Safeguarding & Child Protection Policy

Our Vision

Advanced Learning Schools prepare global citizens to meet the challenges of an ever-changing world while honoring their own cultural heritage and identity.

Our Mission

Advanced Learning Schools offer a high-quality education in a safe and caring environment, with a commitment to life-long learning and digital citizenship, while inspiring students to become creative, compassionate, and analytical thinkers.

Our Core Values (CREM Framework)

Advanced Learning Schools (ALS) is deeply committed to safeguarding all students by fostering a safe, nurturing, and supportive learning environment. This policy ensures that all children under our care are protected from abuse, neglect, harm, and exploitation.

The policy cannot protect children from harm but can put in place the necessary provision to ensure that the school environment and its staff center the safety of children, both proactively and reactively. It aligns with international standards, including:

• The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 19.
• Saudi Arabian Child Protection Law (Royal Decree No. M/14, 26 November 2014), Article 6: “A child shall have the right to protection against all forms of abuse or neglect.”
• The International Task Force on Child Protection (ITFCP) recommendations, which establish best practices for child safeguarding in educational institutions.

At ALS, safeguarding is a collective responsibility that extends to all staff, visitors, and external partners. Every adult has a duty of care to act in the best interests of the child in every decision they make, addressing concerns promptly and appropriately, without hesitation or fear of information sharing.

This policy applies to all individuals associated with ALS, including:

• Full-time and part-time employees: teachers, administrative staff, and support personnel.
• Volunteers: individuals offering their services without remuneration.
• Visitors: parents, guardians, guests, and any other individuals visiting the school premises.
• Contracted and external staff: personnel working on-site or facilitating activities for students off-site, such as bus drivers, cleaning personnel, sports coaches, and trip organizers.

The scope encompasses all settings where ALS students are present, including on-site locations (classrooms, playgrounds, sports facilities) and off-site activities (field trips, inter-school competitions, community service projects, and any school-sanctioned events outside the main campus). Staff in prolonged contact with students are trained accordingly; those with short-term or limited contact have the policy shared with them and are made aware of child protection expectations.

Every student has the right to learn in an environment that is safe and upholds their dignity and sense of self.

• Every child is unique and has the right to be heard, respected, and protected.
• Safeguarding is a shared responsibility — every staff member, visitor, and external partner has a duty of care to report concerns immediately.
• The welfare and best interests of the child must always be the primary consideration in all decisions and actions.
• Timely and appropriate information sharing is essential — concerns about confidentiality should never prevent action when a child’s safety is at risk.
• Data protection and safeguarding must work in alignment, prioritizing child safety.
• Students and staff must be empowered with the knowledge and confidence to recognize and report situations where they feel unsafe, both in school and beyond.

4.1 Operating Principles for Live and Restored Cases (New)

Whenever a live case is being discussed, or a previously closed case is being restored or revisited, the following operating principles apply to every member of the Safeguarding Team and any colleague brought into the conversation:

• Confidentiality and discretion. Case discussions take place in a private, secure setting; information is shared only on a strict need-to-know basis. The privacy of the child, family, reporter and any staff member is actively protected.
• Evidence over impression. Any conclusion, recommendation or referral must be grounded in concrete, recorded evidence — facts, observations, dates, and the child’s own words. Impressions and assumptions must be flagged as such and must not drive a safeguarding decision.
• Safe space agreement. Team members can raise concerns, challenge each other, ask “naive” questions and revisit difficult judgements without fear of being judged or briefed against. What is said in the meeting stays in the meeting.
• Bias check. The team actively checks for confirmation bias, friendship/loyalty bias and “halo” bias. Where bias risk is identified, the case is reviewed by the Alternate DSL or escalated per 7.6.
• Contemporaneous records. Decisions, dissenting views and reasoning are logged in CPOMS at the time, not reconstructed later.

4.2 Duty to the Child, the Alleged, and the Law (New)

In line with the ITFCP (2024) protocols, ALS recognises three distinct but parallel duties at every stage of a safeguarding response:

• Duty to the child. The welfare and protection of the child is the paramount consideration. All decisions are tested against: “Does this action protect this child and other children from harm?”
• Duty to the alleged. Any individual who is the subject of an allegation is entitled to fair, proportionate and dignified treatment — informed of the process, not pre-judged, and given access to support and (where applicable) representation. The school does not investigate the allegation itself (see 7.5).
• Duty to the law. ALS complies at all times with Saudi child protection law, mandatory reporting obligations, and the requirements of any external agency. Where the duty to the law conflicts with internal preferences, the duty to the law takes precedence.

Harm can be physical, emotional, psychological, or sexual. It can also include neglect — the failure to provide for a child’s basic needs — and exploitation. Our working definitions are aligned to the Saudi Child Protection Law (Royal Decree M/14, 2014), Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE 2024), and ITFCP 2024 protocols. Our definition of safeguarding explicitly includes protecting children from maltreatment whether within or outside the home, including online.

• Physical Harm: any form of physical injury, including hitting, kicking, biting.
• Emotional Harm: actions that damage a child’s self-esteem or emotional well-being.
• Psychological Harm: actions that cause a child to feel insecure, afraid, or confused.
• Sexual Harm: any sexual activity causing physical or psychological harm.
• Neglect: failure to provide a child’s basic needs, including lack of proper care, supervision, and medical care.
• Exploitation (added 2026/27): any situation in which a child is used — in person or online — for the benefit, gratification or profit of another, including sexual exploitation, criminal exploitation, and image-based exploitation (see 9.1).

Additional Contextual Concerns

Affluence Neglect (definition updated 2026/27): a form of neglect where a child’s material needs are abundantly met but emotional, supervisory or developmental needs are not. Indicators include over-reliance on permeable caregivers in place of parental engagement, high-pressure achievement environments without emotional scaffolding, unmonitored device and online access, and isolation despite material privilege. It is a safeguarding concern in its own right and is reported through the same channels as any other form of neglect.

Permeable Caregivers: caregivers — such as nannies, drivers, and other paid employees — who play a significant role in a child’s daily life but whose presence is inconsistent due to job changes, contract expirations, or limited responsibilities. Because they often rotate, children may lack stable emotional support and supervision, leading to potential safeguarding concerns.

6.1 Mandatory Reporting and Shared Responsibility

• All concerns about a child’s safety or well-being must be reported immediately to the Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL).
• Staff must not investigate concerns independently but must document and escalate them appropriately.
• Failure to report concerns could result in disciplinary action and consequences under school policy and child protection laws.

6.2 – 6.4 Superintendent, Principals & Counselors

• Superintendent: holds overall responsibility for safeguarding policies and procedures within the school.
• Principals: responsible for ensuring safeguarding measures are enforced within their respective school sections.
• Counselors: serve as a primary point of contact for students who need support or wish to disclose safeguarding concerns.

6.5 Designated Safeguarding Leads (DSLs)

• Receiving and assessing safeguarding reports.
• Liaising with external agencies (child protection services, law enforcement, social workers).
• Ensuring all safeguarding procedures are followed correctly.
• Keeping records of safeguarding concerns using CPOMS or equivalent.
• Attending regular training updates. All DSLs must undergo advanced safeguarding training at least every two years.

6.6 The Safeguarding Team

The Safeguarding Team develops, implements, and reviews safeguarding policies; provides regular staff training; monitors safeguarding practices; and responds to safeguarding incidents, including referrals to external agencies.

6.7 Lead Designated Safeguarding Officer (New)

The Lead DSL is a new strategic role for 2026/27, responsible for the system, not for every individual case. The Lead DSL is accountable for:

• Policy — owning the annual review of this policy, ensuring alignment with KCSIE, ITFCP, Saudi child protection law and emerging risks.
• Practice — monitoring how the policy is enacted across both sections, sampling CPOMS records, and identifying drift between policy and practice.
• Culture — championing a proactive, low-threshold reporting culture among staff, students and parents.
• Training — owning the training rotation (see 14.1) and maintaining central records.
• Governance liaison — reporting to the Designated Safeguarding Governor each term and to the Board annually.

The Lead DSL does not take the lead on every case or allegation; day-to-day case management remains distributed across the DSL team. The Lead DSL’s focus is system health.

6.8 Alternate DSL (New)

An Alternate DSL — a fully trained DSL — steps in whenever the primary DSL is unavailable (absence, leave, travel), conflicted out of a case (personal relationship, prior involvement), or the subject of an allegation. The Alternate DSL holds equal authority to the primary DSL for the duration of any case they pick up, including external referral powers.

6.9 Designated Safeguarding Governor (New)

The Board has identified a Designated Safeguarding Governor whose remit is distinct from the Chair of the Board. This separation ensures the Chair retains independent oversight of safeguarding escalations, including any concerning the Superintendent. The Governor is responsible for:

• Holding the executive (Superintendent, Principals, Lead DSL) accountable for safeguarding outcomes, not just activity.
• Receiving a termly safeguarding report from the Lead DSL.
• Ensuring critical incidents are recorded in board minutes.
• Completing Safer Recruitment and Level 3 DSL training (see 14.3) before sitting on any related panel.

7.1 Reporting Procedures

• No independent inquiries. Staff must never inquire into allegations themselves, as this could compromise evidence, put the child at further risk, or cause additional trauma. Only trained DSLs and external agencies are authorized to handle inquiries.
• Confidentiality. Concerns must be handled with the utmost confidentiality, shared only on a need-to-know basis. Promises of secrecy must never be made to a child.
• How to report. Record the concern in CPOMS. Documentation must be factual, precise, and objective — including the child’s exact words, the staff member’s observations, the date/time/location/individuals involved, and any actions taken.

7.2 Using CPOMS

• Use CPOMS to record and document all safeguarding concerns.
• DSLs regularly review CPOMS records to identify trends and potential risks.
• Ensure all staff are trained on how to use the system.

7.4 Best Practice for Receiving a Disclosure (New)

The team has adopted the trauma-informed approach set out in the ITFCP 2024 protocols.

Do

• Stay calm and show empathy.
• Listen attentively and validate the reporter’s feelings (without validating evidence).
• Take detailed, neutral, contemporaneous notes — using the child’s own words wherever possible.
• Report immediately to the DSL (or the Alternate DSL where the DSL is the subject of the allegation).

Do not

• Ask leading questions, supply language for the child, or repeatedly interview them.
• Promise confidentiality that cannot be honoured.
• View images or media that may form part of evidence — secure the device instead and hand it to the DSL.

Agreed guidance on note-taking: remain fully present with the reporter during the conversation and document the account as accurately as possible immediately after, signing and dating the record.

7.5 Managing Allegations Against a Staff Member (New)

Allegations against a staff member are managed separately from concerns about a child’s home life. The process applies to any allegation that a staff member has, may have, or is alleged to have: behaved in a way that has harmed or may have harmed a child; possibly committed a criminal offence against or related to a child; behaved towards a child in a way that indicates they may pose a risk of harm; or behaved in a way that suggests they may not be suitable to work with children.

Duty of care to the staff member subject to an allegation. ALS recognises this is profoundly stressful even where the allegation is ultimately unfounded. In practice: the staff member is informed at the earliest point consistent with the integrity of any external inquiry; a single named point of contact is assigned (normally the Principal, or the Superintendent where conflicted); the staff member is advised of their right to representation and confidential support; information is tightly controlled on a need-to-know basis; and on conclusion, regardless of outcome, a structured return-to-work or exit conversation is offered.

Balancing child protection and fairness. The duty to the child is paramount; where both duties cannot be discharged simultaneously, the child’s safety takes precedence (e.g. a precautionary change of duties or suspension while an external inquiry is underway). Such measures are not a determination of guilt; this is stated clearly to all parties and recorded in writing.

7.6 Escalation When the DSL, Principal or Superintendent Is Unavailable or the Subject (New)

Concern that the primary DSL is unavailable, or that the allegation concerns the DSL, a Principal, or the Superintendent, must never delay a safeguarding response. The escalation pathway:

• Primary DSL unavailable (absence, leave, travel): refer immediately to the Alternate DSL (6.8), who has full authority including external referral.
• Primary DSL conflicted out (personal relationship, prior involvement): the Alternate DSL takes the case; the primary DSL is excluded from the case file in CPOMS.
• Allegation concerns the primary DSL: the matter goes directly to the Lead DSL and the Principal of the relevant section; the primary DSL is removed from decision-making and CPOMS access.
• Allegation concerns a Principal: the matter goes directly to the Superintendent and the Lead DSL.
• Allegation concerns the Superintendent: the matter goes directly to the Designated Safeguarding Governor (6.9) and, in parallel, to the relevant external authority where the threshold is met.
• Allegation concerns the Lead DSL: the matter goes to the Designated Safeguarding Governor and the Superintendent, with the Alternate DSL assuming Lead DSL duties for the case.

In Saudi Arabia, ALS collaborates with external agencies to ensure the safety and well-being of students. The Saudi Child Protection Authority (under MHRSD) enforces child protection laws and responds to reports of abuse and neglect; Social Services (under MHRSD) provides intervention, case management, counseling, and reintegration support for children at risk.

8.3 Verified Contact Numbers and Reporting Channels (New)

All staff should commit the following numbers to memory and have them displayed in DSL offices and staff rooms. Numbers below are toll-free and operate 24/7 unless otherwise indicated.

8.4 Saudi Legal Framework Applicable to Safeguarding (New)

• Child Protection Law — Royal Decree No. M/14 of 3 Safar 1436H (25 November 2014). Defines abuse, neglect and exploitation; establishes the child’s right to protection.
• Executive Regulations of the Child Protection Law (MHRSD). Operational rules implementing the 2014 Law.
• Anti-Cyber Crime Law — Royal Decree No. M/17 of 8 Rabiʼal-Awwal 1428H (26 March 2007). Article 3 provides for imprisonment up to one year and/or a fine up to SAR 500,000 for defamation or harm via information technology — the principal legal basis for AI-generated, deepfaked or doctored imagery targeting a person (see 9.1).
• Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) and SDAIA Deepfake Guidelines (2024). Govern lawful handling of personal data and responsible use of AI.
• Counter-Terrorism Law (2017), Articles 34 and 35. Criminalise the promotion of, incitement to, or sympathy with terrorism — the relevant frame where suspected online radicalisation rises beyond a safeguarding concern (see 9.2).

Generative AI has moved from a curiosity to a daily fact of student life — used to create homework, conversation partners, images, video and audio, and increasingly to create or distort images of real people. ALS treats AI literacy and AI-related harm as a core safeguarding theme, not a technology issue. Our position: any harm to a student or staff member that is enabled by AI is a safeguarding matter, and is responded to under this policy.

• The school provides training to staff on recognizing and responding to incidents related to generative AI.
• The school responds to all forms of harm and abuse between students, irrespective of where the harm takes place.
• Training focuses on upstander approaches — what students can do when they receive an inappropriate image or video.
• The school shares pathways for removing inappropriate content from the online space, educates students on the ethical use of AI, and advises teachers on keeping social media private.

9.1 AI, Deepfakes and Doctored Imagery (New)

AI-generated, deepfaked or doctored imagery used to target ALS students or staff is treated as a form of image-based abuse, regardless of whether the depicted person was actually photographed. Our response operates under the Saudi Anti-Cyber Crime Law (Royal Decree M/17, 2007) and aligns with the SDAIA Deepfake Guidelines (2024). Operationally:

• Any report of AI-generated or doctored imagery targeting a student or staff member is handled under this safeguarding policy, not solely as an IT or behavioural matter.
• Devices on which such imagery is suspected to reside must not be viewed by staff. The device is secured and handed to the DSL, who involves external authorities (1919 / 999 as appropriate) where the legal threshold is met.
• Staff receive dedicated training on recognising deepfaked content, the trauma response in victims, the school’s pathway for content removal, and communication with parents.
• Curriculum content explicitly frames the creation and circulation of such imagery as a safeguarding harm and a criminal matter under Saudi law, not a prank.

9.2 Online Radicalisation and the Manosphere (New)

Contemporary online radicalisation directed at young people — including “manosphere” content, incel ecosystems, and gendered hate communities — is framed by ALS as a form of grooming and addressed under the safeguarding policy. Where activity rises beyond a safeguarding concern it engages the Saudi Counter-Terrorism Law (2017), Articles 34 and 35. The school’s position:

• Staff are trained to recognise the language, symbols and behavioural shifts associated with manosphere-influenced and ideologically driven grooming.
• Concerns of this kind are logged on CPOMS in the same way as any other grooming concern.
• Pastoral conversations avoid shaming the student; the goal is to disrupt the grooming pathway, not drive the child further into it.
• Parent communications include guidance on online radicalisation, with signposting to age-appropriate resources.
• Where activity crosses the threshold of the Counter-Terrorism Law, the matter is referred to the police (999) and the relevant authority, in parallel with the safeguarding response.

ALS has a clear policy on taking, using, sharing, and storing photos and videos of children. Parental consent must be obtained for any use of student photos or video; for those under 16, written consent is required and a record kept.

• Personal devices (mobile phones, tablets, cameras) should generally not be used to photograph or record students. Wherever possible, school-issued devices are used.
• Where a personal device is used with prior approval, images must be transferred to school-approved storage as soon as possible and deleted from the personal device immediately after. Personal devices must not be used as long-term storage for student images.
• Under no circumstances should images or recordings of students be shared on personal or public social media accounts.
• The school only shares images when it is safe, appropriate, and with written consent, and provides guidance on privacy settings and safe sharing.
• Staff will not photograph children for misbehaving and will instead document details in writing.

11.1 Visitor Sign-In and Safeguarding Declaration

• All visitors must report directly to reception upon arrival.
• Sign the Visitor Logbook (or digital equivalent).
• Read and sign the ALS Safeguarding Declaration.
• Receive and wear a visitor badge visibly at all times.

11.2 Badge Identification

• Clearly identify the visitor as non-staff.
• Contain essential safeguarding information on the reverse side.
• Be collected and returned at the point of exit.

11.3 Supervision of Visitors

• Visitors must never be left unaccompanied while on school premises.
• Politely intervene and guide any unaccompanied visitor to reception.

It is the responsibility of the Principal in each section to ensure that visitor sign-in, declaration, and identification protocols are consistently implemented; that visitors are not left unsupervised under any circumstances; and to maintain a professional culture of awareness and accountability among staff regarding visitor management.

The Superintendent holds overall responsibility for ensuring safeguarding access protocols are established, reviewed, and clearly communicated. Principals are directly responsible for implementing and enforcing these procedures within their sections.

Visibility of Designated Safeguarding Leads

• Photographs and names of DSLs and Deputy DSLs must be clearly and professionally displayed in prominent areas within each school section.
• These displays should be regularly updated and maintained to ensure accuracy and visibility.
• Principals are responsible for ensuring these displays are in place and remain current; DSLs support Principals in providing accurate information.

School safeguarding policies should be reviewed annually, involving relevant stakeholders such as the Principal, educational experts, team leaders, and the child protection officer. The DSL team worked through the Safeguarding Policy Checklist (aligned to KCSIE 2024 and the ITFCP 2024 protocol). The principal gaps and improvement areas identified at the May 2026 review form the improvement plan for 2026/27.

Governance, Roles and Responsibilities

• The DSL team had been operating as a “commune” with insufficiently differentiated roles; specific responsibilities (case lead, alternate DSL, training lead, governor liaison) are now defined and documented.
• The Designated Safeguarding Governor has been identified and is not the Chair of the Board; this is formalised in 6.9.
• A formal Alternate DSL role has now been established (6.8) — previously a critical gap.
• From 2026/27 the clerk records a standing safeguarding item so governing-body involvement in critical incidents is consistently minuted.

Staff Training and Awareness

• The single-session annual model (“drinking from a fire hose”) is being redesigned into a chunked thematic model: foundational training at the start of the year, then shorter focused sessions and table-top scenarios throughout.
• Current DSLs are nearing the end of their 2–3 year refresher cycle; refresher training is an urgent autumn-term priority.
• Provider diversity will be increased beyond ECIS (NSPCC and others evaluated). Online training with embedded checks for understanding is noted as more effective than passive delivery.
• All staff need clearer guidance on the distinction between a concern, a risk of harm, and an allegation, and the correct procedure for each.

Safer Recruitment, Volunteers & Emerging Risks

• Superintendent and Principals must complete Safeguarding and Hiring training every two years; at least one Safer Recruitment-trained member sits on every interview panel.
• Mandatory recurring police background checks for all staff every 2–3 years (subject to Board approval) mitigate the risk of an ongoing investigation in another jurisdiction being unknown to the school.
• A dedicated volunteer tracking system has been established (14.2) within the central Safeguarding Training Log.
• AI/deepfakes (9.1) and online radicalisation/manosphere content (9.2) are now actively addressed with operational steps and the relevant Saudi legal basis.

Student Voice and Policy Communication

• The team strongly favours implementing an anonymous reporting platform in 2026/27 (14.4).
• Protect Ed is in place in primary; secondary roll-out is on hold pending Ministry approval, with sections strengthening their own curricula in the interim.
• The safeguarding policy will be communicated proactively — at admissions, after relevant assemblies, and through routine parent communications — rather than reactively (14.5).

Safeguarding training at ALS is structured around a single consolidated rotation, owned by the Lead DSL, covering every role across the school. The rotation below replaces the three overlapping tables in the 2025/26 handbook with one source of truth, maintained alongside the central Safeguarding Training Log.

Key changes for 2026/27

• Regular Safeguarding and Child Protection training is now annual (previously every two years).
• Reporting and Recording training is now annual.
• The Annual Safeguarding Policy presentation is delivered each year by the Lead DSL with the Superintendent.
• Every two years, all staff complete external online safeguarding training delivered by a recognised, reputable, certified agency (ECIS, TES or NSPCC).
• All record-keeping is centralised in the Safeguarding Training Log; the Lead DSL reports compliance status (Compliant / Due Soon / Overdue / Not Recorded) to the Designated Safeguarding Governor each term.

14.1 Training Rotation Table 2026/27 (New)

14.2 Volunteer Training Tracking (New)

• All external volunteers must complete a safeguarding briefing before any contact with students and refresh it annually.
• Volunteers are tracked on the dedicated Volunteers tab of the Safeguarding Training Log, capturing name, organisation, activity, date trained, the ALS staff member who delivered the briefing, next due date, status, and notes (including background check status).
• A volunteer with Overdue or Not Recorded status may not be in unsupervised contact with students.
• Principals are responsible for ensuring no volunteer begins activity without a Compliant record.

14.3 Safer Recruitment (New)

• At least one Safer Recruitment-trained panel member on every interview panel involving a role with student contact.
• Safer Recruitment training refreshed every two years for the Head Teacher, Principals, Lead DSL and the Designated Safeguarding Governor.
• Subject to Board approval, mandatory recurring police background checks for all staff every 2–3 years.
• HR maintains the central record of Safer Recruitment training and background-check status; gaps are escalated to the Superintendent.

14.4 Student Voice and Anonymous Reporting (New)

• In 2026/27, ALS will implement an anonymous reporting platform accessible to all secondary students and (in age-appropriate form) to primary students.
• Reports submitted via the platform are routed to the DSL team and triaged within one school day.
• The existence of the platform, what it is for, and what happens to a report, are communicated to students each term and to parents at admissions.
• Use of the platform is monitored for trends (not to identify reporters) so emerging risks can be addressed in curriculum and assemblies.

14.5 Policy Communication to Parents (New)

• Admissions — policy summary issued and acknowledged as part of enrolment.
• Start-of-year parent communications — link to the full policy and a one-page summary.
• Post-assembly follow-up — when an assembly addresses a safeguarding theme, parents receive a same-week communication with conversation prompts.
• Termly newsletter — a standing safeguarding section.
• Website — full policy permanently available, with the most recent revision date clearly displayed.

Related Policies

• Online Safety Policy
• Intimate Care Policy
• Acceptable Use Policy
• Behaviour Policy
• Whistleblowing Policy
• Recruitment Policy
• Staff Code of Conduct
• Data Protection Policy

Key References

Hyperlinks in the source handbook resolve to the authoritative source; URLs were verified at the May 2026 review.

• Saudi Child Protection Law, Royal Decree No. M/14 of 3 Safar 1436H (25 November 2014).
• Executive Regulations of the Child Protection Law (MHRSD); MHRSD Family Protection Department.
• Saudi Anti-Cyber Crime Law, Royal Decree No. M/17 (26 March 2007), Article 3.
• Saudi Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) and SDAIA Deepfake Guidelines (2024).
• Saudi Counter-Terrorism Law (2017), Articles 34 and 35.
• International Task Force on Child Protection (ITFCP) — ICMEC Education Portal; CIS overview.
• UK Department for Education (2024) Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE).
• UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989); Convention on the Rights of the Child in Islam (2004).
• Recognised safeguarding training providers: ECIS, TES (Tes Develop), NSPCC Learning.

This flowchart applies to any staff member who suspects, observes, or receives a disclosure about possible neglect or harm to a child. It operationalises Sections 7.1–7.4. Each step has a single trigger, a single action, and a named owner.

Allegation Against a Staff Member — Flowchart

This flowchart operationalises Section 7.5. Each step has a single named owner and a single trigger for the next step.

Glossary of Terms