Health and Safety
Executive / Commission
School Trips
The DfES good practice guide “Health and Safety of Pupils on Educational Visits” (HASPEV) and supplements provide helpful guidance on the role of governors in connection with adventure activities and educational visits.
For those in Scotland, the Scottish Executive Education Department guidance "Health and Safety on Educational Excursions" should be accessed at:
The key points for governors emerging from, or reinforced by, the Glenridding tragedy are set out below. They have been grouped under a number of headings/questions that governors should ask.
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.
Governing bodies of all schools have an important role in the scrutiny of arrangements for educational visits.
In schools where the LEA is not the employer, the Governing Body bears the legal responsibility for the safety of educational visits. Governors of such schools should also look at Key points - LEAs.
There should be a school policy on educational visits including arrangements for approving visits.
Governors should be told well in advance of proposed educational visits and always be prepared to ask searching questions about the educational objectives and management arrangements for forthcoming visits and the outcomes of completed visits (Para C 13).
It should be clear who in a school has specific health and safety responsibilities. The extent and limits of their functions should be clearly set out. They should receive relevant training (Para G 21).
Every school should have a person acting as a focal point for H&S who has clearly defined responsibilities and is provided with effective training and resources (Para F 3).
Educational Visit Co-ordinators (EVCs) have a specific role within the school in respect of school visits. They should have sufficient training and resources to do the job effectively (Para F 3).
Nobody should lead water/rock (or other adventurous) 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).
It is good practice for LEAs to provide concise guidance for head teachers and governors on their expectations for checking staff competencies and qualifications (Para G 10).
There is much useful technical guidance on the Adventure Activities Licensing Authority (AALA) website (Para A 2).
For further information on competencies and their assessment see Key points - competencies.
All arrangements for educational visits should be informed by risk assessment (which should be fit for the purpose (Para A 7)). Key points - risk assessment.
Children should be involved in practical risk assessment and decision-making to help them become “risk aware” (Paras D 10, E 4, E 6).
Schools and LEAs need clear procedures for dealing with any concerns about unsafe practice (Para B 10).
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).
Records of staff/governor H&S training should be updated and reviewed annually (Para G 32).
Monitoring and audit provide mechanisms for identifying when H&S systems are degraded or abused (Para G 28).
Compliance with procedures should form part of a school’s internal monitoring arrangements (Para C 11).
LEAs need to make clear to head teachers, governors and advisers:
There should be “field” monitoring of educational visits (Para F 6).
It would be good practice for the Governing Body to ask regularly about the first aid qualifications held by staff (Para D7).
Favourable Ofsted reports about school trips are not confirmation of safe practice and are no substitute for thorough risk assessment and monitoring (Para F 5).
For further information on monitoring Key points – monitoring.
Visits should have clear educational objectives. (Many of the serious accidents to children have occurred on visits not associated with the curriculum) (Para D 4).
Whatever the objectives of the visit, the leader must organise it to the best of their professional ability. There can be no lower standard for “fun trips” (Para D 4).
There should always be a viable “Plan B” to provide alternative activities in case the primary activity is undeliverable. A similar standard of risk assessment should be applied as to the main activities (Para D 10).
The leader should have the competence and confidence to implement “Plan B” (Para D 10).
Have appropriate consents be sought?
Informed parental consent is essential. This requires good communication with parents (Para D 1).
Parents will not be able to give informed consent unless they are given adequate information about the main and alternative (“Plan B”) objectives of the visit and the hazards and risks involved
It is good practice to hold a meeting for parents before outdoor and residential visits (Para D 2).
It is good practice for a governor to be invited to attend parents’ meetings for visits (Para D 2).
There should be prior parental consent for swimming (Para D 9).
Supervision on educational visits needs to be 24 hours per day 7 days per week. The precise arrangements should be based on risk assessment (Para B7). Parents should be told the arrangements for supervision when consent for the visit is sought.
Training and support for school governors and senior managers in the self-assessment of H&S will support the monitoring and audit processes (Para G 27). This should feature in school development/governor training plans.
It is good practice for LEAs to:
General information on the safe conduct of educational visits is given in the Conclusions and recommendations.
Key points specific to:
Key points for reference: