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