Decision

Findings & Conclusions: St Laurence Educational Trust

Published 12 July 2024

Applies to England and Wales

The administration, governance and management of St Laurence Educational Trust (SLET) 

The inquiry visited the Ampleforth site in February/March 2017 and examined the governance at SLET, with particular focus on its approach to safeguarding, its safeguarding processes and procedures and how it worked collaboratively with the Abbey to ensure the safety of pupils at the College. At this visit, the inquiry team provided verbal regulatory advice to the trustees in respect of their trustee responsibilities and risk management.

The inquiry found areas of weakness and matters of concern in the administration, governance and management of SLET by the trustees in post at the time the inquiry was opened and during the period of the inquiry. It is acknowledged that the SLET trustee board has been subject to change during the inquiry period. The inquiry found that there were instances in which the SLET trustees did not comply with their responsibilities as trustees under charity law.

The inquiry found constitutional and decision-making constraints within the governance arrangements between and within the charities which created weaknesses in the SLET trustees’ ability to operate effectively. The SLET trustees had insufficient oversight of safeguarding matters which impacted on them acting confidently when discharging their duties to their beneficiaries. The inquiry found that the recruitment of additional trustees to the board to broaden the skills and expertise was necessary, alongside a constitutional and governance review to put in place a governance structure that would enable them to more effectively discharge their duties.

The IM found that the safeguarding committees in place at the time the inquiry was opened did not address the needs and requirements of either charity adequately and there was ineffective communication and cross-working with the Abbey which resulted in occasions where the SLET trustees did not receive relevant information from within the charity and from the Abbey in a timely manner. The structure and staffing arrangements also created risks to the effective management of safeguarding matters as there was no comprehensive and joined up approach to the management of safeguarding matters across the site and across activities.

Whilst initially a joint safeguarding committee was set up during the IM’s appointment, as a means of ensuring a joined-up approach to safeguarding, an independent SLET Safeguarding Committee was subsequently established as a sub-committee of the SLET trustee board to which it reports. This was necessary in order to have a resolute and focused approach to the governance of school safeguarding matters, recognising the need for close oversight of the management of school cases. Following her discharge as IM in May 2020, the IM agreed to voluntarily chair the new Safeguarding Committee and continued in this post to support the trustees of SLET during a period of renewed regulatory intervention following an OFSTED inspection in September 2020. She has since left this role.

During her appointment, the IM led and oversaw the review and redesign of the charity’s corporate and governance structures to ensure that the foundations underpinning the revised safeguarding systems and processes which were put in place were fit for purpose and supported, rather than undermined, effective safeguarding. The IM conducted a review of safeguarding, which included an external audit of safeguarding practice within the College and assessed a sample of cases to see how the school was managing its safeguarding arrangements (commissioned by the IM and conducted by professional safeguarding consultants).

The IM then oversaw the implementation of recommendations from her own review of safeguarding, the external audit and recommendations from the Proctor report, see Annex B. This was achieved through the introduction of a Safeguarding Improvement Plan (‘SIP’), which took a structured approach to implementation, including detailed actions and defined timescales. The SIP, later becoming a Safeguarding Development Plan, assisted the SLET board in overseeing a programme of safeguarding development and reform. Safeguarding at SLET is now overseen by an enlarged and strengthened safeguarding team who report to the SLET Board Safeguarding Committee which is chaired by the Designated Safeguarding Governor.

The IM supported the charity in ensuring changes to safeguarding practice were embedded, and that a more professional culture was adopted in the way in which safeguarding incidents are managed and addressed. This included support in the recruitment of new and expert safeguarding trustees, new leadership and the appointment of experienced safeguarding personnel to manage safeguarding operations. Further work to improve and strengthen SLET’s governance and administration continued following the IM’s discharge and is detailed below. It was evident during the Commission’s inquiry and through the IM’s appointment that cultural change would take time to embed.

The management and handling of safeguarding incidents by SLET 

The inquiry identified that other regulators and statutory agencies had a lack of trust and confidence in the leadership and management of the College and its handling of safeguarding matters. For example, during the inquiry, SLET repeatedly failed to meet the Independent School Standards (the ‘Standards’). The inquiry found SLET trustees in place during the inquiry demonstrated a failure to meet their duties and responsibilities as trustees because they failed to ensure a safe environment for their beneficiaries.

During the inquiry, Ampleforth College was subject to a number of Independent Schools Inspectorate (‘ISI’) and Ofsted inspections. An ISI regulatory compliance inspection was undertaken in March 2018 and found that the College did not meet the required Standards and the National Minimum Standards for Boarding. The College failed to demonstrate the required standards including those relating to the welfare, health and safety of pupils and the quality of leadership and management. A further progress monitoring inspection undertaken in November 2018, found that standards remained unmet, specifically on safeguarding implementation, supervision of pupils and the quality of leadership and management. Of particular concern to the Commission, was the ISI’s findings that ‘the School does not implement the safeguarding policy effectively with regard to child protection, within its wider context of the supervision of vulnerable pupils’^{[footnote 1]}. The ISI also found that ‘the checking of the whereabouts of pupils has not been rigorous and the time taken to alert senior leaders increased the risks to the absence of a vulnerable pupil’.

The ISI undertook a further progress monitoring inspection in May 2019 and found that, again, the School failed to meet standards, including those relating to safeguarding, bullying, harassment and leadership. Of particular concern to the Commission were their findings that ‘the School still does not implement the safeguarding policy effectively. It does not identify the different responses required for behavioural concerns and safeguarding concerns, particularly with reference to bullying and peer on peer abuse.’ In addition, the ISI found that ‘members of the senior leadership team failed to follow their training and made judgements that are contrary to the School safeguarding policy and procedures. Incidents involving the physical abuse of pupils are not always recognised as a potential bullying or safeguarding concern, and at times have been recorded only as poor behaviour. In addition, appropriate referrals to the police or local safeguarding authorities are not always made in a timely manner’.

These continued failures by the College to meet minimum regulatory standards was of significant concern to the inquiry, particularly given the changes and improvements to the charity’s governance structures and safeguarding management overseen and implemented by the IM. The inquiry saw evidence of various safeguarding incidents that took place during the inquiry which materially affected the inspection findings. The repeated failures by staff and individuals in leadership positions and the ineffective handling of various safeguarding incidents that took place during the inquiry placed beneficiaries at risk and constituted mismanagement by the SLET trustees in place at these times. In particular, the inquiry found that some of the changes promoted by the IM were not being embraced and followed by the then leaders of the College, who continued to mis-manage safeguarding incidents.

The above led to a change in leadership of the College and supported the need for recruitment of further trustees with skills and experience needed to improve standards and practices at the College.

The inquiry notes that the College fully met the Standards at a further progress monitoring inspection undertaken by the ISI in January 2020. This provided the inquiry with assurance about the College’s safeguarding practices and led to the Commission’s decision to discharge the IM in May 2020.

However, the College subsequently failed an emergency inspection by Ofsted in September 2020. This inspection report detailed failings in relation to Parts 3, 5 and 8 ^{[footnote 2]} of the Standards and additional failings in relation to the National Minimum Standards for Boarding Schools. As a result of this failure, the Department for Education (‘DfE’) issued an enforcement notice to the College on 27 November 2020 which placed a relevant restriction on the College which prohibited the admission of new pupils ^{[footnote 3]}. SLET were required to produce an action plan for Ofsted and the DfE which was finalised in December 2020. This included a full and independent review of safeguarding practice at the College and the appointment of a new Designated Safeguarding Lead. The key area highlighted in these failings concerned the operational management of safeguarding cases. OFSTED found the College was failing to properly manage safeguarding cases and the College subsequently failed further progress inspections by Ofsted in February/March 2021 and November 2021, although each inspection report recorded the progress made towards meeting standards and embedding a good safeguarding culture.

On the basis of the Ofsted progress inspections in February/March 2021, the Department of Education lifted its enforcement notice. However, it required the recruitment of new trustees to strengthen the independence of the SLET Board. Those trustees assumed their roles in November 2021, after the Ofsted November 2021 inspection and SLET have continued to strengthen its trustee board in the intervening period. The College was also required to produce a further action plan by the DfE which was completed in the summer of 2022 and the College then passed a progress monitoring inspection in October 2022. It then passed a standard inspection in September 2023, with both inspections finding that all Standards were met.

The inquiry found that the repeated failures over a prolonged period to meet the Standards demonstrated that SLET trustees in post at those times did not act with reasonable care and skill in relation to their responsibility for the governance of safeguarding procedures and practice. The inquiry considers that this demonstrates mismanagement in the administration of the charity by the SLET trustees in post at these times. However, the inquiry acknowledges the significant work undertaken by the SLET trustees in post during the inquiry to implement change and notes that the College is currently compliant with the Standards. The inquiry also notes the significant commitment of the SLET trustees to drive forward safeguarding improvement work, and the commitment of the head who was appointed in 2019 to lead the charity’s operations in this regard. A substantial amount of focused effort was required in order to ensure that the College staff team understood in practice how to manage safeguarding cases in a way which met current regulatory standards.

As set out above the inquiry found evidence that during the inquiry there were incidents where SLET’s safeguarding processes and policies were not properly followed or complied with. These incidents, some of which were serious in nature and which exposed beneficiaries to significant harm, materially impacted on the College’s repeated failure to meet the Standards and which resulted in a regulatory restriction being placed on the College by the Department of Education. The failures were often individual staff members failing to follow procedure and policy but this demonstrated a lack of effective leadership within the staffing structure at the College to implement the necessary change and professionalism at all levels of staffing and an inability to implement a professional safeguarding culture.

The management of risks in relation to safeguarding by SLET

The inquiry notes that the process of improving the College’s safeguarding policies and procedures has been one of incremental change and improvement throughout the life of the inquiry. The College’s safeguarding policies and processes have been updated and refined multiple times during the inquiry and been shaped by external professional support (including Professor Susan Proctor and other professional safeguarding consultants). Whilst in post, the IM implemented measures necessary to address identified shortcomings in safeguarding procedure or practice at both charities. This was undertaken by the IM initially through the introduction and implementation of the SIP, which covered key areas of activity, including leadership and structures; the role of the trustees; specific matters relating to safeguarding in the schools; managing risk and strategic planning for safeguarding.

In May 2020 at the point the inquiry discharged the IM, the inquiry issued a S84 Order to the SLET trustees which required certain time limited actions to be completed in order to continue the strengthening and improvement of the charity’s safeguarding processes. The inquiry monitored the charity’s compliance with these orders and received quarterly updates on progress from the charity until May 2021. These actions included ensuring a robust safeguarding culture continued to be embedded at the College and ensuring the effectiveness of new safeguarding structures.

Further to the work undertaken by the IM and following her discharge, the trustees of SLET engaged further professional safeguarding consultants to undertake a further review of safeguarding practice following the College’s failure to meet the Standards in October 2020. With the former IM now operating in a voluntary capacity as Chair of the Safeguarding Committee, the report of the safeguarding consultants identified weaknesses which required action to improve safeguarding case management. The reporting to the Safeguarding Committee and in turn the trustees had been inaccurate and presented an over-optimistic view of the College’s safeguarding practice. In particular, the College staff team was not utilising the charity’s case management tool effectively. The SLET trustees and the College’s leadership, with the support of the professional safeguarding consultants, then took further steps to strengthen the College’s safeguarding practices and to mitigate risks. This included role changes, the review and update of safeguarding policies and the improvement of training in and audit of the College’s safeguarding case management system.

Conclusions

This inquiry acknowledges but has not focused on the historic abuse that occurred at Ampleforth College and which resulted in significant harm to pupils. As detailed in the IICSA case study into Ampleforth (appendix A), children were subjected to appalling sexual abuse over decades at Ampleforth College and St Martins, often perpetrated by College staff and members of the monastic community.

The Commission’s examination of the adequacy of safeguarding arrangements at the College has concluded that, at the time the inquiry and at times during the inquiry, there were serious weaknesses in SLET’s approach to, and management of, safeguarding which has exposed pupils at the College to undue risk. The Commission concluded that serious failures and the public exposure of these issues in 2016 and further during the inquiry damaged public trust and confidence and caused reputational damage to both the Abbey and SLET. In addition, during the inquiry, both SLET and the Abbey trustees repeatedly failed to satisfy statutory safeguarding agencies of the adequacy of safeguarding on the Ampleforth site which raised further regulatory concern to the Commission. The Commission concludes that there were repeated serious failures in the way SLET dealt with safeguarding incidents, which appear to have materially affected the outcome of inspections by the ISI and Ofsted and that there was mismanagement by the SLET trustees in post at these times in relation to these failures and the reputational harm caused.  

An IM was appointed to both charities to assess the adequacy of safeguarding within the charities and across the Ampleforth site, identify areas for improvement and implement the changes required to address the same, putting in place a framework and infrastructure by which the trustees of the charities could hold the executive and staff on the ground to account, and each seek assurances around the effectiveness of safeguarding across the Ampleforth site.

The inquiry has concluded that improvements and the embedding of a professional culture of safeguarding at the College was slow to happen which exposed SLET’s beneficiaries to risks of harm and the College to reputational harm from its repeated failures to meet the Standards. Whilst efforts to improve safeguarding were undermined during the inquiry due to incidents in which staff failed to follow correct practice and procedure, which may have been outside the direct control of the trustees, it is their responsibility to create and ensure a safe and robust culture of safeguarding.

The Commission acknowledges the cooperation of the SLET trustees and its leadership in place during the Commission’s inquiry and the significant progress that has been made to improve safeguarding across the Ampleforth site. The SLET trustees worked effectively and collaboratively with the IM to ensure timely progress was made to complete the actions within the SIP and with the inquiry to progress the section 84 Order. With the support of the IM, the trustees of both charities undertook a structured review of the corporate and governance structures in place and latterly, have taken steps to fully separate their governance and the geographical site on which they are located.

Changes to safeguarding practice are now embedded across and throughout the charities, and there is now a professional culture adopted in the way in which safeguarding incidents are managed and addressed. SLET have benefitted from the recruitment of new and expert safeguarding trustees, new executive leadership and the appointment of experienced safeguarding personnel to manage safeguarding operations.

SLET now have the foundations in place to ensure safeguarding is carried out effectively and the right personnel are in place to lead the charities in building on those foundations. The College’s recent ‘Good’ Ofsted inspection in September 2023 demonstrates they are meeting all of the Standards and that they have begun to rebuild their reputation with a recent successful inspection by the Catholic School’s Inspectorate and readmittance to the Headmaster’s Conference (HMC), which it lost in 2018. However, it is recognised that both SLET and the Abbey have experienced difficulties in satisfying statutory safeguarding authorities as to the adequacy of safeguarding across the site and they must continue to maintain high standards and ensure that going forwards there is a robust safeguarding environment that protects vulnerable people that come into contact with the charities. It is noted that these difficulties have impacted significantly on the length of the Commission’s inquiry.

1. See: https://www.isi.net/school/ampleforth-college-6197 ↩

2. These being Welfare, health and safety of pupils, Premises of and accommodation at schools and Quality of leadership in and management of schools respectively. ↩

3. This restriction came into force on 22 January 2021, following the withdrawal of an appeal by SLET against the restriction. The restriction was withdrawn on 15 April 2021 following the acceptance by DfE of an action plan to address the identified failures to meet the Standards, produced by SLET. ↩