to think this is breaching confidentiality and what should I do?

[SecretMinceRinser]

I visited the office of ds's school today to do a crb check so I can help out at the school. I was sat down at the desk of someone else who worked there but wasn't in that day. Laying in full view on the desk was a piece of paper that said 'Safeguarding Alert'. I glanced down at it and saw the title and though I'd better not look at it but as completing the crb application was dragging on I became more and more uneasy that it was left there for visitors to the office to see so I decided to read what was on the paper in more detail.
It had the full personal details of a mum of a child at the school, her child and the childs father - full names, dob even a physical description of each of them. It also detailed the fathers criminal convictions. It went on to say where the family had moved from and how they hadn't been co-operating with ss and that there was a history of domestic violence along with a ton of other personal stuff about the family/finances etc.
I don't know the family in question and won't repeat what I've read but that's not the point is it? There were drawers in the desk that the paper could easily have been put into out of sight.
I want to mention it to someone to ensure that personal stuff like that is stored more carefully in future but not sure who to speak to/what to say.
It did occur to me after the event that I could have mentioned it to the man in the office who was dong my application but he is a bit of an arse to be honest and not the sort of person that would take kindly to being told how to do his job. Anyway I didn't say anything at the time so too late to do that now. WWYD?

The member of staff would have had basic IG training which would teach them that nothing confidential should be left out on a desk when you are not at it. We are told to report any breach to our managers immediately as it is usually financial or patient information.

Obviously you should not have read it but the fact is that it was there where people could have read it (and did).

I agree you shouldn't have read it. However, I think the school are the ones at more fault here. They will have appropriate policy regarding sensitive information under the DPA. I don't think you should say anything to anyone however. As you read it, you don't really have a leg to stand on in complaining.

Did you find it? What words were you putting into Advanced Search ?

I was looking for opinions on when data protection confidentiality protocols can actually be breached. As is the case with the net, a wide variety of headings came up, many of which I passed over but this one caught my eye.
It was a welcome diversion from essay writing !
It's interesting that some people have since replied to the OP.

People are now replying because the Zombie warning disappears after the first few bumped posts unfortunately so there's no warning it's a v old thread.

Im shocked at you op!

You right sparkling! I hate this. Think mn should lock threads down after so long

OP - I don't think it's the job for you if, when you read "safeguarding alert" you don't have the self-discipline not to read it.

I'm amazed at how many people seem to have assumed the OP was in a "secure" office - the use of the school office has varied in almost every school I've ever worked in! In some schools staff, parents and children are in and out constantly and in some it's a case of 'woe betide you if you step into the office without Mrs X's permission'. It's impossible to tell from the OP's post, and her half hour in the office what kind of set up the office has. Therefore it's unacceptable, and entirely down to the school and their procedures to keep information like that safe.

The OP reading it or not reading it is not really the issue imo - she's not the one with policies and procedures to protect confidental information about vulnerable people. If it's a genuine alert then a parent, who may or may not pass the CRB to become a helper and who hasn't even been given a cursory 'this is what you do if you hear/see things you shouldn't' chat, has been given access to confidential information, and in a way that the school may not even realise that she (and potentially others) has read.

It also reminds me a of a school I used to work in and the HT who used to test parent helpers with things like that. They'd 'accidentally' overhear something, or read something about a (non-existant) child and how they dealt with the information went a very, very long way to deciding which volunteers were trusted with things and which ones got the 'we don't need anyone at the moment, but we might need some help with making costumes for the Christmas show. We'll let you know' brush off.

People are now replying because the Zombie warning disappears after the first few bumped posts unfortunately so there's no warning it's a v old thread.

in all honesty I find this hilarious!
I wonder how far it will go

Oh bloody hell. Didn't realise it was a zombie thread!

Thankfully, the use of the term CRB rather than DBS in the OP alerted me to the fact that this is a SIX YEAR OLD ZOMBIE THREAD.
I remember it the first time round.

I sort out DBS checks regularly and still say CRB now and then by mistake so I didn't even think about it

Thankfully, the use of the term CRB rather than DBS in the OP alerted me to the fact that this is a SIX YEAR OLD ZOMBIE THREAD

As a matter of genuine curiosity, that being the case, why would you reply to it to let us know you knew it was an old thread ? I'm not trying to be rude or funky, I'm genuinely curious.

The OP reading it or not reading it is not really the issue imo - she's not the one with policies and procedures to protect confidental information about vulnerable people. If it's a genuine alert then a parent, who may or may not pass the CRB to become a helper and who hasn't even been given a cursory 'this is what you do if you hear/see things you shouldn't' chat, has been given access to confidential information, and in a way that the school may not even realise that she (and potentially others) has read

This is one of the reasons that the thread caught my eye in the first place. There could be all kinds of reasons why the document was left on the desk, such as an emergency that needed to be dealt with, but none of this absolves the person that left the document on the desk. Even if they were just going to the loo for a minute, they should have put it out of harm's way. It should be a reflex action in one's mind in the same way it would be if one was reading a sexy e~mail on the computer from one's significant other or reading an important letter about your child's behaviour or whatever and the doorbell rang and friends came round. If it were me, I'd put the letter away or turn off the computer unless I was cool with people knowing the contents of what I was looking at.
At the same time, it's a poor excuse to say "it's human nature" or "at least the OP was honest." Lots of people with nefarious intent can be honest about certain matters and there are a number of dodgy aspects of human nature. It's the nature of a child not to share; that doesn't make it excusable. That's why we teach children to share. But you know, I'd even question if it is human nature to read a document that shouldn't be read because many people simply would not be interested.
The wondrous thing about the situation that the OP posed is that there are at least three very distinct ways that the matter could be taken.

I hate this. Think mn should lock threads down after so long

While I understand the view {I thought it myself initially when people asked why the thread had been resurrected}, when I thought about it again, I could find no compelling reason threads should be locked down. Bottom line really, if you don't want to get involved in it, don't get involved in it. Think of zombie threads the way one might think of an aeroplane flying through one's town at mid day ~ you may be aware it's there but you don't have to look up at it.

It's a bit of a popular year Dixie. No idea why.

I agree with the OP ok she shouldn't have read it but it shouldn't have been there in the first place. At that point she was not a member of staff bound by confidentiality rules and that is the key factor. Once bound by them then anything can be lying about but prior to that they are massively in the wrong.

Didn't realise it was a zombie thread

Many people still say CRB rather than DBS

hmmmm.......dont think you are gonna last long in your new post of helping out at the school somehow....you read confidential papers, and then have the cheek to call the man in the office 'a bit of an arse'....i think he probably has your number!