Why NSPAC Exists

Lessons from the Other Side of the LADO Call

“Hi Paul… can I run something past you?”

Over the years, working as a Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO), I have lost count of how many conversations have begun that way.

For the person calling, it is often a moment of uncertainty. Something has happened. A concern has been raised. A line may have been crossed. They are unsure what the next step should be, or whether the matter meets the threshold for an allegation.

For me, it may be one of many such referrals that week.

When you see safeguarding concerns and allegations across many organisations, patterns begin to emerge. One truth becomes clear: when it comes to safeguarding practice, even well-intentioned professionals can get it wrong.

Most do not wake up that morning intending to lose their temper. They do not set out to act in ways that are emotionally harmful. They do not plan to compromise their integrity or suitability. Yet time and again concerns arise — not from deliberate abuse, but from poor judgement, blurred boundaries, emotional responses, or gradual drift in professional practice.

It was from this vantage point, seeing how concerns arise and what happens afterwards , that the idea for NSPAC emerged.

The Reality Behind Safeguarding Concerns

The most serious cases rightly attract headlines. They should.

But far more common are the situations where the heart of the issue lies not in malevolence, but in judgement.

A professional under pressure.
A boundary that softened over time.
A comment made without reflection.
An emotional response that overrode judgement.
A failure to recognise the power dynamic in the room.

These moments are rarely dramatic at the outset.

But their impact can be profound.

It would be misleading, however, to suggest that all concerns arise from drift alone. Over the course of my time as a LADO, I have seen more examples of serious abuse perpetrated by so-called safe and vetted adults than I ever expected when I first stepped into the role. These are not everyday occurrences, but nor are they exceptional. Child-serving organisations identify unsafe and unsuitable adults within their midst more often than many outside the system would feel comfortable knowing.

Where harm is intentional, the consequences are devastating. Children and families experience deep and often lifelong betrayal. Organisations can face what feels like nuclear-level fallout: fractured trust, damaged reputations, and shaken staff teams.

On those occasions where an allegation turns out to be false or malicious, the harm to the subject of that allegation must not be underestimated either. That too can be devastating.

We Are Better at Responding

We have become significantly better at responding to allegations.

While not perfect, the LADO process has strengthened oversight and transparency. Concerns are recognised earlier, thresholds applied more consistently, and risk managed more clearly through multi-agency scrutiny.

But response is not the same as learning.

The Gap: Reflection

Allegations are responded to. Investigations take place. Conclusions are reached.

What we do less consistently is create structured space for reflection — either before harm occurs, or once the immediate process has concluded.

Despite recruitment checks, statutory guidance, policies and codes of conduct, one factor remains underestimated:

clear, simple and relentlessly applied safer practice principles.

Note the word principles, not rules.

Rules have their place. There are circumstances where an unequivocal rule is essential. But rules alone can become performative. They can be followed literally while the underlying culture quietly drifts.

I have even heard safeguarding rules cited in defence of poor judgement:

"I was only following the rules."

Principles are different.

They shape culture.
They guide professional judgement when the rule book is silent.
They require insight, not just compliance.

The Middle Space

There are, of course, individuals who should not be working with children at all. Systems must be robust enough to identify and remove them.

NSPAC is not for that group.

It exists for a different, and much larger, group: professionals who are not malicious, but whose mindset, stress, defensiveness, or lack of reflection has allowed their practice to drift.

It is also relevant for those who are new to working with children, or returning to practice after time away — individuals who may not have done anything wrong, but who would benefit from structured reflection on professional boundaries, power and culture at the outset or at the point of reintegration.

In some cases, an employer may refer a professional to NSPAC instead of disciplinary action, where reflection is proportionate and appropriate.

In others, NSPAC may sit alongside or follow a disciplinary process, forming part of a structured reintegration plan to ensure that insight develops alongside accountability.

It is not an alternative to safeguarding procedures.

It is a structured response to the learning gap those procedures cannot fill.

Why NSPAC Was Created

NSPAC was created from this view behind the curtain — from the recognition that knowledge of policy does not automatically lead to self-awareness, and that consequences alone do not guarantee reflection.

Culture shifts when adults are willing to examine themselves.

The course provides structured, challenging reflection on professional power, boundaries, emotional triggers, impact versus intention, organisational culture, and child-centred values.

What We Owe Children — and the Adults Who Work With Them

Children deserve more than systems that respond once something has gone wrong.

They deserve adults who understand the weight of their role, and organisations that learn as well as investigate.

The LADO process strengthened our response.

NSPAC was created to strengthen our reflection.

Safer practice does not begin with an allegation.

It begins long before that — in the daily habits, conversations and judgements of adults.

It begins with us.

Paul James
Founder – National Safer Practice Awareness Course (NSPAC)