Themed Audits Safe Recruitment

Internal Audit Report Themed Audits Safe Recruitment 2016/17 Issued to: Simon Newland Assistant Director (Education Provision and Access) Marcus Cooper - Senior Education Manager Copied to Report Status: HCC Schools Final Reference: 20202/17/001

SIAS Themed Audit Safer Recruitment 2016/17 INDEX Section Page 1. Executive Summary 3 Appendix A Summary of s 8 2 of 13

SIAS Themed Audit Safe Recruitment 2016/17 Introduction 1.1 Hertfordshire County Council s (HCC) Schools Audit Strategy includes a requirement to annually establish the effectiveness of financial control, risk management in relation to financial control and governance arrangements in a sample of schools. Three themes are identified annually and safe recruitment is the second theme that was agreed for 2016/17 by HCC s Audit Committee. This theme was selected as it is important that schools have robust recruitment and selection processes that help recruit candidates with the skills, knowledge and aptitudes to work, whether volunteers or employees, in a school environment and that also help to deter, reject or identify people who are unsuitable. 1.2 A random sample of 12 schools was visited in this theme. This report summarises the findings arising from the visits made as part of the safe recruitment theme. The learning points captured are circulated to all schools via the School Bulletin and The Grid. 1.3 This audit assessed the effectiveness of controls in the following assurance areas: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Policy and Procedures Shortlisting Interview Process Pre-Employment Checks Single Central Record Volunteers, Contractors and Governors. 1.4 The primary objective of this review is to provide assurance and guidance that schools comply with the statutory guidance in the Department for Education s publication Keeping Education September 2016 and the Home Office Right to Work in the UK legislation, when undertaking recruitment activity. Overall Audit Conclusion 1.5 The objective of the audit was to ensure that the procedures were operating satisfactorily; it was not to give a judgement on the outcomes of the recruitment processes. 1.6 All schools had a recruitment policy which has been followed for all recent recruitment exercises. In a couple of the schools visited this was in need of review and in one school, the school had not supplied applicants with the documents specified in the policy. 1.7 Most schools visited were finding it challenging to recruit staff and as a result shortlisting procedures are confined to pre-interview safeguarding checks. 1.8 All schools completed DBS checks for their staff and none of the schools visited had allowed staff to start work before the DBS results has been received. However, all but two schools had retained DBS checks on file. In some cases this 3 of 13

SIAS Themed Audit Safe Recruitment 2016/17 was policy in others the retention of the DBS check was accidental. Retention of DBS checks is not allowable under the data protection act and could potentially result in fines of up to 0.5m for the school. 1.9 References were always obtained before staff started work but it was not always clear where the reference had been obtained from. 1.10 All schools had a single central record and our checks confirmed with minor exception (four personnel across all schools visited) that all necessary personnel are included. From the audit work that was completed we are able to confirm that robust processes exist to ensure that the single central record remains up to date. 1.11 We were satisfied that schools were aware that photographic ID should be checked, there was limited awareness of the checks to be undertaken and how these should be recorded. Also there was confusion as to whether documents should be kept. Colour copies should be taken of all ID documents once they have been verified. 4 of 13

SIAS Themed Audit Safe Recruitment 2016/17 Summary of s 1.12 We made a total of 62 recommendations across the schools visited. The graph below shows the distribution of these recommendations by assurance area.. Number of Audit s Raised by Subject Area 1.13 The recommendations that we made related to: ensuring that policies were up to date introducing checklists to ensure that all stages in the recruitment process are completed and that there are no omissions in the documentation held on personnel files ensuring that DBS checks are destroyed in line with data protection legislation ensuring that robust documentation is available to support the recruitment process and in particular shortlisting, the interview process and candidate selection training the members of the interview panel retaining copies of photographic ID and recording the tests undertaken to confirm validity ensuring that there were two appropriate references updating the single central record 5 of 13

SIAS Themed Audit Safe Recruitment 2016/17 1.14 Details of the recommendations made are shown at Appendix A. 1.15 Included in Appendix A are the associated potential risks, related to the audit finding. These are included to give context to the issues reported. The associated potential risks are not statements of the current situation in school but are suggestions as to what could potentially occur as a result of a recommendation not being acted upon. 6 of 13

/ 1 Policy and Procedures Safer Recruitment Policy The current version of the Safer Recruitment Policy had not been reviewed and approved in a timely manner and there were no plans to do so. Policies are out of date and fail to give guidance on current legislation and best practice, resulting in the possibility of noncompliance with expected procedures. Education. School Staffing England Regulations 2009 We recommend that the policy is reviewed by the Headteacher and put to governors for discussions and approval. We recommend that as each policy is reviewed and approved by the full governing body, that details of the date and persons approving it should be record on the front page. 2 Policy and Procedures Recruitment Checklist 42% of schools visited did not use a recruitment checklist that is signed off to document the completion of each stage of the recruitment process. There was also limited use of personnel file checklists to ensure that all necessary documentation is kept and that there is a structure to the file. Non-compliance with the law, as summarised in The Managing Staff Appointments- Supplementary Advice from the Department for Education could potentially lead to fines for the school. The school can clearly evidence that legislation has been complied with. In addition, the checklist will act as a guide for any new staff. The Managing Staff Appointments- Supplementary Advice from the Department for Education We recommend that schools use a recruitment checklist to ensure that all stages in the recruitment process are completed satisfactorily and this can be evidenced. Further, we recommend that the schools sign off the recruitment checklist to ensure that all stages in the recruitment process have been completed satisfactorily. Where queries are raised the checklist should be signed off once these have been satisfactorily resolved. We also recommend that schools use a personnel file check list to ensure 7 of 13

/ that necessary documentation is kept on file and that there is a structure to the file. 3 Policy and Procedures - DBS Checks All schools visited had obtained DBS checks for staff. However 83% of schools visited had not destroyed all DBS checks in their personnel files once the six month retention period has been reached. On occasion it was the school s policy to destroy the checks but the odd check remained on file, in other schools all DBS checks remained on file. Non-compliance with data protection legislation, which could in extreme circumstances result in a potential fine for the school of up to 0.5m. 113 We recommend that all personnel files are checked for any DBS certificates that are more than six months old and any found are destroyed. Going forward schools should ensure that there is a process in place to ensure DBS certificates are destroyed when they become six months old. 4 Shortlisting The selection criterion for matching suitability of candidates to the post was not evidenced in all schools. Shortlisting scoring was rarely present in shortlisting files. Often, there was no evidence to demonstrate the identification of queries from application forms, such as gaps in employment, to raise with the applicant at interview. There was also a lack of clarity as to who had been involved in the shortlisting process. The school may be unable to evidence compliance with the equalities legislation thereby allowing unsuccessful candidates to challenge the recruitment process. This could result in reputational and financial risk for the school. 108 The Managing Staff Appointments- Supplementary Advice from the Department for Education and Equalities legislation. We recommend that the following practice is used for all future recruitment: a person specification is completed for all positions in school; evidence is retained to show that the candidates suitability has been checked against the person specification and job description; evidence is retained to support the selection of candidates for interview; evidence is retained to record any specific questions asked at interview, e.g. gaps in employment 8 of 13

/ a shortlisting template is used to sign off and support the decision to interview. Note: best practice suggests that there should be evidence that more than one person has been involved in the shortlisting process There should also be a structure for all personnel files with a checklist introduced. Job descriptions and person specifications should also be placed on all files. 5 Pre-employment Checks We noted instances where the candidates selected for interview are not subject to any pre-employment checks as to their suitability for the role in the school. As good practice, references should be taken up as part of shortlisting. 108 We recommend that schools consider obtaining references prior to interview. 6 Interview Process Safe Recruitment Training Interview panels did not always include a member who had attended safer recruitment training. There is an interview panel that does not conform to best practice. 72 We recommend at least one of the interview panel members have completed the safer recruitment course. School Staffing England Regulations 2009 Para 9 9 of 13

/ 8 Interview Process Evidence of the Process We examined evidence to support the interview process and identified that: a) Whilst there is evidence that there are two or three members on an interview panel, panel members do not write their names on their interview sheets, b) Interview notes are made but a scoring matrix was not applied. The school would find it more difficult to evidence the basis behind a decision to recruit in event of challenge, future dispute or issues. The school may also find it more difficult to demonstrate that the interview panel contained a member who was safer recruitment trained 72 School Staffing England Regulations 2009 Para 9 We recommend that: a) Members of the interview panel clearly write their names on the interview sheets, b) Consideration is given to using a scoring matrix to support the evaluation of interview outcomes 9 Interview Process Evidence of Candidate Selection All schools had at least two members on each interview panel and retained notes to document the interview process. However, in many schools there was no evidence of the preferred candidate being agreed by all interview panel members. The school is unable to evidence compliance with the equalities legislation thereby allowing unsuccessful candidates to challenge the recruitment process. This could result in reputational and financial risk for the school The Managing Staff Appointments- Supplementary Advice from the Department for Education. Equalities Legislation. We recommend that for jobs where there is more than one person interviewed a summary sheet (including a scoring record) should be written to summarise the interview scoring and preferred candidate decision, signed by all panel members. These should then be held on the shortlisting file and after six months the reason for the selection of the successful candidate transferred to their personnel file. 10 of 13

/ 10 Pre-employment checks Photographic ID and Qualifications There was a lack of clarity as to the checks that were undertaken to ensure that the photographic ID and qualification certificated were genuine and belonged to the prospective employee. In addition, copies that were taken were often in black and white and were not annotated to show when they had been checked and by whom. Non-compliance with the law relating to right to work in the UK, which could lead to possible fines for the school. This also represents an increased risk of fraudulent applicants not being identified during the identity vetting process. Subject to the motives of the individual this may increase the potential risk of harm to children, should other related controls in relation to vetting or on-going monitoring processes (when in post) not be in place or function effectively. In the event that evidence presented to confirm right to work in the UK subsequently turns out to be fraudulent (despite School checks), the School may find it more difficult to prove that appropriate checks that had been undertaken to verify authenticity. 102 & 112. Home Office - An employer s guide to acceptable right to work documents. We recommend that applicant s photographic ID is checked; to, for example, ensure that the spelling of all words is correct and that the paper does not fluoresce under ultra violet light, photographs match the candidate presenting the document and the identification does not show signs of being tampered with. We recommend that colour copies of photographic ID and qualifications are signed and dated to note when they were checked and provide evidence that the original documents were seen and ensure compliance with legislation on right to work in the UK. There is also reputational risk for the school. 11 Contractor Safe Guarding and Child Protection Policies In general, school are aware of the need when engaging contractors to undertake safeguarding checks, particularly when these are not HCC approved contractors. The school would be unable to We recommend that schools ensure that all agencies and contractors used (that are not HCC approved 11 of 13

However, these checks had not been undertaken in a small number of schools. / demonstrate that they have undertaken appropriate checks on contractors working at the school, in instances where such checks are required. This may result in financial and reputational risk for the school. 122 onwards contractors) have been subject to the appropriate Safeguarding and / or Child Protection checks in line with key statutory guidance good practice. Evidence of the completion of the required checks / verifications should also be retained on file to provide a robust audit trail. 12 References Our testing identified that whilst schools were aware of the requirements around references these were not always followed. Examples of non-compliance are: It is not clear that the reference is from a former employer A full employment history for three years is not obtained Inconsistencies between references not followed up The reference was sent from a Hotmail account. There is non-compliance with safeguarding requirements that are designed to ensure that the suitability of candidates is verified before they start work. This could lead to an unsuitable person being employed. 108 We recommend that schools should review all files of current employees and confirm that two references are held for each employee. If there are any gaps or inconsistencies noted further advices should be sort from HR. We recommend that going forward schools ensure there are at least two satisfactory references received before employees starts work. These ideally should be received before the interview stage of the recruitment process. References should cover the last three years and where there has been previous employment in an education setting a reference should always be taken from there even if this is not the most recent employment. However if that employment was more 12 of 13

/ than 5 years ago a personal reference should also be sought. Personal references should state in what capacity the potential candidate is known to the referee and for how long they have known each other. The schools should review references to check that the addresses and details appear genuine and where there are any queries the referee should be phoned. 15 Reference Template We noted that templated reference forms are used. However, these forms do not leave a space for the organisation that employed the candidate and referee to be noted. It is harder for the school to ensure that the reference is valid and could lead to an increased risk of fraudulent references not being identified during reference review process. 108 We recommend that the reference pro-forma is changed so that it is clear the address that the reference is from. 16 Single Central Record (SCR) We reviewed the Single Central Record (SCR) for completeness by checking against the nominal roll (NR) and the visitors book in each school visited. We identified four individuals who should have been included in the SCR The school s single central record may be deemed as incomplete by external parties if it does not include all regular volunteers. This could lead to reputational risk for the school. 112 We recommend schools review the SCR to ensure that it contains all current volunteers and peripatetic staff, with regular updates completed in future. 13 of 13