4G.1-4G.2: Initial response considerations

Guidance

Where a safeguarding allegation is made against an elected member, but it relates to matters an elected member’s personal life, the Safeguarding Officer must exercise their professional judgement when determining whether to act on that information. This involves an assessment of whether the information received has any bearing on the elected member’s role in the Church, particularly any work with children, young people or vulnerable adults. Where the Safeguarding Officer decides to initiate relevant safeguarding processes, a clear rationale must be recorded in the case notes, which should detail which aspects of that information are relevant for safeguarding purposes, how and why they are relevant.

When assessing a case where the information available refers to an elected member’s personal life, the Safeguarding Officer should work closely with any statutory services involved and take their advice. The Safeguarding Officer’s assessment of the case should be proportionate and should not lead to an unnecessary and intrusive collection of information about someone’s personal life. For every question asked and action undertaken as part of the assessment, there should be a clear rationale and a link back to an aspect of the respondent’s work within the Church.

The above advice also applies to situations in which an allegation is made about someone in an elected member’s close family. Generally, these situations will not trigger a safeguarding process under this Code, unless there is a rationale to argue that the elected member has displayed concerning behaviours in how they dealt with that matter (e.g. where they actively covered up abuse inflicted by a member of their family, or where they appear to believe that abuse inflicted by a member of their family is acceptable). This does not apply to situations in which the family member is directly involved in the life the Church, as an employee, volunteer or otherwise, in which case they are a Church Officer, and this Code will apply to them and the relevant process outlined in this Code will be followed.

Responding to safeguarding allegations involving non-recent events, where the respondent has left the Church Body

Complainants who come forward to disclose non-recent abuse will have varied reasons for doing so: it might have taken them a long time to look at the events that they have experienced and see them as abuse, they might have felt scared to disclose whilst the respondent was still in active ministry, they may express a need or desire to achieve closure on past traumatic experiences, and/or they may wish to prevent others from becoming victims of abuse.

Regardless of when the events disclosed are alleged to have taken place, complainants should be taken seriously, and their disclosures should not be ignored. A trauma-informed approach must be applied, and support must be offered in line with the Responding Well to Victims and Survivors of Abuse guidance. Specific care should be given to the fact that the complainant might feel a sense of disappointment and/or frustration in situations in which limited action can be undertaken regarding the respondent (e.g. when a disciplinary process cannot be followed). Being open and clear about what processes can and cannot be followed from the start will help manage the complainant’s expectations.

Assessing and managing any ongoing risk

Where an allegation refers to non-recent events and the subject of the allegation is alive, a Safeguarding Officer may be faced with different scenarios, including if the elected member continues to be actively involved in ministry or hold any official role in the Church of England, but has moved to a different diocese or Church Body, or when they have stepped down entirely form any formal roles, and are effectively a member of the congregation only.

There are specific considerations that a Safeguarding Officer would have to keep in mind when acting in each of these scenarios.

If an elected member has left the respective Church Body or diocese, but continues to be actively involved in a different diocese or Church Body within the Church of England, then the Safeguarding Officer should share the allegation with the Safeguarding Officer in that diocese (in line with the Internal Information Sharing Plan) and agree how the allegation will be taken forward and by whom. The requirements, advice and procedures set out in this Code would then apply.

If the elected member has moved to a role outside of the Church, then from a safeguarding perspective the Safeguarding Officer, would need to consider the following:

• If the allegation is that a crime might have been committed or that a child, young person or vulnerable adult has been, or might be at risk of being, harmed, then the relevant statutory services would need to be informed. Some police forces have specific teams that deal with allegations of non-recent abuse, and Safeguarding Officers should ensure that they maintain up to date knowledge whether or not such a team is available within their local police force.
• There may be transferrable risks associated with the respondent, particularly in cases in which the respondent has moved, or may have moved, to a role that involves contact with children, young people and vulnerable adults. Close partnership working with statutory authorities is essential in these circumstances, as a Church Body may not always have information about a respondent’s subsequent roles outside of the Church.
• Any risks associated with other potential victims being part of the respective Church community or Church Body and may require support.
• Depending on the nature of the allegation, the respondent might have had connections with other individuals who may continue to be connected to the Church and may pose a safeguarding risk, for instance there may be the possibility that a different Church Officer covered up or failed to act to prevent abuse.
• Depending on the nature of the allegation, if the processes put in place to safeguard children, young people and vulnerable adults have failed to do so, their effectiveness needs to be reviewed and improved.

In such circumstances, Church Bodies would still need to follow the requirements and processes outlined in this Code, but the extent of any safeguarding enquiries and risk assessment carried out may be limited and would need to be proportionate. Disciplinary processes and procedures would only be applicable if the respondent has moved to a new role in a different diocese or other church body.

If information is held or becomes available about a respondent’s current role, then the need to share information about the allegation / concern with the new employer or the new religious organisation / denomination should be considered. This will generally be done only in very limited circumstances, usually via the police, LADO or other relevant statutory authority. The key questions that should be asked in these cases are:

• Are statutory services involved? Have they been informed? If yes, follow their advice.
• Does the individual’s new role involve work with children, young people and vulnerable adults?
• What is the nature of the allegation / concern? Based on the records and information gathered, if the concern / allegation is substantiated, is there a continued risk of harm to children, young people and vulnerable adults?
• Would children, young people and vulnerable adults potentially be at risk if information is not shared?
• Have the Diocesan Registrar / the relevant legal advisor and the relevant Data Protection Officer provided advice whether the information about the allegation / concern should be shared? If not, seek their advice.

Any information shared needs to be necessary, accurate and proportionate, with a clear rationale and aim, and should meet the requirements under data protection legislation. The Internal Information Sharing Plan covers information sharing with the Church in Wales, but does not cover information sharing with other religious organisations or Christian denominations.

If they are now simply a member of the worshipping community, the Safeguarding Officer would need to determine firstly if the requirements are met for any referrals to statutory services, and whether a risk assessment is required. It may be that there is no action which can be taken in respect of the alleged respondent, however support must always be provided to the survivor.

If abuse took place, Church Bodies should reflect on their safeguarding arrangements and understand where such arrangements have potentially gone wrong and why. Organisational learning from such incidents and addressing any identified weaknesses or gaps, as well as any cultural factors, are important aspects of promoting safer practice and environments. Further guidance can be found in the Code of Practice on Safeguarding Practice Reviews.