CRB checks

[mick.brennan]

Hi All
My branch has recently acquired some junior snorkel members, which brings up the prickly matter of undertaking Criminal Record Checks, on persons involved in their training. I would be interested in a link to BSAC policy on this.

We have members within the club who have undertaken such procedures and been vetted themselves, but through other organisations; the main sticking point at the moment is the lack of a CRB check form. I understand BSAC has such a form, which requires completion by candidates. So, help locating this would be much appreciated, is it available for download, or is there someone at BSAC HQ I need to contact.

Thanks Mick

[Adrian Kelland]

All here (http://www.bsac.org/page/136/welfare-guide.htm) Mick. It is important to remember it is not a compulsory requirement of BSAC. It may be a requirement for pool hire etc.

Adrian

[JamesW]

Hi All
My branch has recently acquired some junior snorkel members, which brings up the prickly matter of undertaking Criminal Record Checks, on persons involved in their training. I would be interested in a link to BSAC policy on this.

We have members within the club who have undertaken such procedures and been vetted themselves, but through other organisations; the main sticking point at the moment is the lack of a CRB check form. I understand BSAC has such a form, which requires completion by candidates. So, help locating this would be much appreciated, is it available for download, or is there someone at BSAC HQ I need to contact.
Thanks Mick

Hi I am on my 3rd CRB each organisation have to have a CRB but like what Adrian said its not a compulsory requirement of BSAC so its down to your committee.

[Stephen Davies]

If you wish to have people within your Branch CRB checked you need to amend the Branch Constitution. The link from Adrian should give you access to all the necessary information you need to make the amendment. You then decide who from within the Branch will require a CRB.

The whole process is covered under the Welfare of The Vulnerable Policy.

The Branch I belong to went through the process two years ago. Club members decided that all instructors and committee members require a CRB. Committee members were added as they along with the instructors tend to have dealings with junior members.

We also produced our own Policy in respect of Junior members that has to be signed by the parent/guardian/carer of the junior member.

Stephen

[Keith Lawrence]

All here (http://www.bsac.org/page/136/welfare-guide.htm) Mick. It is important to remember it is not a compulsory requirement of BSAC. It may be a requirement for pool hire etc.It is BSAC policy, something that should be followed although the requirment for a CRB check is not (yet) law in England and Wales.

It's a very simple process Mick, loads of branches have made use of the services we provide at HQ. The policy is that those with significant contact (e.g. teaching) with vulnerable people should have a CRB check, it's all in the policy documents, it can all be handled by HQ for you.

HTH

Keith L

[Keith Lawrence]

Club members decided that all instructors and committee members require a CRB. Committee members were added as they along with the instructors tend to have dealings with junior membersThis is of course a local agreement, over and above the requirements of the BSAC policy and those of Sport England (who have approved the BSAC policy). If people do not have (and do not wish to have) significant contact with vulnerable people then there is no need for a CRB check.

[Stephen Davies]

This is of course a local agreement, over and above the requirements of the BSAC policy and those of Sport England (who have approved the BSAC policy). If people do not have (and do not wish to have) significant contact with vulnerable people then there is no need for a CRB check.

You're quite right Keith. However, we felt that committee members who weren't instructors still had significant contact with the junior members and should therefore have a CRB.

Stephen

[Adrian Kelland]

You're quite right Keith. However, we felt that committee members who weren't instructors still had significant contact with the junior members and should therefore have a CRB.

Stephen
Stephen,

What is your branch policy regarding someone who does not want a CRB check?

Adrian

[mick.brennan]

Thanks All
I have checked out the links and forwarded them to our branch welfare officer, who has experience of this mater within another organisation. It seemed she had trouble getting hold of the relevant (BSAC) CRB declaration form, which I see is part of the links provided. This may be due to the fact that the branch hasn’t completed the necessary protocol and registered with HQ.
Thanks again, should give the committee something to think about before the next met.

Mick

[Stephen Davies]

Stephen,

What is your branch policy regarding someone who does not want a CRB check?

Adrian

Adrian,

To date this has not been a problem. All we have done is follow the BSAC document on Welfare of The Vulnerable. See Self Declaration (page 5).

We did have an instructor who expressed a preference not to be involved with Junior members, this was duly respected by the Branch, even so he was still prepared to have a CRB.

The text of the bye-law which is incorporated into the branch constitution is contained on page 17 of the above document.

I trust the above answers your question.

Stephen

[Odin]

My objection is to the process.
I have to have an extended crb check every three years for work.
I have just gone on the committee of my branch and am required to have a crb check through the BS-AC.
This will cost HQ money and time in processing a check that has already been carried out.

My significant other (HR Manager) recently attended a conference where the Govt. announced yet another check for people involved with children an vunerable adults was being planned in the very near future. So we will all have to have yet another check as well as the crb!
Paul

[Mike Halligan]

My objection is to the process.
I have to have an extended crb check every three years for work.
I have just gone on the committee of my branch and am required to have a crb check through the BS-AC.
This will cost HQ money and time in processing a check that has already been carried out.

My significant other (HR Manager) recently attended a conference where the Govt. announced yet another check for people involved with children an vunerable adults was being planned in the very near future. So we will all have to have yet another check as well as the crb!
Paul

Hi, Paul,

Interesting. I'd read the publicity as if a whizzy bit of political window-dressing that was superceding rather than overlaying CRB.

Well, I can dream, can't I?

[Odin]

Hi Mike,
apparently it is going to run alongside crb. It will be a national database and information transferable to other employers/groups. It is "free" for volunteer groups... but if you then use it for employment purposes then a retrospective fee will be charged!

When's the next general election?
Paul

[Stephen Davies]

My objection is to the process.
I have to have an extended crb check every three years for work.
I have just gone on the committee of my branch and am required to have a crb check through the BS-AC.
This will cost HQ money and time in processing a check that has already been carried out.

My significant other (HR Manager) recently attended a conference where the Govt. announced yet another check for people involved with children an vunerable adults was being planned in the very near future. So we will all have to have yet another check as well as the crb!
Paul

Paul,

I have had to have several enhanced checks over the years. Tow different CRBs for the same organisation within six months of each other. Tow different roles.

What is more disconcerting is the use of soft information. If you have been subject to a police investigation it will appear on the form. Through my work I am aware of someone who was charged with a criminal offence and found not guilty at Crown Court but details were still included on a CRB.

Stephen

[Edward]

Hi all,

One other thing to remember is its not only children that these policies cover, but all vulnerable individuals.

Edward

[Adrian Kelland]

Adrian,

To date this has not been a problem. All we have done is follow the BSAC document on Welfare of The Vulnerable. See Self Declaration (page 5).

We did have an instructor who expressed a preference not to be involved with Junior members, this was duly respected by the Branch, even so he was still prepared to have a CRB.

The text of the bye-law which is incorporated into the branch constitution is contained on page 17 of the above document.

I trust the above answers your question.

Stephen
A little. As I read byelaw 5) iv) there is an element of compulsion; 'required to give permission'. To me that is not permission if I have no choice but to give it.

Would your branch ban anyone from a selected post if they refuse to give permission.

Adrian

[Stephen Davies]

Adrian

This has not been an issue.

The decision to propose the incorporation of bye-law 5 iv) into the branch constitution was made by the committee. At the AGM the proposal was carried "Nemcon".

Most clubs/society's have rules for membership. This just forms part of the rules for membership of our Branch. At the time of its adoption members felt that the move was appropriate and still do. We are required to re-affirm the rule on an annual basis and have just done this.

All prospective members are informed of the rules of membership and in particular 5 iv). To date prospective members have not withdrawn their application to join because of rule 5 iv). Neither have existing members declined to renew their membership of the Branch.

[Keith Lawrence]

Most clubs/society's have rules for membership....

All prospective members are informed of the rules of membership and in particular 5 iv). To date prospective members have not withdrawn their application to join because of rule 5 iv). Neither have existing members declined to renew their membership of the Branch.Fair comment Stephen, but my personal view is that you're being draconian and are way in excess of what is actually required and of the whole ethos of the WoV system. I would not like to see what your branch has done become the norm.

I would not join your branch, if I were an existing member I would not renew. That view is coming from somebody who is in full support of the BSAC WoV policy, in fact I helped to formulate it! I have also undergone a BSAC CRB check as I felt it was applicable to my position at the time.

But as an ordinary member, who has no significant contact with vulnerable people (and does not wish to have any such contact), the requirement for a "just in case" CRB check is in my view excessive, unnecessary and draconian.

Kind Regards

Keith L

[Stephen Davies]

Keith,

If you refer to one of my earlier posts you will see that a decision was taken that along with instructors, committee members were likely to have significant contact with juniors and other vulnerable people. These are the only members who are required to undergo a CRB.

It would have been draconian to require ALL members to under go a CRB. A proposal that did come from the floor of the meeting.

All we have done is follow what is contained in the BSAC WoV document so I fail to understand how you have come to the conclusion that we have been draconian.

Prospective members have their attention drawn to the fact that we operate a WoV policy.

Stephen

[Keith Lawrence]

If you refer to one of my earlier posts you will see that a decision was taken that along with instructors, committee members were likely to have significant contact with juniors and other vulnerable people. These are the only members who are required to undergo a CRB.
If that is the case then I apologise Stephen, that policy is entirely reasonable and in line with BSAC policy. However, your original post was as follows -
Club members decided that all instructors and committee members require a CRB
In my personal view that is unnecessary and draconian, only those who have significant contact with juniors and other vulnerable people (your words) are required to undergo a CRB check in line with BSAC club policy.

If an instructor, member, or committee member has such significant and supervisory contact with vulnerable people then I (and I suspect the majority of people) would think it reasonable that a CRB check was done, that is something that BSAC HQ can arrange for any club. But your original post stated "all instructors" - as an instructor who will not teach or dive with minors (personal choice!) the requirement for me to undergo a CRB check is unnecessary, draconian and would be a waste of BSAC money and resources in my opinion.

K

[Stephen Davies]

If that is the case then I apologise Stephen, that policy is entirely reasonable and in line with BSAC policy. However, your original post was as follows -

In my personal view that is unnecessary and draconian, only those who have significant contact with juniors and other vulnerable people (your words) are required to undergo a CRB check in line with BSAC club policy.

If an instructor, member, or committee member has such significant and supervisory contact with vulnerable people then I (and I suspect the majority of people) would think it reasonable that a CRB check was done, that is something that BSAC HQ can arrange for any club. But your original post stated "all instructors" - as an instructor who will not teach or dive with minors (personal choice!) the requirement for me to undergo a CRB check is unnecessary, draconian and would be a waste of BSAC money and resources in my opinion.

K
Keith,

In a post yesterday I did make mention of one of our instructors expressing a preference for not being involved with juniors and the fact the this was respected by the Branch. Even so the instructor was still prepared to give permission for the CRB. Although they did not wish to be involved with the formal training of junior members they did play an active part in delivering try dives to juniors from other organisations and therefore felt the CRB was appropriate.

I trust that this clarifies the situation for you.

Regards

Stephen

[liamm]

My inpression is that a POVCA (protection of children and venerable adults) check can go further than a CRB check.

there are instances when you might like to be aware or any criminal issues that an employee had - eg bank worker, but thet would not have an implication to children. IN this case a crb would suffice.

The POCVA check can highlight criminal records but can also link red flags that havnt led to conviction, i was under the belief that it superceded the crb check - we might have a different system in northern ireland.

One problem that you will have is regards information management. What you do with the information recieved, how long its kept for, how do you deal with an unfavourable response from POCVA etc.

I am very uncomfortable with the idea that accusations that did not lead to conviction will appear on this check if serious enough. Its a slippery slope....

[Keith Lawrence]

In a post yesterday I did make mention of one of our instructors expressing a preference for not being involved with juniors and the fact the this was respected by the Branch. Even so the instructor was still prepared to give permission for the CRB. Although they did not wish to be involved with the formal training of junior members they did play an active part in delivering try dives to juniors from other organisations and therefore felt the CRB was appropriate.

I trust that this clarifies the situation for you.I did see that post Stephen, in the case that you highlight it would seem that a CRB check is both appropriate and proper as the member concerned did have significant contact with vulnerable people by virtue of their participation in try dives. However, the issue that I (and I suspect Adrian) was alluding to was the case where an instructor did not have and did not wish to have any such significant contact with vulnerable people, in such cases a CRB check is unnecessary, it is not required by either Sport England or by BSAC policy.

If your club constitution requires the CRB checking of all instructors, regardless, then in my personal opinion that constitution is wrong. The whole point of the BSAC WoV policy is one of appropriate policies, practises and procedures in appropriate places, it is not a knee jerk "check everybody!" policy.

I just don't want people to get the idea that clubs should adopt a "check everybody" policy, that is not the norm and is not a requirement. We are primarily an adult club dealing with adult members, we have comprehensive and approved WoV policies that should be applied where appropriate.

[Keith Lawrence]

My inpression is that a POVCA (protection of children and venerable adults) check can go further than a CRB check.
...
One problem that you will have is regards information management. What you do with the information recieved, how long its kept for, how do you deal with an unfavourable response from POCVA etc.

I am very uncomfortable with the idea that accusations that did not lead to conviction will appear on this check if serious enough. Its a slippery slope....OK, it's been a little while since I was involved with all of this, but unless things have changed significantly let me put your mind at rest -

BSAC HQ has been accredited as a processor of this information. Complying with the conditions of this are very, very onerous, it involves single points of contact, locked safes, and very strict information control.

When a form is submitted to HQ the only real question is "would it be appropriate for this person to work with vulnerable people?". The only answer that will go back to any branch officers is a simple "yes" or "no", nothing else, no details, no reasons. The applicant gets a full copy of their own CRB results so that they can have confidence in the accuracy, but that is private and is not divulged to anybody else.

If anybody is at all unsure then please check with HQ, they will be more than happy to answer any questions that you have. What the BSAC have set up is a simple, appropriate and free system for branches to use, they should make use of it to comply with BSAC policy.

Those of you with a long memory will know that my involvement in this issue goes back many years, I have fought long and hard for appropriate (and not draconian) measures for the BSAC. I have myself been through the BSAC CRB checking procedure, when it was appropriate for me by virtue of my position on BSAC Council at that time.

I have complete confidence in the BSAC system, rest assured that I would be the first to voice an opinion if that were not the case!

Keith L

[IainC]

Keith is there any official BSAC memo that summarises your last post?

I think it would be useful & reassuring for people thinking about CRB checks to understand that everyhting is kept confidential and that they (but nobody else) wil see the full results beyond yes/no.

Iain C.




--
edit for spelling

[Mike Halligan]

I believe it is covered in the process description available in the welfare area of the web-site (i.e. not the policy itself, the guidance for use). Can't recall the name but I've a copy in my Clubmark file behind the WoV Policy.

[Michelle Haywood]

Edward, I agree

In fact I challenge anyone to define any individual who isn't vulnerable in some way at some point in time.

Branch policies should relate to all individuals. Having had an 18th birthday party does not make you less vulnerable to bullying, intimidation, poor management. Neither should you have to have some sort of doctors note to be treated with respect, fairness and equity.

I suspect the branches that have really had to deal with this in detail for Clubmark will also be treating their adult members differently now.

Michelle

[Mike Halligan]

I suspect the branches that have really had to deal with this in detail for Clubmark will also be treating their adult members differently now.



Too right! :) Clubmark does nothing more than codify reasonable behaviour between individuals and demands it as the order of the day.

Only the provisions of the Clubmark regime would persuade me to engage with parents, such has been my experience of them outside the BSAC. Clubmark's side-effect of drawing lines in the sand for general membership behaviours (by and toiwards volunteers) is a most welcome development which should lighten my accessibility load considerably.

[Odin]

You mean with clubmark I won't be able to bully the trainees into carrying all my kit, loading the boat, buying the tea/beer, call other members of the branch PLONKERS...etc.....

[Michelle Haywood]

As long as you do it to all of them equally it shouldn't be a problem! :D

Michelle

[Mike Halligan]

Just behave normally with everyone and someone will feed you chocky bickies and the occasional beer

[Odin]

Just behave normally with everyone and someone will feed you chocky bickies and the occasional beer
With one or two of our members NORMAL does not compute! :p

[Michelle Haywood]

Only one or two?????
What sort of a club is that?

You need to be aiming for at least 75%!!!!:D

Michelle