2,800 words*
Introduction
Among all the challenges in school safeguarding, allegations of abuse made against members of staff stand apart. They require the school to hold two distinct responsibilities simultaneously: the protection of the child who may have been harmed and the fair treatment of the adult against whom the allegation has been made. Both responsibilities are real, both are statutory and neither can be treated as secondary to the other.
This article examines the legal framework governing allegations against staff, the role of the Local Authority Designated Officer, the immediate steps a school must take when an allegation is received and the principles of fair and thorough handling that protect both children and staff.
The Statutory Framework
KCSIE 2025 categorises allegations against staff into two groups: those that may meet the harm threshold and lower-level concerns that do not. Understanding this distinction is essential because it determines which procedures apply and what the consequences may be for the staff member involved.
An allegation meets the harm threshold where a person working in or on behalf of the school is believed to have:
> • 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 in a way that indicates they may be > unsuitable to work with children > > • Behaved or may have behaved in a way that indicates they may not be > suitable to work with children even if the behaviour did not directly > involve a child
This last category is important: it means that behaviour outside the school, in an adult's private life, can constitute a relevant allegation if it indicates a risk to children. The scope of the threshold is broad by design.
The Role of the LADO
The Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) is the key external figure in the management of allegations against staff. KCSIE 2025 and Working Together to Safeguard Children both establish the LADO's role as providing advice, managing oversight, liaising with the police and children's social care, and monitoring cases to ensure they are dealt with promptly, fairly and thoroughly.
Schools must contact the LADO as soon as possible on receiving an allegation that meets the harm threshold, and in any case within one working day. This is not optional and it is not discretionary. Even where a headteacher believes an allegation to be false or malicious, the obligation to consult the LADO before making that judgement is absolute. The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse and numerous serious case reviews have found instances where schools managed allegations internally rather than through the LADO process, resulting in perpetrators moving between schools without any record of the allegation being transferred.
Research conducted on behalf of the DfE found significant variability in how schools handle allegations, particularly those that are less serious in nature, with some headteachers using discretion to handle allegations internally in cases where they did not consider there to be a risk of harm. This practice undermines the integrity of the system and, in cases where the allegation turns out to be well-founded, can expose children to continued risk.
> Source: DfE Research Report DFE-RB192, Allegations of Abuse Against > Teachers and Non-Teaching Staff.
The First Staff Member: How to Receive an Allegation
When a member of staff first hears an allegation from a child about another member of staff, their role is carefully defined: listen, reassure and record. It does not extend to investigation, to confronting the person against whom the allegation is made or to forming and communicating personal judgements about the credibility of the account.
The staff member should:
> • Listen to the child and provide appropriate reassurance without > leading questioning > > • Limit questioning to the minimum necessary to understand the nature > of the concern > > • Not make any promise of confidentiality > > • Make an accurate written record using the school's confidential > cause for concern form > > • Inform the DSL immediately so that the LADO and appropriate agencies > can be contacted within 24 hours
The temptation to investigate independently, to speak to the member of staff concerned before the LADO has been consulted, or to speak to other staff about the allegation is very strong and almost always counterproductive. Premature disclosure of the allegation to the person against whom it is made can compromise a criminal investigation, give a perpetrator the opportunity to destroy evidence or align their account with what has been reported and, in some cases, put the child at risk of pressure to retract.
Immediate Actions Following an Allegation
Once the DSL has been informed and the LADO consulted, a decision will be made about the immediate steps required. These may include:
> • An immediate referral to children's social care or the police if > the child is at risk of significant harm > > • A risk assessment to determine whether the member of staff should > continue in their current role while the investigation proceeds > > • Consideration of suspension, but only where there is cause to > suspect a child is at risk of harm, the allegation warrants police > investigation or the allegation is so serious that it might be grounds > for dismissal
Suspension must not be treated as an automatic response to an allegation. KCSIE 2025 is explicit that suspension is a neutral act, not a disciplinary sanction, and should only be used where a risk assessment indicates it is necessary to protect children. The decision to suspend rests with the employer alone; neither the police, children's social care nor the LADO can require an employer to suspend a member of staff.
Where suspension is not imposed, alternative risk-mitigation measures should be considered, including redeployment to a role that does not involve contact with children or increased supervision.
> The fact that a member of staff has been suspended does not mean that > the allegation has been substantiated. Suspension is a neutral > precautionary measure. It should be communicated to the staff member > in those terms and should be accompanied by the offer of appropriate > pastoral and welfare support.
Outcomes of the Allegations Process
KCSIE sets out four possible outcomes for an allegation once an investigation has been completed:
> • Substantiated: there is sufficient evidence to prove the allegation > > • Malicious: there is sufficient evidence to disprove the allegation > and there has been a deliberate act to deceive or cause harm to the > person subject of the allegation > > • False: there is sufficient evidence to disprove the allegation > > • Unsubstantiated: there is insufficient evidence to either prove or > disprove the allegation
The distinction between unsubstantiated and false is critical. An unsubstantiated allegation does not imply that the child was lying or that the member of staff has been cleared. It means that the evidence available was insufficient to prove what was alleged. Schools must handle the recording and communication of outcomes with extreme care, particularly in relation to the staff member's personnel record and any future reference requests.
DfE research found that almost one-third of allegations against teachers referred to LADOs were substantiated, and that over half were physical in nature. These figures suggest both the seriousness with which the system must be taken and the importance of a fair process that does not treat allegation as equivalent to conviction.
> Source: DfE Research Report DFE-RR192.
Low-Level Concerns
Not every concern about a staff member's conduct meets the harm threshold for LADO referral. KCSIE introduces the category of low-level concern to describe behaviours that are inconsistent with the school's code of conduct and may indicate poor professional practice, but that do not yet constitute a risk of harm to children.
A low-level concern might include a staff member who uses unnecessarily physical contact with students beyond what is professionally appropriate, who communicates with students through personal rather than school channels, who makes comments about students' bodies or appearance, or who repeatedly spends unstructured time alone with individual students without a clear educational rationale.
Low-level concerns must be taken seriously, recorded and responded to. A pattern of low-level concerns that is allowed to accumulate without challenge can escalate into serious harm. KCSIE notes that where a pattern of such behaviour is identified, the school should consider whether there are wider cultural issues that enabled it to develop.
Supporting Staff Subject to Allegations
The impact of an allegation on the staff member against whom it is made can be severe: anxiety, depression, damage to professional reputation and significant personal distress are all commonly reported consequences. Schools have a legal duty of care to their employees as well as their students, and this duty does not cease when an allegation is made.
Staff subject to allegations should be informed of the allegation as soon as the LADO has agreed this is appropriate, and should be provided with information about the support available to them, including access to an employee assistance programme, trade union representation and, where relevant, occupational health support. Schools should ensure that the management of the investigation is clearly separated from any pastoral support offered to the staff member, to avoid conflicts of interest.
Conclusion
Allegations against staff are among the most testing circumstances any school leader will face. They require simultaneous, uncompromised commitment to child protection and to the fair treatment of adults. They require strict adherence to statutory procedures at the very moment when institutional anxiety creates the greatest pressure to manage situations informally. And they require leadership of the highest order: clear, principled, well-informed and genuinely committed to the safety of every person the school is responsible for.
The LADO process exists because experience has shown what happens when allegations are managed internally, informally or inconsistently. Schools that understand and implement it well protect children, protect staff and protect the integrity of the institution.
References: KCSIE 2025 | Working Together to Safeguard Children | DfE Research Report DFE-RB192 | Gloucestershire SCP, Allegations Against Staff or Volunteers | IICSA Final Report (2022)