Safeguarding governance: what school boards should do

The board or owner provides strategic oversight of safeguarding. The Head and the designated safeguarding lead (DSL) run it day to day.

In England, Keeping children safe in education (KCSIE) says governing bodies and proprietors hold strategic leadership responsibility. They must make sure policies, procedures and training are effective. Many international schools use KCSIE as a benchmark, but local law may differ, so ask local counsel.

The International Task Force on Child Protection (ITFCP) lists seven jobs for a board or owner.

• Name one board member to lead on safeguarding
• Complete child protection induction and training
• Keep safeguarding as a standing item on the agenda
• Adopt a safeguarding statement and approve key policies
• Receive a report from the DSL at least once a year
• Review anonymous data to spot patterns and trends
• Receive and review any allegation against the Head

KCSIE asks for a senior board-level lead for safeguarding. ITFCP calls this person the Designated Safeguarding Board Member, and the Council of British International Schools (COBIS) says Designated Governor for Safeguarding. Use the name your accreditor uses.

ITFCP strongly recommends that this person is not the owner or the board chair, and not a staff member who reports to the Head. After an incident, someone who did not run the response can then review it fairly.

If one owner holds all governance, there may be no board to choose from. KCSIE says a DSL needs enough independence to raise a concern about a sole owner or their family. Consider asking a trusted outside adviser to hold the board-lead role, with a written role description.

NSPCC Learning also advises naming one governor to lead, while the whole governing body stays accountable. ITFCP suggests choosing someone with these strengths.

• Knowledge of safeguarding and student wellbeing
• Time to do the job properly
• Skill at keeping sensitive information private
• Knowledge of the local context
• Confidence to speak up and challenge

The board approves the key policies. The Head and the DSL write them, and ITFCP says the board should review them periodically.

KCSIE says the child protection policy should be reviewed at least once a year and made public. Charity Commission guidance for trustees in England and Wales also says to review policies yearly, and after any serious incident.

ITFCP also asks the board to adopt a short statement of commitment to safeguarding and child rights. Put it on your website, in job advertisements and at the school entrance.

Put these policies on the board's review schedule. Minute each approval with a date and a version number, so a visiting team can see it. The policy audit checklist shows what each one should contain.

• Child protection policy, with a clear route for concerns about the Head
• Staff code of conduct, including low-level concerns and whistleblowing
• Safer recruitment, including checks on board members
• Managing allegations against adults
• Online safety, including filtering and monitoring

Make safeguarding a standing item on the board agenda. ITFCP asks the DSL to present a report in person at least once a year. ITFCP and COBIS both suggest the named board member meets the DSL every term.

The board sees anonymous, combined data on the kinds of concern in the school. It spots patterns with the Head and the DSL, and makes sure they have the time, training and money to act. It does not write the action plan.

Ask the DSL and the Head to keep a safeguarding risk register that the board reviews and approves. ITFCP says it should list risks to students, such as self-harm, bullying or online grooming. It should also list risks to the school, such as gaps in insurance.

KCSIE also asks governors to make sure filtering and monitoring is reviewed at least once each academic year. For the report itself, see what to share with governors each term.

ITFCP warns against board overreach. The board and the named member should not take reports of concerns or manage cases day to day. Anything they hear about concerns comes without names.

Some matters do go up. An allegation or low-level concern about the Head goes to the named member or the chair, never to the Head. KCSIE agrees, and names the chair of governors or the proprietor.

ITFCP also says a concern that could harm the school legally, financially or in its reputation should reach the named member, and maybe the chair, if local law allows. See managing allegations against staff for the full process.

Board members who are parents or staff should not hold identifying details. ITFCP asks every board member to sign a confidentiality agreement, and strongly recommends that schools never use non-disclosure agreements to settle allegations of abuse.

If a governor hears a worry about a child, they tell the DSL the same day and follow the child protection procedure. If a child is in immediate danger, call local emergency services first.

KCSIE says every governor and trustee should have child protection training, including online safety, at induction, and update it regularly. It should help them give strategic challenge and test whether policies work.

ITFCP agrees. For a member who joins mid-year, it suggests a one-to-one session with the DSL or an outside provider. The named member and the chair should take advanced training, especially on managing allegations.

ITFCP suggests regular board training covers these topics.

• The board's role in overseeing safeguarding
• How to review and approve a risk register
• The board's role when an allegation is made against staff
• What to tell parents and the community after a critical incident

ITFCP notes that public investigations into abuse have asked boards why they did not know, and why safeguarding was not on their agenda. Good questions ask for evidence and leave cases alone.

ITFCP describes the board as a critical friend, one that supports school leaders and holds them to account. Governors can put these questions to the Head and the DSL.

A good answer names a person, a date and a document. A staff survey on policy and practice gives real evidence for the first question.

• Who do staff tell, and do they feel safe doing it?
• Which kinds of concern are rising, and why do you think so?
• Has every adult, including governors, finished induction and refresher training?
• Does the DSL have the time, funding and cover they need?
• When did we last review the child protection policy, and what changed?
• How would a concern about the Head reach the chair?
• Who checked filtering and monitoring this year, and what did they find?

Make short, specific requests, and ask the clerk to minute each decision.

To ask for a named lead, say: "KCSIE and ITFCP both ask for a named board lead on safeguarding. I am asking the board to name one at this meeting and agree a written role."

To ask for training, say: "I would like 30 minutes at the next meeting to run safeguarding induction for every board member."

To ask for cover, say: "KCSIE asks schools to plan cover for the DSL. Please fund a trained deputy, so concerns are picked up when I am away."

If a governor asks for names, say: "I cannot share who a child is. I can show you the pattern and tell you what we changed."