When a school receives a concern about a half-term club, preserve who reported what, act through the school's safeguarding procedure and establish who runs the activity. School-run provision, an external provider hiring school premises and an independent setting have different accountability arrangements. That check mustn't delay protection. Contact the DSL or deputy promptly, use the relevant local safeguarding partnership or children's social care route, and contact emergency services where there's immediate danger.
For concerns about an adult, also follow the school's allegations reporting route: the headteacher or principal, or the chair or proprietor where the policy directs, including when the concern involves the headteacher. Don't report solely to the person concerned. Keep the child-protection response and the applicable adult-allegation route coordinated without delaying either.
This recording walk-through is for DSLs, deputies and school leaders in England. It deals with a concern arriving from outside the classroom. For routine holiday cover and outstanding school actions, use the separate half-term handover guide. Exact holiday dates vary. This example doesn't replace safeguarding training or local procedures.
The first entry preserves the report and its limits
The administrative example below is wholly invented, with no pupil, family, provider or customer data. A parent contacts the school about an adult's conduct at a holiday club. They relay something their child told them. The receiving member of staff didn't witness it, and the club's relationship with the school hasn't yet been established.
Source: Parent's account of what their child reported. Received by a member of school staff through an approved contact route. Record the actual receipt time separately from the reported event time, which is unknown.
Account: Preserve the parent's words in the restricted source record. Identify any words directly attributed to the child. Don't recast the parent's account as a disclosure heard directly by the school.
Immediate response: Record the action actually taken, who was told and when. Applicable child-protection and adult-allegation reporting routes followed through the school's procedure. Provider identity and setting arrangements remain unconfirmed.
Listen calmly and take the report seriously. Don't investigate, test credibility, ask leading questions or ask the child to repeat an account to complete the form. Record necessary clarification and its source without filling gaps by inference. The disclosure-recording guide covers factual recording in more detail.
DfE's provider guidance, updated 9 February 2026, recommends recording concerns, actions and reasons for decisions. It is non-statutory guidance; applicable legal requirements still apply. A reporting form or a club's safeguarding policy doesn't establish what happened or discharge the school's response.
The setting check establishes accountability
The DSL checks school-held booking and management information alongside the report. This is an administrative check, with an attributed source and date. The venue's name alone can't establish who managed the activity. Protection and any required external contact proceed while unanswered questions remain visible.
- School-run activity: Where the governing body or proprietor provides the activity under school staff's direct supervision or management, the school's child-protection arrangements apply.
- External provider on school premises: KCSIE expects assurance about the provider's safeguarding arrangements and appropriate liaison. For an allegation about an incident during such use, follow school procedures, including informing the local authority designated officer (LADO).
- Independent setting elsewhere: Follow the school's response to a concern about a child and the relevant local partner routes. Record the provider contact only where established and appropriate. Don't assume the school manages the setting.
These distinctions draw on paragraphs 208 to 209 and 460 of Keeping children safe in education 2026, statutory guidance in force from 1 September 2026. An allegation about an adult requires the applicable allegations procedure. A low-level concern is a different category; neither the setting label nor software decides which route applies. Seek advice through local procedures where the route is uncertain. Don't automatically forward the account to the adult or provider concerned.
DfE's local-authority guidance describes how councils and partners respond to settings of concern. It addresses council responsibilities; it doesn't give schools an investigative role. The March 2026 Working together statutory guidance sets the wider multi-agency context, including voluntary organisations and sports clubs.
A known support arrangement changes the contact question
In the invented example, the authorised DSL also checks the school's communication record and the relevant agreed support plan. The latest plan records an accessible communication arrangement for contact with the family. An older contact entry has no confirmation that the arrangement was used. This changes the next question: can the family receive and respond to the school's proposed contact through the agreed route?
The DSL gives the appropriate colleague responsibility for confirming that arrangement, with a return time proportionate to the situation. Only the minimum authorised information travels with that task. Keep each source, version or date, owner and review state visible to permitted staff. A missing confirmation means the contact evidence is incomplete. It doesn't establish that no contact occurred or that the family declined help.
The plan and communication record can inform an accessible response. They can't establish harm, explain the adult's conduct or determine the report's credibility. SEND, disability, attendance and family circumstances aren't proxies for abuse or parental capacity. Check the original sources and invite correction through a safe, appropriate route. DfE's parent and carer guidance, updated 6 February 2026, can help explain expected club arrangements; it doesn't require a family to investigate before being heard.
The DSL records a decision, recipient and next check
The invented record remains open for the authorised professional's decision. Record the procedure used, decision-maker, rationale, action owner and review time. Where information is shared, record the purpose, verified recipient, necessary content, secure route and any advice received. Separate sending from acknowledgement and acknowledgement from an agreed response. A missing receipt needs follow-up through local procedures; new information or unresolved concern may require earlier action.
DfE's September 2026 information-sharing guidance is statutory, and the information-sharing duty commenced on 30 September 2026. The duty's scope depends on the organisations involved. Chapter 5 gives non-statutory advice for sharing outside that duty, including with community groups. Don't assume every club falls within it. Necessary safeguarding sharing still needs an appropriate lawful basis, proportionality, security and an accountable record. Seek advice without delaying necessary protection.
Keep the narrative, sensitive metadata and even the existence of the concern within authorised safeguarding access. Don't copy them into general dashboards, SEND plans, behaviour records or family messages. A colleague's support task should reveal only what that colleague is authorised to know. The professional-challenge guide covers an unresolved partner response.
Where the school has safeguarding enabled, Student Radar's Safeguard supports concern recording and authorised DSL casework. The DSL Action Board shows case ownership and review dates to permitted roles. A SENCo role alone doesn't grant board access. Staff still follow urgent reporting procedures directly. Student Radar can't prove harm, score a child's risk, diagnose, decide statutory thresholds or make autonomous referrals.
Check one received club concern against this sequence: attributed source, setting arrangements, human decision and the next owned check. Read the restricted evidence before interpreting an action status. Completion of an administrative task doesn't establish that a child is safe. For a product walkthrough, book a Student Radar demonstration.
Sources and further reading
- DfE: Keeping children safe in education 2026, statutory guidance, effective 1 September 2026; paragraphs 208 to 209 and 460.
- DfE: Working together to safeguard children 2026, statutory guidance, published 18 March 2026; organisational and multi-agency responsibilities.
- DfE: Out-of-school settings safeguarding guidance for providers, non-statutory guidance, updated 9 February 2026; safeguarding leadership and concern records.
- DfE: Using after-school clubs, tuition and community activities, parent and carer guidance, updated 6 February 2026.
- DfE: Unregistered independent schools and out-of-school settings guidance for local authorities, published 29 May 2025; identifying and responding to settings of concern.
- DfE: Information sharing to safeguard children and young people, statutory guidance updated 10 September 2026; duty commenced 30 September, with non-statutory advice in chapter 5.