Safety first

Safeguarding is a crucial area of responsibility for any leader working with children, but it’s a complex and easily misunderstood area, writes Julie Nightingale.

In September 2009, Ofsted made safeguarding a ‘limiting judgement’ for schools, meaning that if they perform poorly on it, they cannot be rated outstanding, however glowing their report in other areas.

Safeguarding is a complex area, incorporating not only child protection for the most vulnerable, but the security and wellbeing of all children. It affects how schools are managed – buildings security, CRB checks for staff, the enhanced vetting and barring scheme for volunteers; the curriculum, from healthy eating to e-safety; and a school’s community role.

Simon Westwood is an assistant director in children’s services at Bedford Borough Council and a member of the children and family policy committee of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS). The new safeguarding duty raises numerous issues for leaders of schools and children’s services, he agrees. But there are many things schools will already be doing which can furnish evidence for Ofsted of how the school is meeting its responsibilities.

“Many of them stem from your school’s ethos and whether children and staff feel valued and respected there,” he says. “Are children and staff encouraged to talk and their opinions respected? Do you have pupils’ councils and regular staff meetings which consider safeguarding issues? As a leader have you articulated your understanding of what safeguarding is to staff? All of these things combined make evidence for inspectors.”

Simon, who is also a school governor, says one of the key steps heads can take is to make sure governors understand the importance of safeguarding and its implications for the overall performance of the school.

“The governing body has a major role to play in challenging and supporting the school leadership so any weaknesses are tackled and statutory responsibilities met. They need to be effective, so get that discussion going with governors.”

A frequent complaint is that the different agencies and professions who work with children interpret safeguarding in different ways, adding to the confusion. But the only way to overcome these misunderstandings is through ongoing dialogue, between social workers, schools, headteachers and social care, Simon emphasises.

“I know that social care staff, for example, often don’t automatically recognise ‘achievement’ as part of safeguarding and, therefore, how their role links to what children do in school,” he says. “But only 11 per cent per cent of looked after children get five GCSE A–Cs. A key element of safeguarding is to enable pupils to build self esteem, resilience and the skills to be economically productive and positive parents in the future.”

Simon Westwood was one of the speakers at a recent National College seminar on safeguarding where one of the most common concerns was the need for better co-ordination of the mass of information generated by different bodies, national and local.

Bedford has taken practical steps to improve its own communications on safeguarding. Its checklist for School Improvement Partners (SIPs) to use in their meetings with heads covers the key areas in the Ofsted inspection framework such as policies, training for designated teachers and understanding of referral processes. The borough has also produced an A2 size poster and a leaflet for staffrooms which takes school staff through safeguarding “dos and don’ts”.

In Sheffield, meanwhile, the Safeguarding Children Board (SSCB) has a website dedicated to safeguarding which brings together DCSF and Ofsted guidance with the board’s own detailed policies and crosssector protocols on, for example, e-safety, working with volunteers or social care referrals.

There is also a helpdesk run by social care, health, early years and education specialists from the LA’s safeguarding children’s service. Practitioners or volunteers working with children in Sheffield can call for advice.

The need for a safeguarding ‘one-stop shop’ was identified in the wake of one particular case of acute child neglect in the city and work done subsequently with schools.

“Headteachers said they could not tell what the most up-todate advice was and needed something which was more responsive to developing trends,” explains Des Charles, service manager for the Safeguarding Children Service. “We took all of the existing policy documents for schools, reviewed them and established a more userfriendly format for the website. Once the schools section was established we have gradually added the other sections.”

The College has been working with organisations including ADCS, Ofsted, C4EO (a one-stop shop for children’s services practitioners and agencies) and local government agency IDeA, to consider how safeguarding should be covered in the College’s new leadership programme for directors of children’s services.

The plan is for it to include a ‘risk management’ exercise, giving DCSs an opportunity to focus on an area of their own provision, such as safeguarding, to examine how secure it is. The directors themselves will design a peer-review activity, scrutinising each other’s policies and practice.

It’s important to stress that we aren’t providing a definitive answer about how safeguarding should be addressed,” emphasises Aidan Melling, Operational Director for DCS Leadership at the National College. “This approach is about helping DCSs to develop and share good practice in reviewing safeguarding. In effect we will be picking their brains to help them learn from each other.”