Health and Safety
Executive / Commission
School Trips
The DfES good practice guide “Health and Safety of Pupils on Educational Visits” (HASPEV) and supplements provide the main source of guidance on risk assessment in connection with adventure activities and for educational visits.
For those in Scotland, the Scottish Executive Education Department guidance "Health and Safety on Educational Excursions" should be accessed at:
These publications also contain guidance on risk assessments for adventure activities. Guidance on risk assessments for adventure activities is also available from the relevant National Governing Bodies (NGBs). The Adventure Activities Licensing Authority (AALA) website contains much helpful information on risk assessment, including for activities for which there are no NGB standards.
The HSE website contains guidance on the 5
steps to risk assessment [135kb]
.
It is important that you also look at the 10 vital questions which we believe are the essential things anybody should ask about a visit.
Any references in brackets refer to the paragraph numbers in the Investigation Report.
The key points on risk assessment emerging from or reinforced by the Glenridding tragedy are set below:
The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations (1999) require employers to assess the risks of activities, introduce measures to control those risks and tell their employees about these measures.
Risk assessments provide the fundamental intelligence on the hazards, risks and precautions for carrying out an activity
The overall risk assessment for an adventure activity such as plunge pooling would need to cover:
DfES advise that the head teacher should ensure that the group leader is competent to monitor the risks throughout the visit.
Nobody should lead adventure activities unless they have been assessed as competent, understand the full range of hazards and risks and can implement rescue and emergency procedures (Para A 3).
Leaders must be competent in dynamic risk assessment for the activity, so that they can continuously evaluate the implications of changing conditions. Dynamic risk assessments will need to take account of any generic and site-specific risk assessments and good practice (Para A 7).
It is essential that prospective leaders are familiar with all relevant guidelines, including relevant guidance on outdoor and open water activities, and seek expert advice if necessary (Para D 3).
Leaders should make sure that they have sufficient “local knowledge” (Paras E 1, E 4).
It is extremely important to have the best available information to support generic, site specific and dynamic risk assessment (for example in this case, pupil and leader capabilities, water temperatures and rescue options) (Para E 2).
Risk assessments should be fit for the purpose. The most important thing is to identify the right precautions to control the risks.(Para A 7).
Children should be involved in some practical risk assessment and decision-making to help them become “risk aware” (Paras E 4, E 6).
DfES advise that a risk assessment for a visit need not be complex but it should be comprehensive.
LEA guidance on outdoor activities should set out clearly the LEA’s expectations for risk assessment and provide any useful aids to help teachers carry out assessments to a level proportionate to the risk (Para C 2).
Any proposed new activity should be subject to a proper risk assessment (Para B 4).
Schools using Outdoor Education Centres (OECs) should clarify roles with the OEC to ensure that appropriate risk assessments are carried out for all aspects of the visit (Para G 11).
If an LEA becomes aware of schools doing combined water/rock activities, it should:
LEAs and schools are strongly advised to have a policy on leaders and helpers bringing additional children on educational visits. If that policy allows additional children to be brought, it should make clear that each case should be subject to a risk assessment which includes possible conflicts of interest (Para D 6).
Favourable Ofsted reports about school trips are not confirmation of safe practice and are no substitute for thorough risk assessment (Para F 5).
One simple way of monitoring is to check compliance with the precautions identified in risk assessments or set out in safe operating procedures (Para F6).
Supervision should be 24 hours per day 7 days per week. The precise arrangements (including for ”free” time) should be based on risk assessment taking account of factors such as the age and maturity of the party and the characteristics of the venue (Para B 7).
The risk assessment should identify the staffing required to run a visit safely. Staffing should never be decided just by a simple numerical calculation of the ratio of children to adults (Para D 5). The risk assessment may need to consider the possible conflicts of interest if leaders/helpers bring additional children (Para D 6).
The level of competence/qualification of leaders likely to be required should be identified though the risk assessment (Para D 8).
The risk assessment should cover, to a similar standard, both the main activities and the “Plan B” alternative activities included in the visit plan in case the primary activity is undeliverable (Para d 10).
The equipment, including clothing and rescue equipment, should be appropriate for the environmental conditions and should take account of the findings of the risk assessments, including dynamic risk assessments (Para E 5).
Risk assessments should consider how the party might respond to a serious incident, including identifying any procedures for contacting sources of help (Para E 13). Risk assessments for outdoor water-based activities should take account of the possibility of a panicking casualty (Para E 10).
Parents should be provided with sufficient information on hazards and risks to allow them to make informed decisions about their child’s participation. (Para D 1). Any additional information they provide on the child can be fed back into the risk assessment.
Activity (generic) and site-specific risk assessments should be reviewed at intervals in the light of any new evidence. This may include
Dynamic risk assessments - leaders should immediately reconsider the activity if there is:
Note: We have recently had helpful comment from The Adventure Activities Licensing Authority (AALA) on the significance of “cold water and the unexpected panicker”. This appears to have been a contributory factor in some recent drowning tragedies.
AALA consider that the “unexpected panicker” can now be considered as a reasonably foreseeable risk. It can be managed under 3 headings: Anticipation, Prevention and Recovery
Key points specific to:
Key points for reference: