Page 1 of 17
Security and Violence
NUT HEALTH AND SAFETY BRIEFING
This briefing looks at security of school premises and violence issues, in
particular at security arrangements and means of dealing with intruders,
and also considers the related issue of pupil behaviour.
Security of School Premises
Considerable attention has been focused in recent years on action to improve school security and
reduce the risk of violence to school staff. The DfEE1 Working Group on school security,
established in 1996 following the murder of Philip Lawrence and the Dunblane killings, oversaw
the introduction of various initiatives, supported by additional Government funding, to assist
schools in reviewing and improving their security arrangements.
Over the years, the Government has published a number of very useful documents on the
subject of school security; regrettably however, these appear to be no longer available on the
DfE website. In many cases, however, schools and local authorities will continue to retain paper
copies of these documents; this briefing therefore continues to make reference to the
publications concerned where appropriate.
> The Need to Review Security Arrangements
Schools face a dilemma in their security arrangements. On the one hand, they wish to be open
and welcoming places for parents, pupils and the local community. On the other hand, staff and
pupils must be able to work in and learn in a safe and secure environment.
The legal obligations owed to teachers and pupils are clear. Every employer is required by law to
assess the risks to the health and safety of employees and others and to take steps to eliminate
or reduce those risks.
This applies just as much to risks arising out of poor security
arrangements, such as dangers from intruders, as to risks from unsafe premises or equipment.
This means that local authorities and governing bodies are legally bound to examine their
security arrangements, take the steps needed to improve security, and keep their arrangements
under review. All reviews of school security arrangements should be firmly based upon the
principles of risk assessment.
> Guidance on Improving Security Arrangements
There are various sources of guidance to schools on improving security arrangements and
reducing the risk of violence to staff. In particular, the then DfES published detailed guidance for
The Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) became the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) in 2001;
then the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) in 2007, before being re-named the Department of
Education following the 2010 General Election. For a useful search facility for educational acronyms, go to
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/.
1
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 2 of 17
schools on this area in its guidance document, "Improving Security in Schools". This document
described how to assess the risks facing individual schools and the measures to be taken in
addressing them and set out advice on the respective roles of local authorities, governors and
school managers. It also considered the variety of physical security measures available and
advises on assessing and selecting those which are appropriate for the specific school situation.
Unfortunately this guidance is no longer available from the DfE, although as previously indicated,
many schools and local authorities may still have hard copies.
The document included a useful recommended "risk assessment" checklist for use in conducting
school security surveys. This is attached at Appendix 1 to this briefing. This checklist refers in
particular to the previous incidence of crime, the environmental and building factors specific to
the premises, and the degree and effectiveness of the security measures already employed.
The former Education Sector Advisory Committee to the Health and Safety Commission2
published guidance on reducing the risk of violence to school staff. This document, "Violence to
Staff in the Education Sector”, considers how to draw up a workplace policy in schools to address
and minimise the risks of violence to school staff and what such a policy should include. The
document was prepared in consultation with the NUT and other organisations, and is available at
http://books.hse.gov.uk/hse/public/saleproduct.jsf?catalogueCode=9780717612932.
> Local Authority and Governing Body Monitoring of School Security
In their annual reports to parents governing bodies must report on measures taken to review
and improve school security. Schools should therefore review their security arrangements at
least annually. It is advisable that a specific review be carried out against the checklist
recommended by the DfE in order to increase the likelihood of the school securing entitlement to
funding for additional security measures.
Local authorities and other employers should be pressed to provide governors and school
managers with proper guidance, support and training on the area, and operate a monitoring
system on school security issues.
Many local authorities have drawn up comprehensive
initiatives on the issue of school security and all local authorities should be keeping their own
approaches under review in the light of developing "best practice" elsewhere.
NUT health & safety advisers or NUT Regional/Wales Offices can provide more information about
arrangements in place within local authorities for guidance, support and training to governors
and school managers on security issues and for local authority monitoring of security matters.
NUT health and safety representatives should ensure that issues of school security are examined
and kept under review within their school.
Dealing with Intruders
In 1997 the then DfEE issued comprehensive guidance entitled ‘School Security: Dealing with
Trouble Makers’ on dealing with incidents in schools. This guidance sets out the relevant legal
background, covering civil and criminal offences and pays particular attention to offences
involving weapons or violence. It considers, and advises upon, the issue of cooperation between
the police and schools in dealing with incidents and in monitoring school security matters on a
routine basis. The document is no longer available on the DfE website but can be found on the
DfE’s archived site at
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218194057/http://teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/i
ndex.cfm?id=9232.
2
The Health and Safety Commission (HSC) merged with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in 2008.
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 3 of 17
> Who is a Trespasser?
Schools are not public places to which anyone can have access; persons entering without
permission are trespassers and a variety of approaches is available to dealing with trespassers
under the law. The first thing a school should do is make clear exactly who has authority to be
on the premises.
Some people, in particular teachers, pupils and parents, will have “implied” authority to be
present if they would normally be allowed access to the premises. There can be limits, however,
to their implied authority to be present. For example, there may be limits on the times and
places when their presence is authorised. Parents might expect to be allowed on only at the
beginning or end of the day, or when otherwise invited.
Other people, including visitors, need specific authority to be present if they are not to be
regarded as possible trespassers.
A school policy clearly communicated to pupils and parents can help in ensuring everyone knows
who has authority to be present in schools, as can a noticeboard directing all visitors to present
themselves at a specified reception point. Anyone can have their authority to be present
withdrawn by simply letting them know by letter. Any implied authority of individuals to be
present does not extend to circumstances when they are causing a disturbance.
> What Powers exist to deal with Trespassers?
Special legal provisions govern steps to be taken against trespassers in schools. Section 547 of
the 1996 Education Act provides that trespassers who are making a nuisance or disturbance and
refusing to leave school premises are committing a criminal offence. “Nuisance or disturbance”
has a wide interpretation and includes, for example, riding motorbikes or exercising animals in
such a way as to disturb the normal running of the school. Such trespassers cannot be arrested
but they can be removed by a police officer or anyone authorised by the local authority (or
governors in foundation and VA schools and academies). They can also be prosecuted and fined
up to £500 or, if under 16, their parents can be bound over.
The NUT strongly advises that school staff should not themselves take on responsibility for
removing intruders. The recommended course of action is:



to advise trespassers that they are on the premises without authority and ask them to leave;
if they ignore the warning, to advise them that the police will be called; and
to call the police and arrange for a police officer to come and remove them from the premises
(serious incidents should, of course, be reported to the police at once).
The general criminal law applies where other criminal offences are being committed. Anyone
committing an arrestable criminal offence, such as threatening behaviour, causing a breach of
the peace, assault or committing criminal damage can be arrested and prosecuted.
Finally, the school may take action under civil law. Injunctions can be sought against persistent
trespassers and these can, for example, prohibit named individuals from coming onto school
grounds or within a certain distance of the school. Anyone causing loss or damage can be sued
by the school. In recent years, police and local authorities have used Anti-Social Behaviour
Orders (ASBOS) (now known as Criminal Behaviour Orders) to exclude particular people from a
school or schools where their behaviour is identified as likely to cause harassment, alarm or
distress.
A comprehensive summary of legislation relating to school security can be found at Appendix 2.
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 4 of 17
> Rights of Way through School Grounds
Certain schools have rights of way through their grounds. The law provides, however, that rights
of way may in certain circumstances be closed or diverted.
A school’s security risk assessment may identify a security risk posed by the existence of a right
of way, particularly if there have been previous incidents. The school’s governing body may
therefore determine that it believes that the right of way should be closed or diverted. In
practice, courts prefer applications for closure or diversion to be made by the owner of the land;
this may be the local authority, the diocese for voluntary aided schools or the foundation for
foundation schools. The governing body should therefore seek the support and assistance of the
appropriate body in making any such application.
Violence in Schools
In Violence at Work: A Guide for Employers 3 the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) defines
workplace violence as: ‘any incident in which a person is abused, threatened or assaulted in
circumstances relating to their work’. The HSE goes on to say:
‘This can include verbal abuse or threats as well as physical attacks. Physical attacks can cause
anxiety and distress, and in more serious cases, pain, disability or even death. Serious and
persistent verbal abuse may damage worker’s health through anxiety and distress. In addition,
worry about violence at work, even in workers who do not directly experience it, can be a source
of stress’.
> The Scale of the Problem
The table below shows the risk of violence at work for employees in England and Wales,
reproduced from the 2009-2011 British Crime Survey. Only the highest risk occupations are
shown, and it can clearly be observed that teachers are twice as likely as the average worker to
be the victim of an assault at work4.
Percentages
Assaults
3
4
2009/10 and 2010/11 BCS
Threats
All
violence
at work
Protective service
occupations (e.g.
police)
Health and social
welfare associate
professionals
Health professionals
7.3
1.9
8.4
1.8
2.0
3.5
0.6
2.6
2.9
Teaching and
research
professionals
Transport and mobile
machine drivers and
operatives
All occupations
1.4
1.0
2.3
1.4
1.0
2.3
0.7
0.8
1.5
Available at http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg69.pdf
See http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/causinj/violence/british-crime-survey2010-11.pdf
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 5 of 17
> Further data on violence towards teachers
In 2008, researchers at Nottingham University identified teachers, in addition to a handful of
other occupational groups, as being ‘particularly at risk’ of occupational violence. 5
In April 2009 the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, (ATL) released details of a survey of
over 1,000 of its members which found that nearly one quarter of them had been on the
receiving end of physical violence by a student6.
A survey for Teacher Support Cymru in 2009 found that two out of five teachers in Wales had
been violently attacked by a pupil, and nearly three out of five had had objects hurled at them
during lessons7. Furthermore, 49 per cent of those surveyed had been threatened with assault.
In 2009, children were suspended from school on more than 80,000 occasions for attacking
teachers and classmates, according to official figures8.
Meanwhile, figures released by the Department for Education for the school year 2009 - 2010
showed that nearly 17,000 pupils were excluded for assaulting an adult at school; and that
nearly 900 children were excluded for abuse and assault every day 9.
A 2009 European study demonstrated that the risk of psychological harm to teachers is not
confined to the UK.
‘While physical risks are low in the education sector, exposure to
psychological risks is high….exposure to threats of physical violence and actual acts of violence
from colleagues and non-colleagues is highly prevalent in the education sector’ 10.
> Violence and Abuse in Schools - The Legal Framework
The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 places a duty on employers to ensure, so far as is
reasonably practicable, the health of their employees at work. This includes taking steps to
make sure they do not suffer violence, abuse or stress-related illness as a result of their work.
This statutory regime supplements the ‘common law’ obligations on employers to provide
reasonably safe working environments for their employees. Employers also have a specific duty
under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 to undertake risk
assessments that seek to identify and eliminate or reduce risks to their employees’ health, safety
and welfare.
Appendix 2 to this document contains further information on legal remedies for violence or abuse
against members of the school community.
Mental Capital and Wellbeing: Making the most of ourselves in the 21st century – research carried out by the
department of Business Innovation and Skills 2008. http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/bispartners/foresight/docs/mentalcapital/sr-c11_mcw.pdf
6
http://www.atl.org.uk/media-office/media-archive/violence-against-teachers.asp
7
The Teacher Support Cymru Violence and Disruption Survey for 2009 can be found at:
http://teachersupport.info/news/press-releases/More-action-at-local-level-needed-to-tackle-widespread-violence-anddisruption-in-schools.php
8
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/80000-pupils-suspended-for-school-violence2038430.html
9
http://www.education.gov.uk/inthenews/inthenews/a00192714/school-exclusion-statistics-for-200910
10
European Foundation for the improvement of living and working conditions (2009)
5
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 6 of 17
> Taking Action on Violence, Abuse and Assaults in Schools
The incidence of violence and assaults on teaching staff - in addition to the stress arising from
working in environments where the fear of violence and assaults exists - are both examples of
risks to teacher health, safety and welfare which must be assessed and controlled.
Local authorities, governing bodies and all other employers of teachers must:




consider the risk of violence and assault on members of their workforce;
consider the risk of stress which arises from working in fear of violence or assault;
take steps to remove the risk; or
where removal of the risk is not possible, reduce the risk by any necessary changes in
working practices or by introducing appropriate protective or supportive measures.
Violent incidents involving adults from the wider community
Comprehensive advice on dealing with the risk of violence from outside the school, such as that
perpetrated or threatened by parents or other adults from the wider community, can be found in
the DfES publication ‘A legal toolkit for schools - Tackling abuse, threats and violence towards
members of the school community’ (see below for further details). This includes advice on





legal remedies available to schools and local authorities to combat this problem;
risk assessments;
police-school protocols and the ‘safer school partnerships’ programme;
the reporting of violent incidents; and
the formulation of school policies and procedures designed to tackle incidents involving
abusive, threatening or violent adult visitors.
The DfES security checklist/risk assessment attached at Appendix 1 is a useful starting point in
terms both of assessing the efficacy of existing security arrangements at your school, and also of
suggesting possible areas where improvements could be made.
Violence involving pupils at school
The NUT has issued a comprehensive document on managing pupil behaviour, which includes
guidance on




school discipline policies;
powers to exclude disruptive pupils;
teachers’ powers to use physical force to restrain pupils;
NUT support for members who face problems with disruptive pupils or who suffer assaults at
work; including, where appropriate, guidance on possible recourse to industrial action
The NUT has also issued guidance on health and safety issues for teachers undertaking home
visits. NUT safety reps should refer to these documents for further guidance. Both documents
can be found on the NUT website at http://www.teachers.org.uk/
> Individual Pupil Behaviour Risk Assessments
The measures set out in the guidance cited above relate primarily to the ways in which poor pupil
behaviour can be successfully tackled through the effective use of school codes of conduct and
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 7 of 17
their accompanying sanctions, including exclusion. Violent or intimidating pupil behaviour can
also be addressed through appropriate health and safety measures in which the risk to staff and
pupils of injury and psychological distress can be managed and controlled in the same way that
other health and safety hazards are tackled. Individual pupil risk assessments have begun to
achieve considerable success in this regard, and the NUT has published guidance on Individual
Pupil Risk Assessment, available at: http://www.teachers.org.uk/node/12532.
Where problems arise, whether at school or local authority level, in satisfactorily implementing
suitable risk management strategies for tackling violent or intimidating pupil behaviour, contact
should be made with the appropriate NUT Regional/Wales office for further advice and support.
Note on Data Protection
Staff involved in the drawing up of individual pupil risk assessments should be mindful of the
Education (Pupil Information) (England) Regulations 2005 which place a duty on schools to
disclose, with a few exceptions, the contents of pupil records to parents and pupils where they
make such a request.
Dealing with Violent Incidents
It is essential that suitable arrangements are in place to ensure an adequate response to a
violent incident. This includes:



first aid and other emergency medical treatment required by any injured party;
the provision of appropriate emotional support - such as counselling - for those directly or
indirectly affected by such events; and that
the necessary administrative and legal procedures are fulfilled, including the proper reporting
of the incident.
> Reporting incidents of violence and abuse
All accidents and injuries should be reported, no matter how trivial they might appear. This is as
true of verbal abuse as it is of physical assault, as the psychological harm which can follow such
incidents can lead to very real illness and mental distress for those who are unfortunate enough
to experience them.
Additionally, the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations
(RIDDOR) require that employers must inform the HSE of the following:

all accidents to employees resulting in deaths or “major injuries” and all accidents which
result in an employee being off work due to injuries for more than three days (referred to as
“over-three-day injuries”11); and

all accidents to non-employees which result in them being killed or taken to hospital and
which are connected with work.
From 6 April 2012, subject to Parliamentary approval, RIDDOR’s over three day injury reporting requirement will
change. From then the trigger point will increase from over three days’ to over seven days’ incapacitation (not counting
the day on which the accident happened). Employers and others with responsibilities under RIDDOR must still keep a
record of all over three day injuries – if the employer has to keep an accident book, then this record will be enough.
The deadline by which the over seven day injury must be reported will increase to 15 days from the day of the accident.
11
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 8 of 17
The definition of accidents includes assaults so that injuries resulting from assaults are also now
reportable. The NUT is particularly concerned that these are reported to the HSE and recorded
by the employer whenever necessary.
Following any incident involving violence or assault, risk assessments should also be reviewed in
the light of the incident, to identify whether additional measures are necessary. Further advice
on all these matters can be found in the NUT Health and Safety Briefings ‘Accidents and Injuries’,
and ‘Risk Assessments’ – both of which are available on the NUT website at:
http://www.teachers.org.uk/node/12488 and http://www.teachers.org.uk/node/12551.
The following HSE guidance might also be helpful:
HSE FAQs on reporting school accidents: http://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/do-i-need-toreport.htm#Injuries-in-schools
HSE RIDDOR website: http://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/
HSE guidance on risk assessments: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/raindex.htm
Safer School Partnerships
Safer School Partnerships (SSPs) arose from a joint initiative between the then DfES, the Home
Office, the Youth Justice Board and the Association of Chief Police Officers. The SSP initiative
aims to provide structured ways in which schools can work with the local police force to achieve
the following aims:




to reduce the prevalence of crime and victimisation amongst young people
to enhance the learning environment via a safe and secure school community
to help young people achieve their full educational potential
to engage young people, challenge poor behaviour and build mutual respect within the
school community
SSP arrangements can include:



a dedicated full time police officer for a secondary school and its feeder primaries
the secondment of police officers to Behaviour & Education Support Teams
police officers in a neighbourhood policing team responsible for liaison with a group of
schools
In introducing the SSP, it is intended that the various agencies, including the schools, local
authority and police, work together to develop a protocol based on shared principles and clearly
setting out roles and responsibilities of the various partners in the initiative.
A small number of schools in local authorities identified as having the most significant street
crime problems were selected to participate in piloting Safer School Partnerships.
Further guidance on Safer School Partnerships cannot be located on the DfE website at the time
of writing.
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 9 of 17
Further Guidance on Tackling Violence in Schools
> DfE Archived Guidance
Note that the content on the National Archives site may not reflect current Government policy.
All statutory guidance and legislation published on this site continues to reflect the current legal
position unless indicated otherwise.
School Security – Archived ‘Teachernet’ website
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218194057/teachernet.gov.uk/wholeschool/hea
lthandsafety/schoolsecurity/
School Security: Dealing with Troublemakers, DfES/Home Office 1997
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218194057/http://teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/index
.cfm?id=9232
Safe School: A legal toolkit for schools
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218194057/http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/
index.cfm?id=1607, but see also notes at
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218194057/http://teachernet.gov.uk/wholesch
ool/healthandsafety/schoolsecurity/abusivebehaviour/
Archived FAQs on school security can be found at
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218194057/http://teachernet.gov.uk/wholesch
ool/healthandsafety/schoolsecurity/faqs/
> HSE Guidance
HSE’s guidance document, "Violence to Staff in the Education Sector", is available at
http://books.hse.gov.uk/hse/public/saleproduct.jsf?catalogueCode=9780717612932
> European Agency for Safety and Health at Work – Factsheet 47
The European Agency for Safety and Health at Work has produced a very useful factsheet
entitled ‘Prevention of Violence to Staff in the Education Sector’. This can be found at
http://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/factsheets/47
> The Suzy Lamplugh Trust
http://www.suzylamplugh.org/
> The Arson Prevention Bureau
http://www.arsonpreventionbureau.org.uk
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 10 of 17
Action Points for Safety Reps
Check that:

your school has a copy of the guidance documents, “Dealing with Troublemakers”, “Safe
School: A Legal Toolkit for Schools” and if possible, “Improving Security in Schools”;

your school has a copy of the NUT guidance document, “Pupil Behaviour: Advice and
Guidance for Teachers”, available at http://www.teachers.org.uk/node/11054

your school has examined its security arrangements and behaviour policies in line with these
guidance documents and keeps matters under review; and

where appropriate, risk assessments have been carried out in respect of pupils whose
behaviour has included or is likely to include violence or the threat of violence as defined by
the HSE.
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 11 of 17
Appendix One: School Security Checklist
Source: DfES Guidance Document: “Improving Security in Schools”
Assess your school’s level of security risks by allocating scores in each of the boxes below according to the criteria
specified and totalling the score.
Low Risk
0
1
2
3
4
5
High Risk
Part 1: Incidence of Crime in the last 12 months
1.
2.
3.
4.
3.
6.
Trespass
No cases of trespassers
in school rounds
Vandalism
No cases of vandalism
Reported
Points
Trespassers commonly
present in school
grounds
Frequent and costly
vandalism of school
building
Theft/Burglary
No cases of theft or
Burglary reported
Frequent theft or
burglary
Fire
No arson attacks in the
locality
Schools in locality have
suffered arson attacks
Safety attacks on staff & pupils
No attacks or
threats reported
Attacks inside school or in
vicinity of school
Drug/Solvent Abuse
No problems reported
School/locality problem
with drugs/solvent abuse
Part 2: Environment and Building
1.
Incidence of crime in
surrounding areas
Locality has a low crime
rate
Locality has high crime
rate as reported to police
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 12 of 17
Low Risk
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
0
School overlooked from roads
and/or housing
Grounds clearly visible to the
public
1
2
3
High Risk
4
5
Points
Unobserved grounds
Boundaries, fences & gates
Boundaries well defined,
fences/gates to grounds
No fences/gates preventing
unauthorised access
Clearly defined entrances
Clear entrances with signs
directing visitors
No clear entrances or
multiple entrances
Well organised reception area
and visitors’ control
Pass system in operation
with badges issued to
visitors
Car parking
Car parks well lit and
overlooked
No system of recording
visitors
No safe place to park, car
parks unlit & not overlooked
or surrounded by trees
Conditions and appearance
of buildings
Buildings well kept and in
good repair with no graffiti
and not vandalised
Buildings badly kept and in
state of disrepair, graffiti
covered and vandalised
Detached/temporary buildings
No buildings detached
from school building
Many detached buildings,
inc. temporary huts
_______
Recesses & internal
Courtyards
No places for intruders to
hide and break in
unobserved
Numerous places for
intruders to hide and
break in unobserved
10. Secure exit doors
Doors secure against all
but most determined
intruders
Fire exit doors easily
forced, inadequate locks
11. Secure windows and rooflights
Windows and rooflights
protected against
burglars
Windows and rooflights
provide easy access
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 13 of 17
Low Risk
0
1
2
3
4
5
High Risk
Points
12. Valuable equipment that is easily
stolen and disposed of
Few computers, TVs and
video cassettes
13. Fire precautions
Buildings have adequate
fire compartmentation,
fire/smoke barriers and
fire doors.
14. Community ethos and support
for school
Strong community and
parent support benefits
security, e.g. active PTA
15. Out of hours use of school
facilities
No reported problems
and/or security benefit
from out of hours use
Many computers,
keyboards, faxes,
camcorders, etc.
Over-large fire
compartments and lack of
fire/smoke barriers
and fire doors.
Insignificant parent or
community involvement
or negative attitudes
Many security problems
due to out of hours use
eg bars, social clubs
Part 3: Security Measures
1.
2.
3.
School out of hours
Efficient system of
reporting suspicious
incidents, e.g. paging
via satellite link
Pupil involvement
Successful youth action
group or school council
Waste Bins
Waste and recycling bins
locked up every night
4. Security lighting
Lighting of all entrances,
footpaths & building
facades
No scheme in operation
No pupil involvement
in security
Unlocked mobile bins left
around school
No lighting
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 14 of 17
Low Risk
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
0
1
2
3
4
5
High Risk
Surveillance
Efficient surveillance, e.g.
CCTV covering perimeter
or security patrols
No system
Intruder Alarms
System using passive
infra-red detectors in all
ground floor covered and
vandalised vulnerable rooms
No system
Fire detection and sprinkler
systems
Automatic system linked
to brigade
No automatic detection
Property Marking
All valuable property
marked and kept secured
locally
____
No markings on property
Cash handling procedures
Secure methods in
operation
Procedures lacking
Security risk assessment score summary:
Part 1 – Crime
0-30 points
Part 2 – Environment and
Buildings
0-75 points
Part 3 – Security Measures
Total
0-45 points
0-150 points
NUT Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence – Jan 12
Page 15 of 17
Appendix 2 - Legal remedies for violence or abuse against members of the school
community: summary of DfES advice
This section has been adapted from the DfES publication ‘A Legal Toolkit for Schools – Tackling abuse, threats and
violence towards members of the school community’.
As well as invoking section 547 of the Education Act 1996, the following two vehicles may be
used by a LA on a school’s behalf.
Section 222 Local Government Act 1972
Section 222 empowers a local authority to prosecute or defend proceedings where it is
considered expedient for promoting or protecting the interests of those living in its area. It would
potentially allow the local authority to prosecute an abusive parent under one of the other options
mentioned here or, alternatively, to bring civil proceedings against the parent.
Criminal Behaviour Orders
These new orders have been created by the Government to replace ASBOs.
The Home Office has outlined that the new Criminal Behaviour Order will have a punishment
system within a ‘sliding scale’.
Under the new Criminal Behaviour Order system, when incidents of anti social behaviour are
informed directly to the Police, by a minimum of five people, the Police will have a mandatory
duty to investigate the reported incident(s). This will be referred to as the “community trigger”.
Criminal Behaviour Orders will give the police options to apply to the courts for an order to deal
with behaviour that is described as ‘low level nuisance’.
Other remedies are available under civil and criminal law. These are as follows:
Protection from Harassment Act 1997
More informally described as anti-stalking legislation, although not only used for that purpose.
This action can be taken either through criminal prosecution or a private action for damages in
the Civil Courts. It can be done on behalf of an individual, or a group (e.g. a group of children or
teaching staff). The sanctions include both criminal penalties (fines, imprisonment, or community
sentences) and a restraining order, which is a flexible order which prohibits the offender from
continuing their offending behaviour. For example, it could prevent a parent from coming within a
certain distance of a school, or from making phone calls to the school or a teacher’s home. The
restraining order can last for as long as the Court thinks appropriate.
Injunctions
These can be granted by a court to ban somebody from school premises. Generally they are
viewed as less flexible and more expensive than alternatives such as a restraining order granted
under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, described above.
Criminal Damage Act 1971
Under this, if a parent or carer destroys or damages property belonging to the school, or to a
teacher, he or she can be prosecuted for causing criminal damage. If the value of the damage is
below £5,000, the case is tried in the Magistrates’ Court, where the penalty is a fine up to £2,500
or up to three months imprisonment or both. If the damage is above £5,000, the case can be
tried in the Magistrates’ Court or the Crown Court. The penalty in the Magistrates’ Court is a fine
up to £5,000 or not more than six months imprisonment, or both. In the Crown Court, the
penalty is an unlimited fine or ten years imprisonment, or both. Where the criminal damage is
committed with an intent to endanger life, the maximum period of imprisonment is life. This
NUT Draft Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence
Page 16 of 17
includes cases of arson with the same degree of intent. There is a racially aggravated form, which
carries higher maximum penalties (Crime and Disorder Act 1998, section 30).
Common Assault
Where a member of staff is assaulted by a parent or carer and minor injury is caused, the parent
or carer may be charged with common assault in accordance with section 39 of the Criminal
Justice Act 1988. This can only be tried in the Magistrates’ Court. Where there is a racial
element to the offence, the parent or carer may be charged with the offence of racially
aggravated assault contrary to section 29 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. This can be tried
either in the Magistrates’ Court or the Crown Court. The maximum penalty for common assault is
a fine of up to £5,000, or six months imprisonment, or both. The maximum penalty for racially
aggravated assault is six months imprisonment or a fine up to £5,000, or both, in the
Magistrates’ Court. In the Crown Court it is an unlimited fine, or two years imprisonment, or
both.
Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm
Under section 47 of the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861, a parent or carer can be
charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm where more serious injury is caused to a
member of staff (such as broken teeth, extensive bruising or cuts requiring medical treatment).
Again, there is a racially aggravated form of the offence. The first form is triable either way. In
the Magistrates’ Court, the maximum penalty is six months imprisonment, or a fine up to £5,000,
or both. In the Crown Court, the maximum penalty is five years imprisonment. For the racially
aggravated offence, the maximum sentence is the same in the Magistrates’ Court. In the Crown
Court, the maximum sentence is seven years, an unlimited fine or both.
Offences under the Public Order Act 1986
There are four separate relevant offences under this Act. The behaviour that they criminalise has
some overlap with the Protection from Harassment Act, but unlike that Act, one incident alone is
sufficient to constitute a public order offence. Three of them (sections 5, 4A and 4) are heard
within the Magistrates’ Court.
Section 5 is the lower level of public disorder where a parent or carer causes a disturbance in or
outside the school and causes alarm, harassment or distress.
Section 4A creates an intentional form of this offence.
Section 4 is more serious, where there is a fear or provocation of violence. The maximum
sentence for section 5 is a fine up to £1,000. The maximum sentence for section 4 or 4A is a
term of imprisonment not exceeding six months or a fine up to £5,000 or both. There is also a
racially aggravated version of all three of the above offences, under section 31 of the Crime
and Disorder Act 1998, with higher maximum penalties.
Section 3 of the Act, affray, may be tried either in the Magistrates’ Court or the Crown Court.
This offence is committed when a person uses or threatens unlawful violence such as would cause
a reasonable person to fear for his safety; the threat cannot be made by the use of words alone.
In the Magistrates’ Court, the maximum penalty is six months, a fine up to £5,000, or both. In
the Crown Court, the maximum sentence is three years, an unlimited fine or both.
In the circumstances outlined above, although the LEA may not have the relevant power to take
action itself, it should – as the employer – work with the school to provide staff with full support
in ensuring that action will be pursued against an alleged offender, under the above legislation as
appropriate.
NUT Draft Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence
Page 17 of 17
Criminal Justice Act 1988
Section 139A of the Act (as amended by the Offensive Weapons Act 1996) makes it an offence
to carry an offensive weapon or knife on school premises. Under section 139B a police officer
may enter a school and search for a weapon; where one is found they may seize and retain it. A
person who has a weapon on school premises will be guilty of an offence, unless he can prove a
statutory defence. The maximum penalty on conviction on indictment for carrying a knife is two
years imprisonment or an unlimited fine or both. The maximum penalty on conviction on
indictment for carrying an offensive weapon is four years imprisonment or an unlimited fine or
both. The weapons which are caught under section 139A and 139B include any article made or
adapted for use for causing injury and any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed. A
folding pocket knife with a blade under 3 inches long is, however, excepted although this does
not prevent schools from imposing their own bans on pupils carrying them.
In general, where a school suspects a weapon to be on school premises the police should be
called. Where the police have reasonable grounds for suspecting a weapon to be on a school’s
premises they can enter without permission from the school.
Non statutory remedies
Aside from the legal remedies, there are other strategies that can help in preventing conflicts
with parents or stopping them escalating. These include mediation and conflict resolution.
Schools might also be able to develop non-statutory Acceptable Behaviour Contracts for some
parents similar to those that have been developed by the Metropolitan Police mainly in respect of
pupils. These require the agreement of the person to an acceptable level of behaviour.
NUT Draft Health & Safety Briefing: Security & Violence