 |
 |
Dear All, Sorry for the delay but please find as follows definitive advice from the CRB that indicates that freelancers and consultants may be treated in the same way as supply teachers for CRB disclosure purposes. This advice (see exchange of messages that follows) combined with the very sensible paper from Martin at SWMLAC should provide everyone with the evidence and information they need. Regards Towse Harrison ----- Original Message ----- From: <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 3:04 PM Subject: RE: CRB/Disclosures Ref:2002/0059886 Towse Apologies for not getting back sooner. I would agreed that the relationships that you suggest are comparable and that as a starting point for museums and agencies could use the principles contained within our guidance if they wished. Terry Hegarty Child Protection Policy Team ----- Original Message ----- From: Sun Jester <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 11:00 PM Subject: Re: Re: CRB/Disclosures Ref:2002/0059886 Dear Terry Hegarty, Thank you for your detailed reply. I hope you will excuse my pedantry but I seek one further clarification before posting this information to my professional peer group's e-list. Would it be in order to say that the relationship between self employed professionals in the heritage field, (i.e. artists in residence, interpreters, workshop leaders, learning programme providers) is comparable to the relationship between schools/teacher employment agencies and supply teachers? If that is the case it would be reasonable to suggest that museums (including those managed by local authorities) and other heritage bodies would be advised to follow the guidance from DfES that relate to schools/agencies and supply/freelance teachers? Can you just please confirm that I have understood this correctly from the implications of your previous posting. Many thanks for your detailed attention. Towse Harrison ----- Original Message ----- From: <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 5:58 PM Subject: RE: Re: CRB/Disclosures Dear Towse Harrison The guidance that we offer on background checking is contained in a Circular "Child Protection: Preventing Unsuitable people from Working with Children and Young Persons and is available at the following website address. http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/index.cfm?id=2172 Paragraph 6 of Annex C in the guidance outlines the Department's advice on the frequency of checks. Whilst the Annex is aimed at teacher employment agencies, we would expect that an organisation such as your own would only have to obtain an initial enhanced disclosure when employing someone and people working in different institutions in circumstances that you describe need not be asked to obtain a separate Enhanced Disclosure by each institution. In those circumstances the second or subsequent institution should require the teacher/worker to produce his or her copy of the Disclosure obtained by the first agency, and should verify the validity of the document by checking with the first agency. The second agency will, however, need to obtain a separate Disclosure if the first agency advises that the police disclosed non-conviction information that was not included on the teacher's copy of the Disclosure. What this advice means in practice is that subsequent employers or users of the person's services should be able to go to the body that requested the initial enhanced disclosure and ask whether or not there is any non-conviction information on the employers copy of the Disclosure certificate. If such information is not present and provided that there has not been a break of service of more than three months, the subsequent employers can decide to use a person's services. If however non conviction information is present then the subsequent employer will have to obtain an enhanced disclosure as the initial employer is not necessarily allowed to release non conviction information to other parties This is a practise that we are trying to encourage, as unnecessary checks only serve to increase the workload for the Criminal Records Bureau. I hope that you find this information useful, but if you need any further advice or assistance on this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2002/0059886 Yours sincerely Terry Hegarty CHILD PROTECTION POLICY TEAM PUPIL SUPPORT AND INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS DIVISION 01325 392037 [log in to unmask] http://www.dfes.gov.uk/index.htm -----Original Message----- From: Sun Jester [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 21 September 2002 13:11 Subject: CRB/Disclosures I am a self employed learning professional working in the cultural heritage field which does involve working with children, sometimes unsupervised. There is some confusion among colleagues in The Group for Education in Museums about how self employed people are affected. In particular it would seem that some institutions might be instructed not to accept an individual's own copy of their Disclosure. This affects all sorts of people working as freelancers, artists in residence, short term projects, theatre in education, museum and gallery visits and the like. The guidance document for governors offers some relevant advice relating to supply and agency teachers but it would be useful if some formal advice relating to self employed professionals, who may not work for individual schools, LEAs, LAs or museums on a regular basis, could be forthcoming. Can you help? Towse Harrison SUN JESTER CONSULTANTS FOR LIFELONG LEARNING HISTORICAL INTERPRETERS COMMUNITY ARTS WORKERS 12 Ascott Road, Aylesbury, Bucks, HP20 1HX Tel: 01296 423118