Changes to DCSF guidance on school trips resulting from the 2005 HSE report on the Glenridding Tragedy

Dear Sir or Madam,

The HSE report on the Glenridding Tragedy said "The extensive
investigation of this tragedy at Glenridding Beck by HSE and
Cumbria Police revealed many important lessons both for those who
lead educational visits and those involved in their management.
There is a consensus in the educational and outdoor worlds, which
HSE supports, that these lessons should be made widely known."

The above report made a large number of recommendations. Please
could you tell me what changes the DfES/DCSF made to their guidance
on school trips as a result of these recommendations?

How did the DfES/DCSF communicate these changes to schools?

Yours faithfully,

Anne Jago

Dear Amanda Thomas,

Thank you for your response dated 15 August to my FOI.

Please could I check my understanding of your response. Are you
saying:

1. The HSE report on the Glenridding Tragedy was 45 pages of A4 in
length and you were able to summarise this in 4 sentences on the
Teachernet website?

2. The HSE report was published in March 2005, three and a half
years ago and you haven't yet made any changes in your guidance as
a result of the HSE recommendations?

3. You believe no omissions in the HASPEV guidance were revealed by
the HSE report?

In relation to point 3 above could you therefore tell me where the
following HSE recommendations are to be found in HASPEV, paragraph
numbers would be useful:

a) Schools need to have effective management arrangements in place
to ensure that leaders taking young people into hazardous
environments are properly supported.

b) Leaders of these activities should always put the safety and
best interests of the young people first.

c) They should always follow the Department for Education and
Skills’ (DfES) guidance on educational visits.

d) Any complaint about unsafe practice should be referred
immediately to the Head teacher

e) The circumstances of the complaint be investigated objectively,
putting aside possible “personality issues”

f) Schools and LEAs need clear procedures for dealing with any
concerns about unsafe practice

g) The leader should ask at the planning stage “what might go
wrong?” and this question should also be posed by EVCs, head
teachers, governors and others involved in planning and approving
educational visits/adventure activities.

h) Head teachers need to ensure that essential paperwork, such as
consent forms, have been completed

i) The need for schools to have clear risk-based arrangements for
the supervision of pupils on educational visits

j) The need for schools to have effective procedures for responding
to complaints about unsafe practice

k) The risk assessment should identify the staffing required to run
a visit safely. Staffing should never be decided just by a simple
numerical calculation of the ratio of children to adults

l) The risk assessment should also consider the implications of one
of the leaders/helpers becoming incapacitated either before or
during the trip

m) Teachers who fail to provide adequate supervision place
themselves at risk of action under both civil and criminal law.
They are also likely to be in breach of their professional duties
under Paragraph 65.7 of “School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions
Document” and liable to disciplinary action.

n) Risk assessments should consider how the party might respond to
a serious incident

I am sorry that this is such a long list but I am sure you agree
that nothing is more important than the safety of children.

Yours sincerely,

Anne Jago