Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Rob Jones
Hello,
I am looking for advice on what I see as a sfety matter which affects my kids. They currently attend a primary school which has been given outstanding reports from ofsted recently and, apart from this issue, I am happy with the quaility of teaching and care.
The school is a new one (was built a couple of years ago) and has a complete perimiter fence. The main building is well set back in the site. Entry to the site for pedestrians is via a gate remotely controlled from the office (there is an intercom on the gate). Entry for cars and deliveries is via large double gates that have no entry control on them. These gates are regularly left open during the school day and thus allow unrestricted access to the site for anyone who fancies it.
I think this is a significant security issue and have spoken with the head about it. His latest response is that the school can not afford to automate the gates and if I do not like it then I should take my kids to another school.
The rational put forward by the school is that they too would like the gates shut all the time, but as they get a lot of deliveries its not possible. Signs on the gates ask them to be closed, but the head insists that he can not spare staff to go out and close them all the time. The option to automate the gates has been rejected as the school feel it would cost too much.
I feel that if I pushed the same argument at my place of work to the HSE, i.e. 'I can't spare the staff to do this' I'd be on the receiving end of a notice!
Does anyone have any advice on how to approach this? I am being overzealous in requesting that the a gates are shut all the time as I'm personally involved?
RJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Rob
In my days at school you would have been laughed at, but times and expectations have changed. On the prima facie facts I would say that you are not being over zealous. After all, what is the point of having a remotely controlled access when adjacent gates are left open.
The attitude of the Head could be more helpful, perhaps taking the matter up with the school governors might prove to be more useful - plus a little reminder about their duty of care.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By bill reilly Rob This is a difficult area but you will find some attempt at defining national standards on these sites.I would expect that your LEA would also have issued guidance on the topic.The approach has certainly changed from when my kids were at school.The headteacher then had an open policy all doors open to the community free unrestricted access.As with H & S schools which have had problems with intruders or violence at gates are more aware of what can go wrong. http://www.governornet.c...=1&contentId=208&mode=bghttp://www.teachernet.go...ndsafety/schoolsecurity/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jack
From my experience of many hundreds of schools, I think the school to which you refer is probably less accessible than most. At least there is a fence and a gate that can be closed! In fact I can only recall one where I had to contact the school office for the gate to be opened.
The HSE would certainly not consider enforcement action.
I think you are misjudging the risk entirely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tabs
How do the other parents feel? How do the staff feel?
If you found strong support, you could take it to the govenors of the school, and perhaps even think about how money could be made available. At present I guess the Head is looking at closed gate -v- teaching resources. Perhaps enough support could lead to a compromise of fund raising and LEA grant?
Personally I would not follow your path - but I don't have kids at that school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Renny Thomson
Jack,
well said. Common sense approach to risk is what we need in society.
OP, if you are so concerned about your children's safety, I suppose you drive them to school every day avoiding the likelyhood of ever coming into contact with strangers, or having to make a safety judgement as to when to cross the road that is full of other parents doing the same thing? Do you veto any school trips to "Adeventure Activities"?
The school buildings will probably have a secure door entry system (never certain if this is to protect the children from "strangers" or the staff from abusive parents these days). It will propbably have playground supervision during breaks as well. What risk are you imagining your childern are going to be threatened by?
Get a life and let your children have a childhood. Who knows, they may enjoy playing, grow up being able to judge risks and might even pursue a career in H&S!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tabs
Renny, I think your post is quite rude and not very well thought out. Do you write for the Daily Mail per chance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Renny Thomson No Tabs, I'm an H&S bod in a Local Authority. I just get annoyed at unrealistic people who try to eliminate every risk no matter how unlikely and expect the taxpayer (Local Authority, Education Authority, Central Govt) to foot the bill. They then wonder why we have such an obese, risk averse, unthinking population placing unrealistic demands on an underfunded NHS and public sector. Have a look at http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/principles.htm it might remind you what we as H&S professionals should be doing. If you feel aggreived at my post, please feel free to contact the Moderators.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David Bannister
The primary school my children attended has excellent security including fences and remote-operated doors, plus a manned security presence that ensures gates are closed. However, I believe that this is an exception, funded by parents. The nearest primary scool to me has an open gate during school time but secured doors.
The secondary schools have yards that are freely accessible by both vehicles and pedestrians although the buildings have better security. Probably to reduce the theft risk as well as keeping out nutters.
The rationale is I guess that at secondary school age, pupils are more expected and likely to recognise danger. The pupils are allowed out at lunchtimes to local shops etc and the gates need to be open. Teachers and visitors need frequent access so any attempt at high security would be costly and probably misused anyway.
Risk assessment would probably decide that the benefits of high security are insufficient when weighed against the agrravation and costs. Thankfully we do not live in USA or other countries where children are at higher risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mitch
Just what is the percieved risk? Has there been threats against the school, staff or pupils. Look at the statistics and realistically evaluate the risk.
Mitch
I was going to be rude but Renny beat me to it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tabs
Renny, if the gates have a notice on them requiring them to be closed, and the headmaster's response was "he cannot spare the staff" and can't afford to automate them, then I think it is clear that he agrees that they should be closed, and it is just a matter of money - otherwise his reply would have been on the lines of yours. :-)
I'm not sure that Rob is a H&S professional, but even if he is, I don't think the link you provide stops him from wanting compliance with the correct procedure (as set by the signs on the gate, and inferred by the headmaster's response). Or does your LA condone setting a procedure and then varying it to suit the economics of the business?
Rob, I doubt you will win this one without finding a funding resource that does not impact on the headmaster's already tight budget - he's more likely to remove the signs. But good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jack
Quote: "The rationale is I guess that at secondary school age, pupils are more expected and likely to recognise danger".
My sole example was a secondary school, but I suspect the 'rationale' was that it was built and operated by a PFI with no experience of the actual risks in schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Renny Thomson
If the school reviews their assessment of risk, perhaps they would identify there is no significant risk, especially if there have been no incidents during the period when the gates have not been getting closed by delivery drivers. Then they could revise their procedure to only close the gates after hours for security and remove the sign. Problem solved.
Mind you, I have seen a school where there were no gates and the children were at risk from parents' cars dropping their charges off in the car park.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rob Jones
Good to see this has stimulated a debate!
The risk here is twofold, firstly a random nutter entering site and say abducting a child or knife attack, secondly the risk of kids wandering out of the site.
I agree that kids should be exposed to acceptable risk. Is being attacked by a nutter with a knife or (given some kids at the school are only 3 years) wandering off site a risk that we should acceptable.
The thing that really get me here is the fact that the reason given for not closing the gates is that staff don't have time or that the money is not there.
The risk assessment for the site either shows that the gates should be closed or not. Given that notices have been fixed to the gates then that would indicate the gates should be shut as a control measure. Therefore if open then the risk is not being controlled.
Either the risk assessment is wrong and the gates should be left open or the control measure is not being implemented. As the pedestrian access gate (which is next to the main gates for cars) is locked with keypad/camera/intercom entry it would appear that some level of risk was assumed when the site was designed.
RJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Aidan Toner
A few questions and a few possibilities;
(1)Was the perimeter fencing supplied as a 'buildings and property' control designed to deter after hours vandalism.?......Perhaps the fence has nothing to do with personal child protection during school hours.
(2)What controls are in place relating to movement of delivery vehicles?...... Perhaps this is a greater risk than the 'bogey man' pervert?
(3)Why is there an assumption that a delivery vehicle MUST access all the way to rear canteen door or reception area? The main delivery companies can be provided with a key for the 'locked gate'OR be requested to make their way on foot to reception to collect a key.... hence deliveries are made only at controlled times............Perhaps the headmaster thinks these 'safety controls' would compromise security and hence invalidate insurance cover.
(4)Why cant a 'goods deposit compound be situated at the drive entrance with key obtained at reception .......The caretaker could receive deliveries in person or thansfer them later from the compound at the drive entrance?........ Perhaps this is a battle the principal will not fight with respect to expected role and duties of the caretaker?
I simply point out that there is more to this story than.....locked gates OR non locked gates..... and the 'singular' solution of electronic gates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rob Jones
Aidan,
I fully agree that there are many other solutions to the problem that electric gates.
The point I was trying to make above was if the gates are a control measure identified in a risk assessment (I am assuming they are or why put notices on them to say please close that gates'?) then the failure to close them means that the risk is not being controlled.
RJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By MickN
I'm with the school headmaster on this. It would seem that his/her school policy for protecting the children in his/her care was neither asked for or examined prior to this thread.
To those who would preach of the need to protect our children, I agree that this is vital however, do you apply the same rules when your kids are out playing with their friends?
Is this perhaps about blame then and the need to apportion it should the worst happen?
Anyway, why not pay for the automated fence as a parent group? I realise that you pay your taxes but it's obvious that that just doesn't go far enough. Should you be successful in forcing the school to pay for the new gate, will that not force every other school to follow the precedent? Requiring more taxpayer money? How about a new "School Gate Tax" at least then we'd be able to call over and ensure our money was being spent.
Mick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rob Jones
Mick,
The school's policy would appear to be 'my gaff my rules, if you don't like then go elsewhere'.
The point in principle remains, the control measure is not being followed. What is the point of risk assessment if the significant findings are not followed? If the control measure is no longer suitable or needs review then the school should review it.
Things have moved on massively since I was at primary school. The school I went to was completely open, we used to play on the fields at weekends and even around the outside of the buildings. Now that school is completely fenced in, the gates to the site are closed except at start and collection time and a separate gated vehicle enclosure is provided for deliveries. Whether this is better or worse is hard to say, but I know I would not like to send my kids to a primary which had the same level of risk that I had when that age.
What has struck me about all this is the fact that there is no real guidance from the government. All of what is available is based upon risk assessment, which as we all know is subjective.
RJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Fornhelper
What is the risk you are worried about here??
Lets get a reality check and bring a little bit of common sense into this - the kids for the most part will be in the classroom .... during breaks they will no doubt be 'playground supervisors' to make sure they don't fall and hurt themselves...there is a controlled entry to make sure they don't escape...their parents will all turn up at the end of the school day...pick up the kids ...take them home....then, if they're lucky, they can go and burn off some energy (supervised of course) at the brownies or cubs...then home safe to look forward to another safe day.
All I can say is thank the heavens I had my childhood when we were able to have fun and enjoy ourselves without having every action monitored, every adventure organised and our freedom of movement restricted.
FH
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete48 Rob, you may find a visit to this page will help you to work out more objectively what the risk is. It will also be helpful for you to determine whether the school that you a challenging has followed this route of assessment. Use the link to the security survey and risk assessment. http://www.teachernet.go...ies/resources/index.htmlThere is always a risk when dealing with vulnerable groups that emotion takes over from objectivity. Such emotion serves no-one well. Do the assessment on an objective basis and then if you wish you can add the emotion to justify the extra controls that you may feel should be put into place. I make that statement generally and not specifically to this case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Sheila EJ Keogh
Rob,
we had very similar issue at my son's school, and also had issue not of uninvited people gaining entry but of pupils (primary school) leaving the premises. I wrote to the Headteacher and the Board of Governors (though since them I'm now one of the Govnrs). If you'd like to discuss the issue, please email me.
thanks
Sheila
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By TT
I'm with Fornhelper on this one and I was beaten to making the point.
If security is your worry, and its presumably the children's security you're concerned about, then there are either going to be nice solid walls between the kids and the 'intruder' or a plethora of teachers wandering the playground. Many schools I've attended often closed and manned gates etc. during play times anyway - even the headteacher in your scenario couldn't complain about that surely since the teachers would already be outside!
I think that worrying about knife attacks etc. is going over the top and borne out of fear through media portrayal of certain generally isolated incidents - particularly with regard to primary schools or very young children.
Lets ensure that risk controls are in proportion to risk and that whatever risk we are looking at is evidence based.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mitch
As I said earlier,
Just what is the percieved risk? Has there been threats against the school, staff or pupils. Look at the statistics and realistically evaluate the risk. It would save a lot of discussion time!
Mitch
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mike Craven
Before certain people continue to post pompous, patronising and, in some cases, downright rude responses to this thread, they might read the initial posting.
As I understand it the school has installed a gate, which is kept locked with pedestrian access being controlled remotely from the school office. One assumes that this is a security measure based on risk assessment findings. However, at the same time, the double gates that allow vehicular access are constantly left open. (This seems to me a bit like securing your house, when going out for the evening, by locking the cat-flap and leaving the patio doors open!)
Our "friend" and/or "colleague" Rob has asked the Headteacher about keeping the double gates locked and been told that there is no money available to automate them, nor do the staff have time to go out and shut them!
It might be the case that such a level of security isn't necessary - as some people have suggested - but until that is agreed, I think Rob has every right to ask the headteacher why risks aren't being controlled as required.
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By MickN
Rob, I respect your stance, would that things were that simple but I think your wrong. You have kids and they have the right to a secure premises for their education but how far should we go? Consider that your kids will go outside to play when at home or at the weekend, will you be supervising them, 100% of the time? If we are not prepared to do it ourselves, can we really expect those standards from others?
We live in modern times, if someone wants to "get at" our children, and they are determined to do so, then gates (automated or otherwise) will not stop them. We all know the names and, of course, it's awful but the alternative doesn't bear thinking about.
Mick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Why not more onus on the delivery and other drivers to close the gates behind them when entering and leaving?
I too stand with the Head Teacher on this, however I would expect him to be doing more to educate the drivers using the gates - this will routinely be the same drivers?
As a slight diversion (to add weight to the more pragmatic argument) what would the school do in the event of a power or other failure to the pedestrian security gate? Presumably then that would be open all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Sally
All schools in our area have a policy of the vehicle gates are closed and locked by the caretaker for 1/2 hr before school, 1/2 hr after school and during breaks so that there is no risk of children getting run down or leaving the grounds. The nursery children who are outside more are in a smaller enclosed playground. This has always worked well for us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Renny Thomson
Many contributors to this discussion have mentioned risk assessment and have presumed one has been carried out. I'd like to consider that the pedestrian gate was installed at the construction phase, so probably it was included in the original design spec, as would have the vehicle gates. The sign on the vehicle gates may well have been installed during the construction also. Does anyone else wonder what it actually says? It may be a polite "Please close these gates" or is it a more direct instruction "These gates must be kept closed".
Is there a secure fence seperating children/playground from the vehicle route, thus negating the need to secure the service road entrance? This would also prevent the children coming into conflict with vehicles, probaly a much greater risk than the percieved risk presented by "bad people".
Some have commented on a security fence to keep children in. Sorry, but I thought it was a school, not a prison...
Rob, if you are still concerned, ask the HT for the schools risk assessmentand security docs (policy/procedure), but be realistic about the risks and the resources. I'd imaging any child would want to escape from a school with no books or other learning resources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By NJS
the thread is rather disturbing!
Rob, are requesting the school be completely fenced in, and the children caged? are we trying to keep people in or people out of the school?
surely with adequate supervision the risk is reduced to acceptable levels?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Sheila EJ Keogh
Renny, and NJS, Yes, I did comment on keeping children in. No school is not a prison, but the school has the duty to look after our children, which they can't do if the little blighters wander/run off. When I and some other parents first raised concerns about the fencing at our primary school, it was amazing what information was lent to me. A certain pupil regularly used to sneak out ("supervision" being what it is, but that is being dealt with separately)and was on a handful of occasions found wandering along a busy A road that leads to/from the M25. Only a few months after I had initially raised my concerns, two pupils thought it would be a laugh to run off across the fields (all 17 acres) at break time. They ignored the calls to return to school, disappeared for hours in woodland and residents back gardens and were thankfully safely returned about 4 hours later, after school had technically finished for the day, after a police helicopter search that cost in the region of £50,000. These stories do not get mentioned to the press for obvious reasons, and there may or may not be horror stories in many primary schools. If the original poster (Richard1 ?) feels it is a concern, for his own peace of mind he would benefit from raising them with the office staff (in my case they completely shared our view but had been ignored until that point on many of the issues raised). I'm off to lunch. :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rob Jones
NJS Wrote:
"the thread is rather disturbing!
1)Rob, are requesting the school be completely fenced in, and the children caged?
2)are we trying to keep people in or people out of the school?
3)surely with adequate supervision the risk is reduced to acceptable levels?"
In response to the above, my answers are:
1) I am not requesting that the school be completely fenced in as IT ALREADY IS, at least when the gates are closed. The same can be said for all of the other primary schools I have seen in my local area (near Leeds BTW).
2)Both. I think there is a risk of kids running off (see Shelia's post above) as well as the 'random nutter' issue.
3) Supervision is never 100%. As Shelia pointed out kids can have the tendency to run in any number of situation. Young kids have a tendency to run when faced with a situation they feels upset by. A dinner time supervisor distracted by another incident in the playground could easily miss a child wandering off.
I do not want a prison, I do want a safe environment.
RJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By NJS
Rob,
1. If the gates are open it is not completely fenced in. And there is NO NEED TO SHOUT!!
2&3. Kids running of is not a risk, and I know I’m going to get grief for saying it. But its not, its part of growing up.
“I do not want a prison” well it certainly seems like your asking for and describing one.
As far as I can from see from my local schools (also near leeds btw) your requests are overkill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mike Craven
Why is requesting that gates be kept closed "overkill"? - particularly as there appears to be a need for pedestrian access to be remotely controlled via intercom!
I don't understand the comments about having a perimeter fence and gates making a school like a prison? Haven't schools always had perimeter walls, fences, railings, gates, etc. I would be interested to know which schools in Leeds don't!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.