Part 3 - Safer Recruitment and Safer Working Practice

S. 175 Audit - Descriptors

REF	ITEM	RED	AMBER	GREEN	RESOURCES

Safer Recruitment
3.1	Recruitment and selection processes are fully compliant with KCSIE Part Three and Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) guidelines (see TRA publication ""Teacher misconduct: disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession” April 2018).	- No up to date SCR - Gaps in SCR/ - Checks not being completed - Training for safer recruitment.	There is robust and sustainable cover. - One person who has done safer recruitment training on the interview panel. This is refreshed every 3 years. - Each interview has a safeguarding question. - Online searches. - Student panel. - Paper work	- Everyone trained on interview panel. - Safeguarding culture is robustly explored during interview beyond just one question. - Maintaining rec
3.2	The setting has robust measures to conduct pre-employment checks and ensures appropriate record keeping around these checks in a Single Central Record
3.3	The setting has appropriate measures in place in line with statutory guidance when commissioning services from other agencies.	- The is limited evidence to indicate quality assurance checks on third party staff, agency workers and contractors on the single central record. - Checks for commissioned ALPS written confirmation of checks ordinarily undertaken for staff is not provided.	There is evidence that letters of assurance are obtained from agency, third party, contractors and commissioned ALPS. - There is a process for the DSL and or SENCO to review suitability of any commissioned ALP for children who are EOTAS. Site visits should be undertaken the DSL (deputy). - These checks are done regardless to LA involvement. - Use of LA checklist should be recorded. - These letters should indicate what level of training the provider has undertaken in relation to safeguarding.	- There is evidence that the governing body have quality assured the commissioning activity to be robust on a termly basis. - DLS reviews level of training undertaken by other providers. - Partnership work with relevant LA should be undertaken with a view that provider maybe working other vulernable children.
Promoting Safer Working Practice
3.4	The setting has robust measures in place to ensure effective staff safer working practice.	The setting has a code of conduct which has not been updated and reviewed the low-level concern. There is limited practice beyond ensuring staff have read this.	The Staff Behaviour Policy (also known as a Code of Conduct) has been reviewed to ensure updates from the above guidance have been implemented. This has been updated to include process of low-level concerns. Safer working practice features in training and CPD at least on an annual basis. This has included the setting’s low level concerns processes and procedures. Regular knowledge checks with staff where feedback supports co-construction of code of conduct with staff body to support ownership. This can include lessons learned from incidents. There are clear and effective mechanism in place for learners to raise concerns or complaints about staff conduct or the effectiveness of safeguarding arrangements. This accessible and well known about. The setting has taken tangible steps to support a open culture where staff are able to reflect on practice (supervision through line management). The setting has systems available to records low level concerns regarding staff members.	In addition to the conditions in the amber: - Code of conduct is a working document which is updated as and when lessons are learnt. - These are publicly available and there is evidence of children and parents/carers being made aware of the settings expectations for staff behaviour. - The setting has invested in a mechanism for discreet or self-reporting for low level concerns. - There are effective systems to identify patterns of concerning behaviour (including online) - The culture of learning evidenced. Staff are not incriminated unjustly for deficits in leadership and governance. Quality assurance from governing body includes benchmarking progress alongside ‘low level concerns’ from Farrer and Co. - Relevant members of senior leadership have read and cascade information from national guidance Safer Working Practice (Safer recruitment consortium). - Site walks can support this approach along side
3.5	The settings has effective systems to manage incidents of physical intervention:	- The setting has a no-physical intervention policy, - Or there is limited records of incidents recorded and no quality assurance around the process.	The setting has an effective behaviour policy includes procedures around the use of positive handling and restraint, detailing the circumstances in which physical intervention may be used. This is consistent with national guidance – Use of Reasonable Force in schools 2013. For Early Years providers this also includes adherence to the statutory prohibition of the use or threat of corporal punishment. - Setting has adequate number of staff fully trained - All staff receive briefing on de-escalation skills. - Learners, parents, and carers are aware of settings approach to using physical interventions. - Bound or numbered book (or equivalent) - Voice of child is reflected in recordings of incidents processes. - Student voice collected as part of the recording of incident process. - A named person responsible for monitoring and signing off all incidents reported (operational) – have assured that the setting is complaint with guidance (contact with parents, follow up with child’s individual behaviour plans to reduce need for physical intervention) There are strategic audits to identify patterns of the following and the designated safeguarding lead can take action to address any deficits in practice - Staff use (number, intensity) - Location, - Number of interventions - Disproportionate number of interventions. - whether there are vulnerable demographic - on going support for the learner.	- Setting has a separate positive handling policy. - The setting has read the ‘Reducing the need for restrictive intervention ‘ 2019 and have reviewed the setting’s policy and practice. - - A whole setting approach is undertaken around a ‘team teach’ approach - A review has taken place to ensure appropriate time, capacity and resource is in place to promote the safety and welfare of children beyond - Contextual safeguarding approaches are evidenced with location of interventions identified, assessed, and have interventions. - There is evidence of the governance, senior leadership team and designated safeguarding leads to identify data trends that impact on practice. -
3.6	Childminders are aware that illegal or safeguarding behaviour of staff and/or members of the household could affect their suitability as a provider.
3.7	The DSL regularly reviews and monitor the care that guardians offer in the case of residential settings. This includes the suitability of any care arrangements.