Updated May 2023
iPeople SC Solutions Limited t/as Action First follow strict standards in order to ensure that all candidates that we supply to our clients are of the highest professional and personal calibre. As part of our standards, we follow Safer Recruitment guidance before placing candidates into any workplace but especially those where children and adults at risk may be present. We also take seriously any concerns raised regarding our staff and our candidates.
This policy gives details of what action we will take when such concerns are raised with us and should be raised alongside our Safeguarding Children and Young People Policy, Complaints Policy, Safer Recruitment policy and Whistleblowing policy.
This policy applies to anyone employed by iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First including our Directors, staff, and any work placement/volunteers/ or registered with us as a candidate. The legislation and statutory guidance used to draft this policy covers England and where candidates are located elsewhere in the UK, additional guidance may need to be considered. The main statutory guidance for organisations working in the education sector is Keeping Children Safe in Education 2021. For all other sectors, it is Working Together to Safeguard Children 2018.
Any member of staff or candidate who wishes to raise a concern regarding their conditions at work (or similar) should do so through the Company Grievance procedures.
Any organisation or service wishing to complain about our services, or the suitability/capacity of any candidate placed with them should do so under the Complaints procedure.
A concern may be raised against an adult which suggests that they may be a risk to a child. This includes people who may have:
Where concerns are raised about someone who works with children, it will be necessary for iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First to assess any potential risk to other children who may have contact with the person against whom the allegation has been made. This includes the person’s own children and family members.
There may be up to three strands in considering a concern or an allegation:
iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First policies and processes ensure that all candidates and other staff understand that it is their responsibility to protect children and adults who are considered vulnerable because they have care or support needs from abuse or neglect. iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First code of conduct gives guidance on what behaviour is expected from candidates when on placement in order to fulfil that responsibility.
All agencies have a joint responsibility to ensure that they work together to protect children and adults from harm. If the iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First gives a local authority information that suggests an adult may be a risk to children or adults, the local authority should give careful consideration as to what information should be shared with the iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First to enable a comprehensive risk assessment to be conducted.
Allegations against people who work with children and adults who may be at risk must not be dealt with in isolation. Any corresponding action necessary to address the welfare of other children or adults with care and support needs should be taken without delay and in a coordinated manner, to prevent the need for further safeguarding in future.
Any allegation which arises in relation to historical abuse by a candidate or other member of staff, should be responded to in the same way as a current concern. In such cases, it is imperative to ascertain whether the person concerned is still working with adults and/or children and if so, to inform their current employer/organisation.
The standard of proof for prosecution is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. The standard of proof for internal disciplinary procedures and for discretionary barring consideration by the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) is usually the civil standard of ‘on the balance of probabilities’. This means that when criminal procedures are concluded without action being taken this does not automatically mean that regulatory or disciplinary procedures should cease, or not be considered. In any event, there is always a legal duty to make a safeguarding referral to DBS if a person is dismissed or removed from their role due to harm to a child or an adult with care and support needs.
If someone is removed from their role providing regulated activity following a safeguarding incident, iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First has a legal duty to refer them to the DBS. This also applies where a person leaves their role to avoid a disciplinary hearing following a safeguarding incident and iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First believes they would have dismissed the person based on the information they had.
The Local Safeguarding Partner arrangements/Local Safeguarding Adults Board procedures should specify the timescales, actions and procedures for responding to any allegations or concerns raised.
Any allegation against people who work with children and/or adults with care and support needs should be reported immediately to the Director of iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First
When an allegation has been made against a candidate or other member of staff, the Director should not investigate the matter by interviewing the accused person, the child or potential witnesses, but should only gather sufficient information to establish whether there is enough credible information to proceed further (this is known as a ‘fact find’). If they are unclear about this, they should consult with the LADO in the area in which the Organisation is located. They should also:
Whilst any allegation is being investigated and until the outcome is decided, candidates or other staff against whom there is an allegation, should always be treated fairly and respectively, helped to understand the concerns expressed and processes involved, and supported through the process. It is the responsibility of the local authority to ensure that there are appropriate arrangements in place to effectively liaise with the police and other agencies, to monitor the progress of cases and ensure that they are dealt with as quickly as possible, consistent with a thorough and fair process.
Any concerns should be shared with the Director of iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First. A plan of action should be agreed including of who needs to be notified and by whom and consider whether any action needs to be taken to preserve evidence or prevent further harm.
Director must inform the LADO, for the area in which iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First is based, of the allegation.
Where it is suspected that a criminal offence may have been committed, the Director should also inform the police.
If the person against whom the allegation has been made has contact with other children (for example, children in their own family), a referral should also be made to Children’s Social Care.
The Director should refer to the Safeguarding Children Partnership or Local Safeguarding Adult Board procedures (for the area where iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First is based) which should specify:
Where the LADO, in conjunction with the police as appropriate, decides that the information gathered requires further discussion, the factors below should be considered. These may be considered as part of a strategy discussion/meeting, depending on the circumstances of the case and what decisions are made if any section 47 (child protection) enquiry is instigated.
The LADO Strategy Discussion should:
The possible risk of harm to other adults or children should be assessed and managed including those adults or children who may be at risk in the accused’s home, work or community life.
Where necessary, action should be taken, using the Safeguarding Children Partnership and Safeguarding Adults Board procedures as appropriate to protect children and adults from abuse or neglect.
Unless it puts the child in danger, risks harm to others, or raises the possibility of evidence being destroyed, the individual concerned should be informed that the information regarding the allegation against them will be shared, and with whom. Each case must be assessed individually as there may be rare cases where informing the person about details of the allegations may increase the risks to the child. Decisions on sharing information must be justifiable and proportionate, based on the potential or actual harm to children at risk and the rationale for decision making should always be recorded. This decision should always be made in consultation with the LADO.
The person with the allegation against them should be offered a right to reply, and wherever possible given the opportunity to consent to the information being shared.
The Director should be advised as to what information (whether fully or partial) can be shared, and when, with the child and their parents (where applicable). The LADO and the police should discuss with the Director and decide what information they can share with the candidate or member of staff to whom the allegation relates, including being kept updated about any investigation which is undertaken, any disciplinary or related actions. Ofsted/CQC should be informed of any allegation or concern made against a person who works with children or adults with care and support needs. They may also be invited to take part in a related strategy meeting/discussion.
When an allegation is made against a candidate or member of staff, it can be a challenging and emotive situation for all those involved, but also for colleagues and family of the accused person. Every effort should be made to maintain confidentiality in relation to the child, their parents and the candidate or member of staff. All candidates and members of staff should be reminded that the allegation must not be discussed outside of formal meetings with approved personnel, and no comment regarding it should be made on social media. It should be made clear that breach of this would result in disciplinary action being taken against the person concerned.
Until a person is charged, the police should not normally provide the media with any identifying information, for example a public appeal to trace a suspect. In such cases, reasons for the publicity should be recorded with prior consultation of involved partner agencies.
Any media interest whilst an allegation is being investigated or considered should be handled very carefully, and a media strategy agreed by a multi-agency strategy meeting, including the iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First where appropriate.
The person who is the main point of liaison with the child and their parents should keep them up to date, as far as possible, with the progress of the investigation whilst not breaching confidentiality in relation to the accused person.
Other professionals providing care and support to the child and their parents should remain impartial throughout the process. Whilst they should provide support specific to their role, they should refrain from offering opinion on the case and in particular, not be seen to favour either side. This duty applies to all those involved, including the placement agency.
As soon as possible after an allegation has been received, the candidate or member of staff should be advised to contact their union or professional association if they have one. The Director should explore how they can be supported if an investigation takes place. This may be via a named person in the organisation or via external agencies.
Following the outcome of the investigation, if the candidate or member of staff returns to work after a period of suspension, the director should consider what help and support might be appropriate. This may include a phased return to work or deciding on what information to give to other professionals.
Suspension should not be automatic when an allegation is received. It should be considered when:
Although those involved in the investigation can discuss views on suspension, only the Director has the power to suspend an employee or candidate. The service cannot be required to suspend an employee by the local authority or the police. Suspension may be considered when there is no other way to prevent the person concerned having contact with children or adults with care and support needs while the investigation is ongoing.
The following definitions should be used when determining the outcome of allegation investigations:
If it is established that an allegation has been deliberately invented, the police should be asked to consider if any action may be appropriate. iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First should also consider whether there is any appropriate action they can take, including giving advice to other members of staff, risk assessments or changes to working practices.
The Director should decide, in conjunction with the LADO, whether disciplinary action is required. The disciplinary procedures of the organisation should be followed in such circumstances. In the case of candidates, they should decide whether it is appropriate to use/employ them in the future, and whether a referral to the DBS is warranted. Referrals to other regulatory bodies (such as Social Work England) may also be required.
Wherever possible and necessary during the disciplinary process, consent should be obtained from the relevant people to share information with required organisations/bodies.
Where there are prosecutions, the police should inform the Director and the LADO of the outcome immediately, to enable them to act as required in relation to the person’s future employment and any required DBS referral.
Wherever possible a conclusion to the investigation should be achieved, even if:
In cases where an employer has a duty to refer an employee to Disclosure and Barring Service as the criteria for referral are met, agreements that enable the employee to resign with no disciplinary action and provision of future references should not be made.
Where the Director dismisses an individual from work with children/adults (or would have, had the person not left first) because they pose a risk of harm, it must make a referral to the DBS. It is an offence to fail to make a referral without good reason. Where in doubt, advice should be sought from the DBS.
The Director should keep a clear and comprehensive record of the allegation, decisions reached, and actions taken on the person’s personnel file, a copy of which should be given to them.
The record should include details of how the allegation was followed up and resolved, the decisions reached, and the action taken. It should be kept at least until the person reaches normal retirement age or for 10 years if longer.
The record will provide accurate information for any future reference and provide clarification if a future DBS disclosure reveals an allegation that did not result in a prosecution or a conviction. It will prevent unnecessary re-investigation if the allegation should resurface.
Details of allegations that are found to be malicious should be removed from personnel records.
Each agency/organisation must take great care to ensure that the records they keep respect the confidentiality of the alleged victim and/or the accused adult.
Cases in which an allegation was proven to be false, unsubstantiated or malicious should not be included in employer references. A history of repeated concerns or allegations which have all been found to be false, unfounded, unsubstantiated or malicious, should also not be included in any reference.
Where it is decided there is not enough evidence to substantiate an allegation, the person undertaking the investigation should inform the Director in writing.
If it is established that an allegation has been deliberately invented, the police should be asked to consider if any action may be appropriate.
Where allegations are substantiated, and in observance with our legal responsibilities, iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First will report candidates to the Disclosure and Baring Service (DBS) where appropriate and seek advice where there is uncertainty.
At the conclusion of an investigation, iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First and the LADO, and any other relevant parties, should undertake a review of the case.
This should ascertain whether there are lessons to be learned for the organisation, which would result in improvements to procedures or practice, in relation to the circumstances which led to the allegation.
The process of investigating the allegation should also be evaluated, to decide if there are also recommendations for improvements.
Where changes to policy are recommended, this should be implemented as soon as possible and communicated to all staff.
Consideration should be given by iPeople SC Solutions Ltd t/as Action First regarding how lessons learned can best be communicated to staff – whether this be by internal communication, supervision, staff meetings or training events.
