Youngest age of unaccompianed customers?

[welsmore]

Hi all, hope this is the right forum for this question!

 

I'm arranging a conference-style event next year, in a museum in Manchester. It'll be a 2-day event, with the typical format of main session, breakout sessions etc - nothing too complex that I haven't done before. The big difference with this event is that it's for Adult fans of LEGO - similar to this one: http://www.brickmagic.org/ - hence a big target market are older children as well as adults.

 

What I'm not sure of is how to deal with under 18's. Obviously any adults can take care of themselves, but what about 16-18yr olds, or under 16's? Obviously the lower unaccompanied age range I have, the more potential punters there are! What do your venues allow, or is there anywhere I can research this short of asking a lawyer?

 

(For reference, the museum - MOSI - are happy to allow anyone over 16 to come in on their own, so I'm tempted to follow that rule. And of course, the insurers may force my hand. But some more info would be appreciated!)

[paulears]

If you are going to be allowing children and young adults to be part of these organised sessions, then almost certainly you will be in CRB check territory - at least for the adults who are going to be working with them. Unsupervised close contact = helping people with making things? The risk is probably very low, but if they are effectively in your care, and you are going to be putting kids in close contact with strangers this isn't very different from other young person's activities where CRB checked adults are the norm. If the venue is a Council owned museum, it would be simplest to check with them and see if they have any rules already in place that will help? Maybe they'll want you, as the organiser to have a check done, and then you supervise what's going on. Very low risk, I'm sure - but there is a risk if kids are invited. "Hello little girl, would you like me to help you with your Lego?" - could have serious meaning if weirdos were to attend?

[abbotsmike]

You may also have to consider that where CRB's are concerned, vulnerable adults include anyone under 21.

[Brian]

Whilst your event falls outside the scope of Licensable Activities it might be considered good practice to work to the rules which would prevail if it did. So...

 

"Where the audience consists wholly or mainly of children under 14 years, at least one steward shall be provided for every 50 children or part thereof. Where the audience consists wholly or mainly of persons under the age of 16 years, the number of attendants on duty shall not be less than one for every 100 or part thereof, whether seated or otherwise."

 

(Source: standard local council conditions aka 'Premises Licence Annex 2')

[paulears]

The thing I was concerned about are the breakout sessions, smaller groups and probably shut-off from the rest.

 

The reality is that the local authority would be the ones who would be interested in unsupervised events, and as it's in one of their buildings, I can't see that many problems, if you ask them for advice and then do it.

[welsmore]

Thanks for the comments. 'Breakout sessions' will be just like any other conference - no actual LEGO building going on (just slideware) and probably a 1:10 ration of kids to adults at most.

 

Having said that, a call to the local authority might well be the best thing to do!

[andy_s]

You may also have to consider that where CRB's are concerned, vulnerable adults include anyone under 21.

 

I think this requires some clarification. I've copied the definition below from the CRB / Home office website. Please note that in this list there is no restriction of vulnerable adults to "under 21", and no identification of "anyone under 21" as a vulnerable adult per se.

A vulnerable adult is a person who is aged 18 years or older and:

 

• is living in residential accommodation, such as a care home or a residential special school;
  
• is living in sheltered housing;
  
• is receiving domiciliary care in his or her own home;
  
• is receiving any form of health care;
  
• is detained in a prison, remand centre, young offender institution, secure training centre or attendance centre or under the powers of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999;
  
• is in contact with probation services;
  
• is receiving a welfare service of a description to be prescribed in regulations;
  
• is receiving a service or participating in an activity which is specifically targeted at people with age-related needs, disabilities or prescribed physical or mental health conditions or expectant or nursing mothers living in residential care (age-related needs includes needs associated with frailty, illness, disability or mental capacity);
  
• is receiving direct payments from a local authority/HSS body in lieu of social care services;
  
• requires assistance in the conduct of his or her own affairs.
  

here's the link to the website: CRB definitions FAQs

[abbotsmike]

Sorry, my mistake. It's a rule of thumb we work to within the RFU when younger adults playing in the senior teams are concerned, rather than any 'rule' per se. One day I will stop trusting my memory so completely!

[paulears]

It's just that many schools and colleges clump together children and vulnerable adults - as they are the people in their care. I think the legislation they base their checks on is the Protection of Children Act 1999 - although that particular act doesn't to the best of my knowledge have a direct link to the OPs case - it deals with employment, child care and other direct contact issues.

 

The case here, if the breakout sessions are just seminars and meetings isn't likely to worry anyone at all - I had images of piles of bricks and people actually doing, not talking!

[andy_s]

Sorry, my mistake. It's a rule of thumb we work to within the RFU when younger adults playing in the senior teams are concerned, rather than any 'rule' per se. One day I will stop trusting my memory so completely!

 

in that context, it makes very good sense ...

[TomHoward]

I'm no expert on this - only what I've picked up from being on the receiving end of CRB and child protection training - but two things come to mind with regards to CRB checks:

 

Are the periods of contact regular enough to require CRB? I was of the understanding that CRB was a requirement for anyone who has unsupervised regular contact with children or vulnerable adults - that being with the same group of children more than once a week or more than six times a year, as 'grooming' (as it were) apparently usually stems from trust gained via regular contact with the same children.

 

Unless the lecture group is made up entirely of children or vulnerable adults, does the breakaway group count as unsupervised access on the part of the (paid or unpaid) employee / lecturer - as there are possibly other adults in the room?

 

In addition to this, in terms of child protection we have a few simple rules and guidelines in place at my place of work - things like we've had windows installed in all the doors - teaching small groups of kids without any other adults we leave the door propped open etc, to avoid accusation and any situations that could be mis-interpreted.

 

As I say I'm not an expert but it might give you something else to consider when thinking about it.

[welsmore]

Thanks for all your help guys. I thought I'd close this one off with the information I've managed to gather so far.

 

First up the local council - pretty useless to be honest. Were far more interested in the licensing (which I don't believe I need) than the child issue.

Second the museum - they looked up their insurance and it seems their age limit of 16 isn't based on anything in particular. However, their staff are CRB checked, as need to be ours.

 

Lastly, the NSPCC who could not have been more helpful! Specifically http://www.safenetwork.org.uk - which is an organisation run by the NSPCC to give out just this sort of advice. I now have a whole host of template procedures, documents, forms etc coming my way. As well as those, I'll be getting my staff and volunteers CRB checked too - but mainly just for good measure, as it's not actually legally required.

 

So, if anyone else is in the same boat - I'd strongly suggest a call to the Safe Network. It doesn't take much effort to make sure you're doing the right thing and for once it's great to have an organisation on the phone to you commending your forethought ;-)