With less changes to implement from KCSIE this year, Jo Perrin discusses some other key activities DSLs and school leaders could be prioritising this academic year…

This year’s edition of Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) brings very few changes that will affect practice – see my previous blog on this topic. 

But this doesn’t mean that DSLs can rest up – as we are all well aware, safeguarding is never finished!  

The lack of substantial changes to KCSIE this year will give some breathing space for DSLs and SLT to really review and consider current systems and procedures.   

Make Time for Reflection 

What works well and what might benefit from tweaks?   

As a starting point, it’s a good idea to look at KCSIE in detail – some of the statements in the statutory guidance have been there for many years and we are often tempted to gloss over these seeming “basics”.   

This year provides a great opportunity to focus on some of the statements in more detail and really assess whether they are working and implemented fully in your setting. 

I’ve started this work for you in this blog, picking out a few key aspects of KCSIE that you might want to revisit with your colleagues and governors/trustees.  

These tend to be aspects that SFE’s Education Advisers pick up on as “areas for potential improvement” when we conduct safeguarding Audits... 

1. The difference (and similarities) between must and should 

KCSIE states “We use the term “must” when the person in question is legally required to do something, and “should” when the advice set out should be followed unless there is good reason not to”.   

This is at the heart of the fact that KCSIE itself is statutory guidance not a statute. If best practice is not enshrined in Law, that doesn’t mean we have an opt-out. Best practice is the “should” and we must follow it unless there is good reason not to – and in all the years I’ve worked in safeguarding I’ve never come across a good reason not to aim to keep children safe! 

Discuss this within your senior leading meetings and DSL team meetings – is there consistency of action even for the “should” statements? Do staff all have the same vision of what keeping children safe is and what their role entails? 

2. Do you get all staff to read Part 1 or do some read Annex A? 

A few years ago, KCSIE introduced, at Annex A, a shorter version of Part 1. The idea was that those staff who don’t regularly come into contact with children as part of their role, but who are required to read bits of KCSIE due to where they work, might benefit from a shorter, more direct, version.  

The implication was that if staff who rarely come into contact with children are required to read the fuller version they might “switch off” as it might not feel relevant to them. However, it was up to the governing body to decide for each setting. 

Now is a good time to reflect on what choice your setting made. What works for your staff? Do you know your staff as individuals to make the correct choice for each person, taking into account their role and their nature?   

I am a huge fan of consistency, so my instinct is to have all staff being trained on the same information and reading the same document – and checking on understanding and filling in gaps in knowledge where necessary.   

You might come to a different conclusion which is absolutely fine, as long as you justify the reason why – and it isn’t to give someone the shorter version because they “don’t do” safeguarding.  As we know “Safeguarding is everyone’s responsibility”. 

Another question that might be more useful to pose is whether some staff might benefit from translation of Part 1 into their first language, in order to ensure the message is understood and can be acted upon.   

LGFL provides translations into several community languages here: Keeping Children Safe in Education Part 1 Translations | LGFL . 

3. Duty on governing bodies to ensure staff understand and discharge their roles and responsibilities. 

This is an interesting topic. Governing bodies have to ensure that any policy is carried out in practice – so how involved are your governors and especially your nominated safeguarding governor, in considering the understanding of all staff?   

KCSIE says  that governors should have a  process for ensuring they have a way of assisting staff to do this – so giving your governors a list of who has signed to say they’ve attended training and reads KCSIE is not enough.   

When and how do you, as DSLs, check that staff understand and act upon any concerns?  Regular safeguarding training – formal or informal – is key to keeping safeguarding at the front of all staff’s minds, but what’s needed goes beyond this.   

It’s crucial to do something with your data – which staff refer, which don’t? If they haven’t referred anything in months, then ask why and collate the data.   

Is it a training need for a specific group? Is it that someone has forgotten how to use your online system or lost the log-in? Is it that someone lower in the school pyramid hierarchy “presumes” someone else has acted? If someone keeps failing the staff quiz on safeguarding – what do you do and when do your governors get this information? 

 4. Children usually experience more than one kind of abuse at the same time. 

KCSIE says that children rarely suffer one type of abuse, neglect or exploitation and that various issues will overlap – so how does your online or paper-based system allow you to categorise forms of harm?   

If you have a system of picking one category only (which some settings do for simplicity) – who decides on the most appropriate and what are the risks that you’ll miss something?  

Some settings only allow DSLs to categorise what staff have inputted, so there might be more knowledge and thought involved, but there are equal risks that things are missed which, if prioritised, would have led to a different type of support for the child.   

Online systems do usually allow for multiple categories to be selected, but this can risk overlap and confusion if too many are picked.   

How can you be confident that you know the true risk level and support needed for a child? When did you last revisit the number of categories you use on your systems and whether they are fit for purpose for the types of safeguarding concerns that are contextually raised in your setting? 

5. Governor safeguarding training should be strategic rather than operational 

For several years this has been part of KCSIE, this idea of governors having strategic training. Governors should have training to “equip them with the knowledge to provide strategic challenge”.  

Governors are there to hold the DSL and SLT to account and to test the effectiveness of the safeguarding policy and procedures in the setting. If they have received exactly the same training as school staff – they are not in a position to do this.   

Staff training has to be operational, noticing signs and symptoms of abuse and neglect and understanding the setting’s recording procedures for example.  

Governors do not need to know this, they need to know numbers at Early Help, numbers getting statutory support, contextual safeguarding trends in the local area etc.   

They also need to be trained on their responsibilities under KCSIE and look at strategic questions to ask of DSLs and SLT in order to test the robustness of systems and look for areas to improve.  Their training needs to be different to that of staff members – is yours? 

Equally the role of governors needs to ensure that “the designated safeguarding lead has the appropriate status and authority within the school or college to carry out the duties of the post. The role carries a significant level of responsibility and the postholder should be given the additional time, funding, training, resources, and support needed to carry out the role effectively.”   

Without an understanding of the contextual safeguarding concerns in the immediate area and knowledge of which questions to ask of the DSL and SLT about safeguarding practices, a governor cannot be assured of the effectiveness of the provision in place.   

For example, if there is an increase in children living in temporary accommodation in the setting, there might be a need for a DSL or pastoral lead to have the time to attend local training or make connections with local support groups and charities and they may need to be released from their usual duties for a period of time to do this work, which might be strengthened by governor support. 

Summary 

These are just five small sections of KCSIE that have been static for several years, but must still remain on our radar in order to allow us to provide the most effective safeguarding support to our communities and staff.   

Try to take time at the start of this academic year when we have less “new” content to absorb, to focus on these sections (or any others in the document you feel are really pertinent to your setting’s context) – they might not be new, but they are still important. 

If you want any support with your safeguarding provision, remember you can contact our expert Education Advisers on safeguarding@servicesforeducation.co.uk 

If you found this blog useful, you may also be interested in reading the following blogs: 

Understanding the Upcoming Changes in Early Help

Education Adviser, Emma Mudge, discusses the Upcoming Changes in early help, including what is proposed...

12
Sep

KCSIE 2025 – What’s Changed?

Education Adviser, Jo Perrin, discusses the changes to the KCSIE 2025 draft and points out...

08
Jul

Wellbeing and Safeguarding: The Crucial Connection

Education adviser Lucie Welch discusses the crucial connection between wellbeing and safeguarding, explaining how prioritising...

04
Apr

  KCSIE 2025 : A Guide to the Key Safeguarding Updates

Our advisers have created a comprehensive resource that gives DSLs and school leaders everything they need to know about the latest statutory changes in Keeping Children Safe in Education 2025.

Covering online safety, attendance, kinship care, safer recruitment, inclusive language and more, it ensures you are fully up to date and inspection-ready.

This resource is an indispensable reference guide to support training, policy updates and safeguarding practice in every school.

  About the Author

Jo Perrin - Interim School Support Lead,  Adviser, Services For Education

Jo Perrin is a seasoned Education Adviser with a strong background in safeguarding. She has held key roles as a Designated Safeguarding Lead and pastoral lead in the education sector. Facilitating training to enhance the knowledge and skills of professionals working directly with children and young people is her passion.

With a wealth of experience in teaching PSHE and expertise in childhood trauma from her time as a foster carer, Jo is dedicated to supporting organisations that work with children and vulnerable adults on safeguarding issues. She is actively involved in professional safeguarding groups in the West Midlands and is currently collaborating on a research project with colleagues from the University of Birmingham and the NHS focusing on FGM awareness within communities. Jo’s has worked as a West Midlands' Adviser for national PSHE resources, presented at the Sex Education Forum National Members' Event and authored an advertorial for PSM magazine and an article for SEND magazine.

Jo's expertise extends to training on topics such as Safer Recruitment and Mental Health at Work. She is also a facilitator for the nationally recognised NPQSL qualification, supporting senior leaders in education. Her contributions to publications and development of resources for RSE provision have been well-received by schools nationally and internationally.

With her extensive experience and dedication to professional development, Jo Perrin is a highly respected figure in the field of education. Her guidance on safeguarding, mental health awareness, personal development, and relationships education is highly valued within the industry.