Connect

      Allegaitons/ Misconduct Policy 


      anzuk Education Ltd follow stringent quality guidelines and takes every reasonable precaution to ensure that all candidates deployed to its Client schools maintain the highest standards of professional and personal conduct.

      Our stringent vetting procedures ensure that any candidate found to have a history of unacceptable conduct or practice, will not be offered a place on our register. Through our continuous and active monitoring, any difficulties our candidates may be experiencing are promptly highlighted, enabling us to step in and pre-empt potential issues.

      However, despite our stringent quality procedures, and the vulnerable position that supply staff often find themselves in, occasionally difficult or sensitive issues do arise. Both Client and candidate feedback is essential to us in order to ensure we continually work towards improving our service.

      In the event of more serious allegations, for example:

      • Physical assault
      • A verbal offence
      • Discrimination

      Anzuk Education Ltd has set out the following procedures which MUST be adopted by staff when dealing with incidents of this nature as well as the responsibilities of anzuk education with regard to Child Protection/Safeguarding issues.

      Any candidate who has a complaint made against them is automatically suspended and not placed in another school until the matter has been fully resolved.
       

      Procedure:

      Anzuk Education Ltd has a central Incident File in which staff can record the details of any allegation or complaint against a candidate, together with a detailed account of all actions taken in the course of any investigation. Copies of statements and all correspondence are kept as well as a chronological sequence of events. (Director to sign off).

      Following the receipt of a complaint or report of an incident, we would explain that we have certain procedures for handling incidents and that we will be happy to set these in motion if the school wishes. In deciding how far to pursue the investigation, we are usually guided by the school’s attitude to the incident.

      If the incident is considered by either the school or a parent serious enough to warrant further investigation, we adopt the following procedure:


      Stage 1

      • Does the school wish to terminate the arrangement for the candidate’s services immediately?
      • Does the school wish to retain the candidate’s services pending investigation?
      • Does the school require a replacement candidate?

       

      Stage 2

      • Inform the school that we will conduct our own investigation of the incident by interviewing the candidate in the presence of their Union representative/ Colleague/ Independent representative (We always advise the candidate that we have been informed of an incident and ask for their version of events, prior to telling them what has been stated by the school).
      • Prior to such investigation, we request a written statement from the school, together with any supporting statements outlining the nature of the allegations.
      • Following such investigation, we will record the response of the candidate and report back to the school.

      Stage 3

      Following receipt of a written report from the school, we write to the candidate concerned and ask him/her to attend a meeting at our office. We advise them that it would be in their own interest to be accompanied by a representative.

      Stage 4

      We write to the school informing them of the steps we have taken.

      Stage 5

      We arrange a meeting and ensure that 2 representatives (one to conduct the investigation and the other to act as a witness and note taker) are present:
      Introduce parties to each other

      • State that this is not to be regarded as a disciplinary procedure, merely an investigation of a formal allegation which we have received.
      • The details of the allegation are presented at this point (copies are handed out only with prior consent from the school) and the candidate is invited to comment.
      • The candidate’s comments are noted and read back to them for confirmation that we have noted the response accurately.

      If the candidate accepts responsibility for their actions and expresses regret, we give advice as to the dangers of laying himself/herself open to allegation. We also draw attention to our Code of Conduct and explain that the future of the candidate as a member of our register will be dependent on his/her acceptance of and adherence moving forward to the Code.
      If, however, the candidate denies the charge, we simply note his/her comments and say that we will report these back to the school. We inform them that following this meeting, the school may or may not wish to pursue matters and that we will keep them informed of further developments. 

      Stage 6

      Following the meeting we will then write to the school to report on the outcome of our investigation. The school is advised that if the matter cannot be resolved and that the seriousness of the allegation warrants further action, to adopt whatever measures would normally come into force to meet legal requirements.

      During the course of any such proceedings a senior representative of anzuk Education will be available to attend, if requested, any meetings to share information and co-operate fully with the Authority pending a final decision. All internal paperwork will also be made available.

      Following the outcome of any such investigation, we are guided by the Authority’s decision when considering the candidate’s future as a member of our register.

      Post-Registration:

      If Anzuk Education Ltd receives information following registration of a candidate which may be relevant to his/her suitability for a post within a school, we would first assess its severity. If it is apparent that the information is of a serious nature and could be child protection issue, then we would notify all relevant parties immediately and implement the following procedure:

      • Managers will immediately make their Director and Company Protection officer of any candidate having serious allegations made against them.
      • Any serious acts of misconduct will be dealt with by the company’s Child Protection officer.
      • Any candidate who presents false documentation or has a serious allegation made against them is referred to The National College for Teaching and Leadership, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State. This department is responsible for investigating allegations of serious misconduct against teachers and Head teachers in schools in England. If appropriate, the National College for Teaching and Leadership can prohibit the teacher, meaning the person concerned is not allowed to teach in schools, relevant youth accommodation and children’s homes in England.
      • If an allegation is of a less serious nature and does not require referring to the above department, we will suspend the candidate and require them to attend an interview with Anzuk Education Ltd about the incident as previously described.

      The National College for Teaching and Leadership, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State, is responsible for investigating allegations of serious misconduct against teachers and Head Teachers in schools in England. If appropriate, the National College for Teaching and Leadership can prohibit the teacher, meaning the person concerned is not allowed to teach in schools, relevant youth accommodation and children’s homes in England.

      How are cases referred?
      Allegations of serious misconduct against a teacher may be referred to the National College for Teaching and Leadership by any of those listed below:

      • a teacher’s employer, including an employment or supply agency, has a legal duty to consider whether to refer a case to the National College for Teaching and Leadership when they have dismissed a teacher for misconduct, or would have dismissed them had they not resigned first
      • members of the public who think that a case of misconduct by a teacher is serious enough to warrant a prohibition order, although the National College for Teaching and Leadership will expect local procedures to have been exhausted before it will consider investigating the case
      • the police, the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) and other regulators who are aware of relevant information.

      A referral is appropriate if the alleged misconduct is so serious that it warrants a decision on whether the teacher should be prevented from teaching again. Cases of less serious misconduct, and all cases of incompetence, should be dealt with locally by employers. If an allegation is deemed to be such that the teacher should be prevented from teaching until their case has been fully investigated, the National College for Teaching and Leadership can impose an interim prohibition order until the case is concluded.

      N.B. Please consult the relevant information on the Department for Education website

      (under the ‘Teacher Misconduct’ section at www.education.gov.uk) for full details of the teacher regulation process.

      The system of teacher regulation:
      Teaching Agency (TA) receives case from employer, public, police, Disclosure and Barring Service (DAB) or other regulator TA does a formal investigation. They inform the teacher and referrer that they have 28 days to submit evidence; they consider evidence and decide whether to proceed to a hearing. They can seek advice from experts when needed including from teaching, medical, legal professions. They inform the teacher and referrer of outcome.
      On receipt of a case the TA will check:

      • That it relates to a teacher in England; 
      • That it is a case of serious misconduct

      Where a case is referred to a Professional Conduct Panel –teacher and referrer are informed and invited to give any further evidence. A Panel (3 members made up of professional and lay members) hears evidence (teachers and witnesses can present their case) and panel decides whether facts have been proven and whether to recommend to the Secretary of State that a prohibition would be appropriate or not If it is decided not to undertake an investigation –the referrer & teacher are informed and no further action will be taken IPO (Interim Prohibition order) is given. 

      Teacher, referrer and current employer are informed. The current employer must take action to ensure the teacher is not employed by them as a teacher. IPOs will be reviewed every 6 months.

      Where the Secretary of State decides not to prohibit the teacher, the teacher and referrer are informed in writing and this is published on the website. No further action is taken.

      Where a person has been prohibited, the Secretary of State may indicate that they can appeal to have their prohibition order reviewed after the minimum period specified in their order has passed (not less than 2 years).

      Summary:
      It is Anzuk Education Ltd’s utmost priority that incidents and complaints are dealt with in a fair manner. Our operating system of individually accountable personal consultants for schools and candidates means that a consultant will normally deal with a complaint until its resolution.
      If at any time a complainant is not satisfied with the treatment of their complaint, then Anzuk Education Ltd has a clear line management structure for the complaint to be referred to a more senior level.