LADO – Managing Allegations Against Those Who Work or Volunteer With Children – Procedure

Managing Allegations Against Those Who Work or Volunteer with Children – LADO Process

Scope of this Procedure:

This procedure outlines the key roles and responsibilities to be undertaken when responding to allegations against staff or volunteers who work with children. 

HM Government Guidance Working Together to Safeguard Children 2023 (WTSC) requires organisations and agencies working with children and families to have clear policies for dealing with allegations against people who work with children, defined in Working Together 2023 as “People in Positions of Trust”.

WTSC states that ‘individuals in positions of trust are those who work with children and have regular and close contact with them and are viewed by children as trusted adults. This includes all paid or unpaid staff, supply staff, volunteers, foster carers, and prospective adopters.

This includes any individual over the age of 16 who holds a position of trust, such as those involved in sports coaching, babysitting, or participating in youth or community activities.

If there is any doubt about whether someone meets this definition, contact should be made with the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) to discuss and agree whether the criteria are met.

All references to employers should be interpreted as meaning any agency or organisation with responsibility for paid or unpaid staff and volunteers, including Foster Carers and prospective Adopters. 

All references to child, children or young people refers to persons under the age of 18 years, in this document referred to as “child”.

WTSC identifies the role of the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) as that of managing and having oversight of individual cases, provision of advice and guidance to employers and voluntary organisations, liaison with the police and other agencies and the monitoring of cases to make sure they are dealt with as quickly as possible and are consistent with a thorough and fair process. 

Department for Education Guidance Keeping Children Safe in Education 2025 (KCSiE) outlines additional roles and responsibilities to be undertaken when responding to allegations against teachers, members of staff or volunteers in schools or colleges that provide education for children under 18 years. 

In line with Working Together to Safeguard Children (WTSC) and Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSiE), these North Yorkshire Safeguarding Children Partnership (NYSCP) procedures should be applied when there is an allegation that any person who works with children has:

• Behaved in a way that has harmed a child, or may have harmed a child, and/or
• Possibly committed a criminal offence against or related to a child,

and/or

• Behaved towards a child or children in a way that indicates they may pose a risk of harm to children, and/or
• Behaved or may have behaved in a way that indicates they may not be suitable to work with children.

Fig:1

(Also known as the LADO harm/ risk threshold or criteria)

This is the threshold for LADO initiating the allegation management process.

This procedure includes all those identified as working with children in a position of trust as outlined above.

Transferable Risk: An allegation may involve behaviour outside of work or personal relationships. It will be assessed to determine whether the individual may be unsuitable to work with children. Examples of concerns that could indicate transferable risk include:

• A parent or carer whose child is subject to Child Protection Procedures.
• Involvement in serious criminal behaviour, such as possession of weapons, drug offences, extremist activity or views, domestic abuse, or assault against adults.
• Close personal association with someone (e.g. partner, family member, or housemate) who may pose a risk to children the individual works or volunteers with.

The employer or organisation will assess whether these concerns could affect the safety of children the person works or volunteers with. Further guidance on Transferable risk assessments can be found on the NYSCP website: NYSCP – LADO WEB PAGE

Transferable risk also applies when an allegation relates to one role, but the person holds another role involving children. For example, an allegation against a teacher who also volunteers as a football coach.

Disqualification and Household Risk: Organisations must follow NYSCP procedures when an individual’s employment is covered by the Childcare Act 2006 and they live in the same household as someone who is disqualified also lives or works. A person is disqualified if they have committed an offence listed in the 2009 Regulations (known as a “relevant offence”).

Statutory guidance on this is provided in: The Childcare (Disqualification) and Childcare (Early Years Provision Free of Charge) (Extended Entitlement) (Amendment Regulations 2018 (“the 2018 Regulations”).

Safeguarding Concerns Involving Family or Associates: Although not directly covered by statutory guidance, concerns involving an individual’s family members or close associates should be taken seriously. These concerns must be discussed with the LADO to assess any potential risk to children.

For example, if someone works in a nursery and their partner is under investigation for sexual offences involving a child, this must be reported to the LADO. The LADO will ensure appropriate enquiries are made to determine whether the association poses a risk to children through the individual’s role.

Allegations Involving Working with Vulnerable Adults: There is a separate process to be followed if there are concerns about someone who works with vulnerable adults in a position of trust. Please follow the link for more information: NYSAB

If an individual works with both children and vulnerable adults, the LADO will continue to oversee and manage any actions required under the NYSCP procedures where the allegation involves their work with children. The LADO will also consult with the relevant Local Authority Adult Safeguarding Lead. Together, they will decide who will take the lead in managing and overseeing the case.

Supply Staff and Safeguarding Allegations: Although schools and colleges are not the direct employers of supply staff, they must ensure that any safeguarding allegations are managed properly.

Schools and colleges should not stop using a supply staff member due to safeguarding concerns without first establishing the facts and consulting both the supply agency and the LADO.

Supply agencies must be fully involved and cooperate with the LADO any investigations conducted by the police, children, and young people’s services.

Use of Premises by External Organisations or Individuals: If an organisation receives an allegation involving another organisation or individual using its premises to run activities for children, it must follow its safeguarding policies and procedures. This includes informing the LADO where appropriate.

Organisations must ensure that any external provider using their premises has suitable safeguarding and child protection policies in place. These should be reviewed or inspected if necessary. Safeguarding requirements must be included in any lease or hire agreement as a condition of use. Failure to meet these requirements may result in termination of the agreement.

This approach applies regardless of whether the children attending the activities are on the organisation’s roll or of statutory school age.

The effectiveness of these procedures is monitored and evaluated by the NYSCP.

Relevant Statutory Guidance:

• HM Government: Working Together to Safeguard Children 2023
• Department for Education: Keeping Children Safe in Education 2025
• Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006
• Protection of Freedoms Act 2012
• Childcare Act 2006
• The Childcare (Disqualification) and Childcare (Early Years Provision Free of Charge) (Extended Entitlement) (Amendment Regulations 2018 (“the 2018 Regulations”)
• Department for Education:  Use of Reasonable Force Advice July 2013
• Children’s Homes (England) Regulations 2015
• HM Government: Information Sharing Practice Guidance
• Disclosure and Barring Service Guidance Disclosure and Barring Service – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
• North Yorkshire Safeguarding Children Partnership website www.safeguardingchildren.co.uk

Relevant Definitions:

Working Together to Safeguard Children 2023 defines an allegation as where a relevant individual has:

• Behaved in a way that has harmed a child or may have harmed a child.
• Possibly committed a criminal offence against or related to a child.
• Behaved towards a child or children in a way that indicates they may pose a risk of harm to children.
• Behaved or may have behaved in a way that indicates they may not be suitable to work with children.

This has been incorporated into the NYSCP procedures.

Working Together to Safeguard Children 2023 does not include a definition of “harm”. Section 31(9) of the Children Act 1989, as amended by the Adoption and Children Act 2002, identifies the definition of harm as:

• Harm means ill-treatment or impairment of health or development, including, for example, impairment suffered from seeing or hearing the ill-treatment of another
• Development means physical, intellectual, emotional, social or behavioural development
• Health means physical or mental health
• Ill-treatment includes sexual abuse and forms of ill-treatment which are not physical.

Harm is defined in Section 31(9) of the Children Act 1989 as amended by the Adoption and Children Act 2002.

“Harm means ill-treatment or impairment of health or development, including, for example, impairment suffered from seeing or hearing the ill-treatment of another.”

This, therefore, includes allegations in relation to sexual, physical, emotional harm and/or neglect.  Both Working Together 2023 and Keeping Children Safe in Education 2024 include definitions and examples of the above categories of abuse, and further examples are outlined below. 

Sexual harm: could include allegations of inappropriate sexual behaviour including, but not limited to:                

• Engaging in sexual activity with a child under 18 if in a position of trust in respect of that child, even if consensual (Sections16-19 Sexual Offences Act 2003)
• Grooming – meeting a child under 16 with intent to commit a relevant offence (Section15 Sexual Offences Act 2003)
• Other grooming behaviour giving rise to concerns of a broader child protection nature (for example: inappropriate communication and contact – texts, e-mail messages or the sending or receiving of images and gifts)
• Possession, distribution and/or making of indecent photographs / pseudo-photographs of children.

Physical harm: could include, but not limited to:

• Hitting or throwing something at a child
• Restraints where, for example, the force used was unreasonable or disproportionate, where the restraint was unwarranted in the circumstances, or could have been reasonably avoided, or where the injuries are not consistent with the level of force reported.
• Cases when seclusion has been used in other than exceptional circumstances.

Emotional harm: could include, but is not limited to:

• Deliberately silencing or making fun of what children are saying or how they communicate.
• Serious bullying causing children to feel frightened or in danger.

Neglect: could include, but is not limited to:

• Failing to provide adequate supervision
• Failing to ensure access to appropriate medical care or treatment

This procedure can also be used where there appear to be patterns of behaviour that cause concern.

Non-Recent Abuse Allegations: Disclosures of child abuse may be made by adults or young people long after the abuse occurred. Under NYSCP procedures, non-recent abuse is defined as abuse that was reported more than one year after it took place.

If an allegation involves someone who currently works with children or has done so in the past, it must be reported to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO).

It is essential to establish whether the individual is still working or volunteering with children, either in North Yorkshire or elsewhere. The LADO will work with relevant agencies to confirm this and decide whether the current employer or organisation should be informed.

Organised or Complex Abuse: Investigators must be alert to signs of organised or widespread abuse, or the involvement of multiple perpetrators or institutions. If such concerns arise, the LADO will consult with the Head of Safeguarding from North Yorkshire Police and the Children and Young People’s Service.

If appropriate, the matter will be managed under the organised and/or complex abuse procedures, which take priority over standard allegation processes.

A copy of the Non-Recent, Organised and Complex Procedures can be accessed via the following link: NYSCP – Non-Recent, Organised and Complex Procedures

Roles and Responsibilities:

Organisational Responsibilities for Managing Allegations: All organisations—including schools, governing bodies, trustees, and voluntary groups—must have clear policies in place for managing allegations against staff and volunteers who work with children.

These policies must:

• Align with the North Yorkshire Safeguarding Children Partnership (NYSCP) procedures and associated practice guidance. Clearly explain the process for investigating allegations.
• Outline the support and advice available to individuals who are the subject of an allegation.
• Distinguish between:
  • An allegation (which meets the harm or risk of harm threshold),
  • A concern about the quality of care or practice, and
  • A complaint.

Each organisation must appoint a Senior Manager to whom all allegations are reported. It is the responsibility of this Senior Manager to:

• Ensure their organisation deals with allegations in accordance with these procedures.
• Refer relevant allegations to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO).
• Consult with the LADO throughout the process.
• Resolve any inter-agency issues.

It is the responsibility of individual employers/organisations to ensure that they have access to HR and legal advice to support them with the allegations process.

Employers/organisations have a duty to co-operate with police investigations.

There is a legal duty for regulated activity providers and personnel suppliers to make a referral to the DBS where they have permanently removed a person from regulated activity through dismissal or permanent transfer from regulated activity, (or would have done so if the person had not left, resigned, retired or been made redundant.

Relevant regulatory, governing, or professional bodies that may not have a direct employment relationship with the individual have the responsibility to consider whether to continue to use an individual’s services, or to approve an individual for work with children in future, or to de-register the individual.

Managerless or self-employed: Where there is no employer, organisation or regulatory body, the LADO will determine, with other agencies involved, who will inform the individual of the allegation and who will take forward any actions necessary in relation to the case.

Local Authorities: In line with WTSC and KCSiE, NYC have a team of designated officers (LADOs) who are involved in the management and oversight of allegations against people who work with children in line with these NYSCP Procedures.

Whistle–blowing: All employers and organisations must ensure that staff are aware of their whistle-blowing policies and feel confident to raise concerns about the behaviour or actions of colleagues.

Whistle-blowing policies should:

• Clearly explain how to report safeguarding concerns.
• Include the option to report directly to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) if an employee believes their organisation is not managing an allegation appropriately.
• Be accessible, easy to understand, and supported by training for all staff and volunteers.

LADO: The LADO does not investigate allegations. Their role is to ensure that an appropriate investigation is conducted by the relevant organisation(s), agency(s), or a combination of these.

The LADO does:

• Receive notifications about allegations relevant to this procedure and are involved in the management and oversight of such cases.
• Provide advice and guidance to employers and voluntary organisations.
• Ensure there remains a focus on safeguarding children.
• Liaise with police, children and young people’s services, employers, regulators, and other agencies to share relevant information and coordinate investigations.
• Monitor the progress of cases to ensure they are dealt with as quickly as possible, consistent with a thorough and fair process.
• Provide advice and guidance to employers, organisations and regulated activity providers and personnel suppliers in relation to making referrals to DBS and/ or to relevant regulatory bodies, including Ofsted and the Teacher Regulation Agency.

The LADO, employer, or organisation must ensure that any reported allegations against individuals working with children are not managed in isolation. This includes reviewing any repeated concerns that may have occurred over time.

Where safeguarding or support needs are identified for the child, other affected individuals, or the person subject to the allegation, appropriate action must be taken. If the situation is urgent, it must be reported without delay to the appropriate agency and managed in a coordinated manner by those responsible

The LADO case management will usually sit with the authority where the individual subject of an allegation works. However, where there is a case that covers more than one Local Authority area NYC LADO will liaise with the relevant area LADO, and where appropriate, a joint LADO Allegation meeting may take place.

Police:

North Yorkshire Police Detective Inspectors:

• Have strategic oversight of cases, and they maintain a high-level view of all active investigations.
• Ensure that cases are managed in line with NYSCP procedures.
• They inform partner agencies of any changes in police practice, such as updates to bail conditions, and
• Keep partners informed about the volume and nature of cases, including emerging themes.

Officer in charge: When a case involves a police investigation, the assigned police officer is responsible for keeping the LADO informed about the progress of the case.

Where possible, the employer should ask the police to seek consent from the individuals involved to share their statements and evidence. This enables the police to provide relevant information for the employer’s disciplinary process without delay once the investigation or any court proceedings are complete.

The North Yorkshire Police Vulnerability Assessment Team are the designated lead to:

• Consult with the LADOs
• Take part in relevant meetings/discussions.
• Review the progress of cases in which there is a police officer investigation.
• Share information as appropriate, during, and on, completion of an investigation or related prosecution.

Children and Young People’s Service (NY CYPS) will arrange strategy meetings, conduct assessments, and provide support or services where the criteria are met under Working Together to Safeguard Children.

When a strategy meeting is held, the LADO will attend, and an allegation meeting will follow.

CYPS should seek consent from the individual involved to share their assessment. This allows relevant information to be passed to the employer without delay.

NYC CYPS Education and Skills and/or Inclusion Teams: will lead on safeguarding concerns relating to schools and settings where they do not relate to a named individual.

Initial Response to an Allegation:

Identification and initial action – Allegations and Low-Level Concerns

Allegations against individuals working with children can come from various sources—such as a child, a colleague, or a parent or carer.

All incidents of concern should be reported to the Designated Senior Manager how should review the information and decide on the appropriate course of action:

• Meets Threshold – If The matter meets threshold for notification to LADO, as per Fig1, this should be done with one working day by completing the notification form.
• Threshold Unclear – It can sometimes be difficult to decide whether a concern meets the threshold for an allegation. In these circumstances advice should be sought from the LADO by requesting a consultation. This can be done by submitting a fully completed notification form. If the LADO assesses the concern as low-level, it will be recorded as a consultation only.
• Low Level Concern – If the concern does not meet the threshold for an allegation, does not meet the criteria in Fig1, it is considered a Low-Level Concern under KCSiE. In such cases:
• The employer or organisation should manage the concern through appropriate employment procedures.
• The concern and any actions taken must be recorded by the employer or organisation.
• It is good practice to record the rationale for the matter not meeting threshold for an allegation.

Repeated Low Level Concerns – Where there are repeated low-level concerns, the organisation must consult with the LADO to determine whether the threshold for harm has been met. If so, the full NYSCP procedures will apply.

Managing Disclosures or Reports of Harm:  The person to whom an allegation or concern is first reported, should treat the matter seriously and keep an open mind. They should not:

• Investigate or ask leading questions.
• Make assumptions or offer alternative explanations.
• Promise confidentiality.

Allegations involving an immediate risk to a child or a safeguarding concern that requires an urgent response should be reported immediately to the police by calling 999 (emergency) or 101 (non-emergency) and the Local Authority Emergency Duty Team (EDT) on 0300 131 2 131. These agencies will advise on next steps. The NYC LADO should be informed as soon as possible.

In all other cases (not reported directly to the police), the action should follow the organisation’s procedures, which should include the following:

• Making a written record of the information (where possible in the child/adult’s own words), including the time, date and place of incident/s, persons present and what was said.
• Signing and dating the written record
• Immediately reporting the matter to the Senior Manager, or the Deputy in their absence or, where the Senior Manager is the subject of the allegation the nominated individual as per the organisation’s procedure.

The NYC LADO notification form is on the NYSCP Website NYSCP (safeguardingchildren.co.uk) and should be completed and sent to lado@northyorks.gov.uk.

In all cases, the LADO will take appropriate advice from North Yorkshire Police and/or NYC CYPS Children & Families Team regarding what information can initially be shared with any child and/or children, parents, and/or carers, relevant individual and/or third parties.

Sharing Information to Safeguard Children: Effective information sharing is vital to protect children. The UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018 do not prevent sharing information for safeguarding purposes. Concerns about data protection must not delay action to protect a child.

Organisations should:

• Share information early to identify and respond to risks,
• Follow clear procedures for sharing information internally and with external partners,
• Record decisions about what information is shared, why, and with whom.
• Further guidance is available on the NYSCP website and through the LADO service. NYSCP website: Information Sharing

The LADO coordinates the sharing of information across organisations; however, in all cases where there is a police investigation, the police lead on the management of information in relation to the criminal investigation. The LADO will consult closely with the police lead and the organisation lead to ensure that effective information sharing takes place. 

Initial Consideration by LADO:

 

Initial Consideration by LADO: The LADO will make an initial assessment, from the information provided in the notification, to determine if the threshold for implementing these procedures is met:

• In cases where it is unclear whether the threshold for LADO involvement has been met, the employer/organisation and the LADO should discuss the incident and jointly determine whether the threshold applies. This decision should consider the risk or potential risk to both the child(ren) directly affected and any other children who may be at risk.

• If it is agreed that the incident does not meet the threshold for harm, risk, or suitability, the employer/organisation should address any conduct or behaviour concerns through their standard internal procedures. At this stage, there will be no further action from the LADO, although a record of the discussion and decision will be made.

• The LADO and the employer/organisation should agree and document the rationale for the decision. If there is disagreement about whether the threshold has been met, the matter may be escalated to the LADO Manager for further consideration.

There are three possible strands in the consideration of an allegation:

• A police investigation of a possible criminal offence
• CYPS enquiries and/or assessment about whether a child is in need of protection or services.
• Consideration by an employer /organisation / regulatory body of any action in relation to possible performance/ conduct issues

The LADO will consult with a North Yorkshire Police designated lead in relation to all allegations that are of a sexual nature and any allegations of physical harm, emotional harm, or neglect where there are concerns a criminal offence may have been committed.

The LADO will determine whether an Allegation Meeting is required at this stage, or if the necessary information can be effectively shared through discussions between relevant parties. This decision will be based on the complexity of the information to be shared and the actions that need to be agreed upon.

The subject of the allegation does not attend the meeting.

All discussions will be fully recorded and shared with the professionals involved.

Prior to any meeting, the relevant parties will agree on:

• What information can be shared with the employee, the child, and their parent or carer?
• What information needs to be brought to the meeting by those attending?

Allegation Management

The LADO will ensure that there are no potential conflicts of interest among those attending the meeting. If any are identified, appropriate steps will be taken to manage the situation in a way that maintains the integrity and fairness of the process.

An Allegation Meeting or Discussion is convened to decide and agree on a strategy for managing the allegation. Many cases can be effectively managed through a discussion involving the Senior Manager, the police, other relevant agencies, and the LADO. Where communication takes place via phone or email, detailed records must be maintained for audit purposes within the organisation’s case files.

An Allegation Meeting will typically be convened when:

• There is an allegation of a possible criminal offence, and police involvement is required.
• The case is deemed complex by the relevant parties.

The meeting or discussion will be chaired by the LADO. If there is evidence of a possible criminal offence, the meeting will be attended by:

• The North Yorkshire Police Lead.
• The social work manager for the child (where applicable).
• The organisation’s nominated senior manager.
• A Human Resources Advisor (recommended for employers).
• It may also be appropriate to invite a regulatory body, such as:
  • Sporting regulators for allegations involving sports activities.
  • Ofsted for cases involving childminders or managers of childcare settings.
• Other relevant parties will be identified and invited by the LADO on a case-by-case basis.

The Allegation Meeting / Discussion should:

• Confirm and document that no conflicts of interest exist among attendees.
• Establish protocols for information sharing and confidentiality.
• Provide all available information regarding the allegation and actions taken thus far.
• Share relevant information concerning the individual subject to the allegation.
• Review the current allegation in the context of any prior concerns or allegations.
• Ensure that all input from the child, parent/carer, involved individuals, or other parties is thoroughly considered.
• Where applicable, assess the use of reasonable force by staff to control or restrain children.
• Determine if the case qualifies as a complex abuse investigation.
• Coordinate investigations and agree upon an investigative strategy, including the necessary involvement of Police or Children and Young People’s Services, and define clear timelines.
• Evaluate whether a concurrent disciplinary process can proceed and establish appropriate protocols for information sharing.
• Decide what information should be shared, with whom, and at what time.

The Allegation Meeting / Discussion should:

• Record the evaluation of the information shared and any assessment of risk.
• Record what arrangements are in place to manage the safeguarding of any child/ren involved and any other child/ren affected (by who and when)
• Record what support should be provided to all children who may be affected (by who and when) that have not already been identified and managed through strategy or complex case meetings.
• Outline how the voice of the child and/or parent/carer will be “heard” and managed within an investigation, and how they will be kept up to date with the progress of an investigation and the NYSCP process.
• Record if a strategy meeting has been held or will be held in relation to any of the children.
• Record what support arrangements are in place for the relevant individual and others who may be affecte,d and how they will be kept up to date with the progress of an investigation and the NYSCP process.
• Ensure that any investigation can be sufficiently independent.
• Ensure that a plan is in place by the employer/organisation to enable the relevant individual to make an appropriate representation during an investigation and the NYSCP process.
• Discuss whether suspension is appropriate and if there are any reasonable alternatives. NB. The decision to suspend lies with the employer/organisation.
• Identify a Lead Manager within each agency.
• Agree on appropriate timescales for any organisation updates to the LADO.
• Consider and record strategic issues for the attention of relevant agency senior management (e.g. media interest, resource implications)
• Consider and record if a notification should be made, in terms of interim prohibition, to a regulatory body (by whom and when)
• Agree on dates for future Allegation meetings/discussions.

Recording and Confidentiality: Meeting notes are not verbatim and are strictly confidential. They must not be shared outside the meeting without permission from the LADO or their manager. They are not added to children’s case records, though a reference to the notification to LADO and the outcome may be noted.

If shared with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), regulatory bodies, or via Subject Access Requests, the notes must be redacted to protect third-party information

Timescales: All allegations should be investigated as a priority by those concerned to avoid any delay. The time taken to investigate and resolve individual cases depends on a variety of factors, including the nature, seriousness, and complexity of the allegation.

Consideration of Suspension: The power and decision to suspend lies with the employer/organisation. Neither the Police, CYPS or the LADO can require employers or organisations to suspend a person.

Before deciding to suspend a member of staff, the organisation’s nominated Senior Manager should consider whether the intended outcome of suspension could be achieved through alternative arrangements. This decision should be based on a risk assessment conducted by the employer.

Possible alternatives to suspension may include:

• Redeployment to a role that does not involve contact with children.
• Increased supervision of the individual’s duties.
• Temporary adjustment of duties or responsibilities.
• Working from home or another location where contact with children is not possible.
• Agreed leave of absence, where appropriate.

The Senior Manager may wish to seek advice from their HR adviser, legal adviser, and the LADO. If the case involves a police investigation, the Police Lead should also be included in discussions, as suspension may impact planned investigatory actions.

Suspension should only be considered in cases where:

• There is reason to suspect that a child or other children at the place of employment may be at risk of harm, or
• The case is so serious that it may constitute grounds for dismissal.

The organisation’s nominated Senior Manager must carefully assess whether the circumstances warrant suspension from contact with children.

If immediate suspension is considered necessary, the rationale and justification for such a course of action should be recorded by the Senior Manager and provided to the NYC LADO. This record should also include what alternatives to suspension have been considered and, if they were rejected, why.

Written confirmation of any suspension must be sent by the employer or organisation to the individual subject to the allegation within one working day. This confirmation should include, as appropriate, the reasons for the suspension.

At the point of suspension, the individual must be informed of their named contact within the organisation and provided with that person’s contact details.

The LADO must be notified of any changes to the suspension or alternative working arrangements made by the employer or organisation.

Any discussion on suspension should also consider any bail conditions that might be in place and be reviewed with the LADO in line with any changes that might be made to those bail conditions during the police investigation.

In the case of foster carers, the responsible authority should give consideration as to whether the child or children can remain in the placement, and/or whether there should be a temporary freezing of the placement.

Notifications and Responsibilities:

The Subject of the Allegation: It is the responsibility of the employer or organisation to:

•        Inform the individual that they are the subject of an allegation and provide details of the allegation, following agreement with the LADO and any other relevant agencies regarding what information can be shared.

•        Keep the individual updated on the progress of the case and ensure they are given the opportunity to participate fully in any investigation and to make full representation.

•        Ensure the individual is aware of the possible outcomes of the investigation and the implications in terms of references and potential referrals to external bodies.

Young People, Parents and Carers: It is the responsibility of the employer or organisation to:

• Inform the parent(s)/carer of any allegation that relates to their child.
• Keep the parent(s)/carer updated on the progress of the case.

Note: Where there is a Police investigation or Children and Young People’s Service (CYPS) involvement, this responsibility may be transferred to or shared with the Police or Children & Families service, subject to mutual agreement.

At the conclusion of the case, the employer or organisation must formally inform the parent, child(ren), and any other relevant individuals of:

• The outcome of the case, and
• The outcome of any internal or disciplinary process, ensuring this is done confidentially.

Monitoring and Outcomes:

Monitoring: The NYC LADO should monitor and record the progress of each case, on a regular basis depending on its complexity, but typically monthly.

The LADO will convene review / update meetings / discussions as appropriate.

Outcomes: On concluding the case, there will be a final LADO Review Meeting / Discussion involving all relevant professionals. The subject is not invited.

The Final Review is a multi-agency forum convened to assess all relevant information gathered across the relevant strands of investigation—police, CYPS, employer, and/or regulatory bodies. Its primary aim is to reach a multi-agency decision regarding:

• Whether harm has occurred or may occur.
• Whether the individual poses a risk to children.
• Whether the individual remains suitable to work or volunteer with children.

This process is governed by WTSC and KCSiE guidance and is not a disciplinary or legal hearing. The outcome judgement is not a legal or disciplinary verdict; it is a safeguarding assessment. Possible outcomes include:

• No Further Action: Allegation, after consideration, does not meet the criteria for these procedures.
• Substantiated: there is sufficient evidence to prove the allegation
• False: there is sufficient evidence to disprove the allegation
• Malicious: there is sufficient evidence to disprove the allegation and there has been a deliberate act to deceive
• Unfounded: to reflect cases where there is no evidence or proper basis which supports the allegation being made
• Unsubstantiated: there is insufficient evidence to prove or disprove the allegation. The term, therefore, does not imply guilt or innocence.

The outcome of the allegation will be determined and recorded.

The employer will inform the relevant individual of the outcome in writing, including:

• A comprehensive summary of the allegation,
• Details of how the allegation was followed up and resolved,
• Relevant employer’s action taken and decisions reached,
• Whether the allegation will be referred to in future references by the employer
• How long any records will be retained by the employer.
• If there will be a referral to DBS and / or any regulatory body by the employer.

False or malicious allegations may be an indication of abuse elsewhere and this should be explored further to determine if the child might have been abused by someone else and, where appropriate, a referral made to the CYPS.

Changes to safeguarding agreements at the final meeting: It is the responsibility of individual agencies to ensure their agreed actions are completed in a timely manner.

If the organisation makes any decisions after the final review meeting that alters the decision(s) made, they must inform the LADO as soon possible.

Employment Record Keeping and References: KCSiE guidance states that details of allegations found to be malicious should be removed from the employer’s personnel records. In all other cases, information relating to the allegation, investigation, and outcome should be retained in the employer’s or organisation’s confidential personnel file for the individual concerned.

The purpose of maintaining this record is to ensure accurate information can be provided in response to any future reference requests, where appropriate. It also serves to clarify matters in cases where future DBS checks reveal police information about an allegation that did not result in a criminal conviction. Additionally, it helps prevent unnecessary re-investigation if the allegation re-emerges later.

The record should be retained at least until the person subject to the allegation has reached normal pension age or for a period of 10 years from the date of the allegation if that is longer.

Substantiated allegations should be referred to in future references. Cases in which an allegation was determined to be NFA, false, unsubstantiated, unfounded, or malicious should not be included in references. A history of repeated concerns or allegations which have all been found to be false, unsubstantiated, or malicious should also not be included in any reference.

The LADO will maintain a record of all notifications, case discussions and decisions.

Maintaining Confidentiality During Investigations: The security and management of sensitive information is of paramount importance. While an allegation is being investigated, every effort must be made to maintain confidentiality and prevent unnecessary publicity. Information should only be shared with:

• The child and their parents or carers,
• The person accused (if it does not place the child at further risk),
• Professionals who need the information to protect children, support enquiries, or manage disciplinary or suitability processes.

Legal Restrictions on Publishing Information: Under Section 13 of the Education Act 2011, it is illegal to publish any information that could identify a teacher accused of a criminal offence involving a pupil, unless the teacher is formally charged. These restrictions apply to:

• All types of schools (including academies, free schools, independent and maintained schools),
• All teaching staff, including supply and peripatetic teachers.

The restriction may only be lifted by a Magistrates’ Court if it is deemed in the interests of justice, considering the welfare of both the accused and the alleged victim. Breaching this restriction is a criminal offence. “Publication” includes any form of communication to the public or a section of the public.

Referral to Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) and Regulatory / Professional Bodies

There is a legal duty for a regulated activity provider (employers or volunteer managers) and personnel suppliers to make a referral to the DBS when both of the following two conditions have been met:

Condition 1

• you withdraw permission for a person to engage in regulated activity with children and/or vulnerable adults. Or you move the person to another area of work that is not regulated activity.

This includes situations when you would have taken the above action, but the person was re-deployed, resigned, retired, or left. For example, a teacher resigns when an allegation of harm to a student is first made.

Condition 2

You think the person has carried out one of the following:

• engaged in relevant conduct in relation to children and/or adults. An action or inaction has harmed a child or vulnerable adult or put them at risk or harm or.
• satisfied the harm test in relation to children and / or vulnerable adults. e.g. there has been no relevant conduct but a risk of harm to a child or vulnerable still exists. Or
• been cautioned or convicted of a relevant (automatic barring either with or without the right to make representations) offence.

Relevant conduct in relation to children

A child is a person under 18 years of age.

Relevant conduct is:

• endangers a child or is likely to endanger a child.
• if repeated against or in relation to a child would endanger the child or be likely to endanger the child
• involves sexual material relating to children (including possession of such material)
• involves sexually explicit images depicting violence against human beings (including possession of such images)
• is of a sexual nature involving a child.

A person’s conduct endangers a child if they:

• harm a child.
• cause a child to be harmed.
• put a child at risk of harm.
• attempt to harm a child.
• incite another to harm a child.

Substantiated Outcomes: If an allegation is substantiated and the individual is either dismissed, ceases to provide their services, or resigns, there is a legal obligation for the regulated activity provider or personnel supplier to refer the case to the DBS. This duty applies whether the person is employed directly or through an agency and ensures that safeguarding concerns are appropriately flagged to prevent future risk.

If an allegation is substantiated and the person is dismissed, or the regulated activity provider or personnel supplier ceases to use the person’s service, or the person resigns or otherwise ceases to provide his/her services, there is a legal duty for the regulated activity provider or personnel supplier to make a referral to the DBS. 

Referrals should be made as soon as possible, following the decision to remove someone from regulated activity. This could include when an individual is suspended, redeployed to work that is not regulated activity, dismissed or when they have resigned.

Under the Safeguarding and Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 Local Authorities, Keepers of Registers and Supervisory Authorities have a legal power to refer. A referral can also be in the interests of safeguarding children where the person has not been removed from working in regulated activity. This could include acting on advice of the police or a safeguarding professional, or in situations where there is not enough evidence to dismiss or remove a person from working with vulnerable groups. Legal advice should be sought in such cases.

Full guidance is available on the DBS website:   Making barring referrals to the DBS – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Notifying Ofsted: Early Years and Childcare Providers should inform Ofsted of any allegation of serious harm or abuse by any person living, working, or looking after children at the premises. Ofsted should also be invited to take part in any subsequent allegation meetings / discussions, as appropriate.

A senior manager or fostering agency should inform Ofsted of all allegations made against a foster carer, prospective adopter, or member of staff in a residential childcare facility.

Other Regulatory Bodies: If the relevant individual is a member of a regulatory or professional body a referral should be made to them as appropriate by the employer/organisation.

Resignations and Compromise Agreements: Organisations should continue their investigation if the person leaves, resigns or ceases to provide their services. It is important that every effort is made to reach a conclusion in all cases, even if the individual refuses to cooperate, having been given a full opportunity to answer the allegation and make representations in person and / or in writing.

‘Settlement agreements’ (sometimes referred to as compromise agreements): Where a person resigns in exchange for the employer not pursuing disciplinary action, and both parties agree a form of words to be used in any future reference, should not be used if the person refuses to cooperate or resigns before their notice period ends. Always aim to reach a conclusion, document any intended actions, and refer to DBS if criteria are met.

Any settlement/compromise agreement that would prevent a regulated activity provider or personnel supplier making a DBS referral even though the criteria for referral are met, is likely to result in a criminal offence being committed as they would not be complying with their legal duty to make the referral.

Learning Lessons: At the final review meeting or discussion—or earlier if appropriate—the LADO and multi-agency partners involved in the case should consider whether any learning has emerged from the specific incident. This may include discussions with other key managers who participated in the incident or investigation.

Areas for learning may relate to the LADO service itself, or to other employers, organisations, or agencies, particularly in relation to procedures or practice. Consideration should also be given to whether the case meets the threshold for a Learning Lessons Review under the NYSCP procedures.

Complaints, Challenges and New Information:

The LADO does not manage individual complaints or grievances relating to any investigation or action by a third party. Individual organisations have responsibility to manage any complaints in line with their own procedures.

Complaints: If concerns arise about how an investigation was conducted or the specific actions by another agency (e.g. police, or employer), complaints must be directed to that agency’s own procedures.

• For matters involving a police investigation or action, complaints should be addressed to the police force conducting the investigation.
• For issues related to employment, voluntary activity, or regulatory body investigations, complaints should be directed to the organisation responsible for those actions.

The LADO is not responsible for the conduct of investigations or for decisions made by individual organisations in line with their legislative or procedural requirements.

Any complaint in relation to the application of the NYSCP Procedures should be made in writing and directed to the LADO Manager at: lado@northyorks.gov.uk. These cases will be considered under NYC and/or NYSCP procedures on a case-by-case basis.

Challenges and New Information: There is no formal right of appeal against an allegation outcome. This is because the judgement is not a disciplinary or legal finding, but a safeguarding decision. However, if the subject wishes to challenge an allegation outcome, they can seek a review or reconsideration of the decision based on substantial new or additional information that was not available during the initial investigation.

If the subject believes that substantial new or additional information exists that was not available at the time of the final allegations review, they can write to the LADO Manager to request a reconsideration of the outcome.

The LADO Manager will assess whether the new information would have made a material difference to the outcome categorisation and whether further multi-agency investigation or review is warranted.

The LADO Manager will respond in writing to the individual, outlining any determination made and/or actions taken.

Steps for Challenging an Outcome:

1. Gather New Information:
   • Compile any substantial new or additional information that was not considered during the initial investigation.
2. Submit a Written Request:
   • Write to the LADO Manager detailing the new information and explaining why it would have made a material difference to the outcome. Any submissions can be sent to: lado@northyorks.gov.uk
3. Follow Up:
   • Await the LADO Manager’s decision on whether further investigation or review is appropriate. The LADO Manager will notify the individual in writing of any determination made and/or action taken. 

Page reviewed: September 2025