Working Group - KCSIE 2026 changes - improve the guidance via the consultation process, promote more responses & more

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

Hello everyone - I was hoping to start a working group of some sort in order to respond to the proposed changes to KCSIE (Keeping Children Safe In Education)

Press release https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-publish-new-gender-guidance-for-schools

Proposed changes and response mechanism https://consult.education.gov.uk/independent-education-and-school-safeguarding-division/keeping-children-safe-in-education-2026-revisions/

I have a large personal interest in this. If you are not aware, I am the father in this article in The Times https://archive.ph/C4eXs

Can we come together to build a strategy of supporting the parts the changes which are great, for example the very clear statements of toilets and changing rooms being single sex?

And think how to propose possible changes to the statements about sport and especially about allowing social transitioning at school?

I'd very much love to hear your ideas and suggestions. I don't want to lead the group especially or tell anyone what to do - I am certain there are people with more knowledge than me, but I thought I could start off the conversation?

Thank you both.

@BonfireLady I have 30 characters in hand. It’s v tight. Difficult to do more than throw key words at it but they don’t make sense without explaining Fortunately ASD is 3 characters so I’ll have a go!

They really are, they just are afraid to say so for fear of cancellation / firing.

Also, if even the TRAs can't do it in a court of law consistently I think whether or not it's rude is the least of the problems with it.

I also agree with @BonfireLady that to demand speech that is against a person's beliefs is also rude, so where does that leave us? Who decides who gets to be rude with impunity?

In terms of adults I think it's more clear cut that children should only use sex-based pronouns for safeguarding reasons. IIRC in the Andrew Miller / Amy George case the judge actually stated that the child who was abducted and sexually assaulted probably got in the car as he was dressed as a woman.

What didn't get explored in the court case was to what extent she'd been groomed into ignoring her instincts around sex and safeguarding in order to 'be kind'.

@Cantunseeit (and all) apologies for the bum steer I gave on trying to accommodate these two comments in the feedback form. I've now had a look at the format of the form and can see that they fall under different questions.. and that the free text box character limit applies per question.

Point 1 (staff accessing residential accommodation etc) falls under question 34 on the feedback form: "do paragraphs 104-115 provide clarity for schools and colleges about their legal obligations relating to toilets, changing rooms and boarding and residential accommodation".

The answer is no, regarding staff accessing residential accommodation (on school trips or at residential schools), toilets or changing facilities for children of the opposite sex. The guidance links out to several bits of legislation but it's unclear which one states that staff shouldn't access facilities for the opposite sex. Does anyone know which piece of legislation it falls under? I had a look at a few but couldn't find any wording that covered it.

It's frustrating that the section in which this question sits only refers to gender questioning children and not staff with opposite sex identities as well. From the KCSIE wording, such staff appear to be irrelevant to the safeguarding of children, as they aren't mentioned anywhere else either, which is bonkers.

And point 2 re sports comes under question 35: "do paragraphs 94-97 provide clarity for schools and colleges about the circumstances in which the school is justified in having a policy of single-sex sports"

So thankfully it's not as bad as I thought re character limits.

Edited for clarity.

To add:

Given schools (and local authorities re pupil admissions) can use passports to determine someone's sex for the purposes of the school's records... and anyone can currently obtain a passport stating that they are the opposite sex... the KCSIE should probably have a statement that for safeguarding purposes, all staff and students must have their sex recorded on the school system in accordance with the definition of the protected characteristic of sex in the Equality Act. There may also need to be clarification in the KCSIE that for school staff with a GRC, the record of the staff member's sex will need to be managed in accordance with the GRA.

If this isn't clarified in the KCSIE, it will likely drop through a gap.

Thanks @BonfireLady it’s a good point to add to the toilet section.

Being a total pendent I found it frustrating that this question included accommodation/ boarding but the relevant paragraphs aren’t included in the question (it’s only toilets and changing rooms, accom comes in a later section) I’ve wasted characters pointing this out 😬 I will repurpose to make a valuable point.

Ha! I had the same pedantic thoughts. I had to read the question 34 and the wording in the KCSIE paragraphs to which it referred a couple of times, to make sure I wasn't going mad.

However, I hadn't yet spotted that there is another section about accommodation, so thank you for that. I hope it doesn't contradict with the Equality Act, like the sports information does.

Ps can I also be pedantic about your spelling of the word pedant... or is that going a step too far? 😉 I'm assuming it's autocorrect that let you down here 😬😂

🤣 I was going to confess to being an atrocious speller but seeing what came out I think that must have been an auto correct special!

The residential section looks OK but I haven’t dissected it like the ST section. It definitely needs the same point making in relation to adults though

I think paragraph 273 covers this point?

"Correct information
273. Having the correct information about a child is important in the context of schools and colleges fulfilling their safeguarding duties, and they should make sure all relevant staff are aware of a child’s biological sex in all cases. Schools and colleges are legally required to record a child’s biological sex accurately wherever it is recorded."

Which is not possible to comply with if "living in stealth" as per 274 and 258.

I'm sure all the comments will be filed in the bin and the doc will sail through based on the quant data from the "yes" or "no" questions but nevertheless I find it frustrating that they only allow such short space for comment on 25 paragraphs which really need detailed explanations and links to the evidence to back up the explanations. Why ask if you don't want the answer!

ETA: "you" being DfE in this case not any posters here!

Finally reached the end of the form. There are a couple of boxes for general feedback and a final question:

61. Is there anything missing from KCSIE that would help you safeguard children more effectively?

Could be used as overspill or make the point re staff access to single sex facilities possibly?

Well done! And yes, agreed. Also about accurately recording the sex of staff. I agree that 273 covers recording it for children.... and with your points about how that doesn't work with "stealth". The same issue applies to staff being in stealth - even where it's blindingly obvious what sex a person is, if they claim to be the opposite sex (and have a passport that says they are), it amounts to the same problem.

Transgender Trend have a quick guide to completing the key sections if anyone would find it helpful:

www.transgendertrend.com/kcsie-draft-guidance-consultation/

On the topic of not allowing staff to access opposite sex dorms/toilets/changing rooms - I'm not sure this is feasible to ban, as sometimes you might be the only available adult in the area when something goes down.

Or, during the day on a residential trip, what would the issue be with a female teacher doing a tent inspection of a boys' tent?

I have a question about this, please.

110. Where a school or college provides mixed-sex toilets in addition to single sex toilets, schools and colleges should assess safeguarding risks and plan accordingly, for example, mixed-sex toilets should open directly onto public areas (e.g. a corridor).

Transgender Trend says ‘No’ to this, but mightn’t it be likely these days that a school might legitimately have a few toilets that are larger, fully self-contained rooms opening on to a corridor, for disability/no designated sex?

I would hope that the relevant laws which govern staff members in relation to opposite sex spaces cover off these scenarios. If they don't, that's quite the safeguarding fail.

I would also hope that for the first scenario there would be something written in guidance that says staff members need to loudly announce their intent to enter a facility for the opposite sex if they believe they need to enter it during an emergency.

The second one is easier as the tent is empty - if an inspection was being done while someone was in it (and could be getting changed), that would be inappropriate.

Paragraph 196 lists several documents with guidance/legislation relating to accommodation. I don't know which cover school trips have no idea which legislation covers toilets and changing rooms in schools.

Yes accessible toilets are mixed sex, self contained, private and have to open on to a circulation space precisely like all other accessible designs - because it is a ‘layer’ of supervision and prevention of misuse (in reality not that great because you can’t see what’s going on inside a private room). CCTV will be retrospective.

The unisex toilet in school design was traditionally opposite reception for the same reason.

At some point between 2020 and 2023, the DfE added a new specification point to its Generic Design Brief:

2.3.20.1g) on each floor, at least one of the toilets allocated for mainstream pupil use (i.e., not including accessible toilets) shall be designed and located so that it can be identified as gender-neutral for use by all pupils whilst ensuring pupil privacy.

Obviously we need the accessible toilets. All pupils need to access a toilet. However these are still problematical in terms of their design. In a ideal world they would be within single sex spaces but I can’t see this happening. It would require major reconfigurations to make entrances wheelchair friendly.

The reason it’s not good to have more unisex mixed sex toilets are because how and what private, mixed toilets are used for. Hidden cameras are a problem - to be honest I have more instances of staff (in double figures affecting potentially thousands of children) than pupils. All men in a variety of toilets (staff, pupil, disabled). Caretakers to headteachers struck off. The privacy and the fact there’s more equipment in such spaces (alarm boxes, mechanical ventilation grills, plumbing) means there’s the privacy and means and legitimacy to be in that space and set up a camera.

Since the DfE told me they do not hold any risk assessments or equality impact assessments on their designs (and later said neither can they tell me what’s happening inside toilets because they do not know the answer under my FOI as it involves too much work trying to find out if they could assemble the data) - I looked to schools in America where they had a similar design.

To find a comparable situation where a gender neutral toilet design has been discussed, it has been necessary to look over toAmerica, where the Gender Sexuality Alliance (GSA) ‘took on the push’ to try to establish one gender-inclusive bathroom on each floor. It should be noted that American single sex school designs typically have much bigger gaps than traditional designs used in the UK (sometimes along the sides) and are often called restrooms or bathrooms, although do not contain a bath.

The experience of a private, gender neutral toilet room on each floor of a school (directly comparable to the DfE spec) is summed up here:

‘The gender-neutral bathrooms are both horrible and amazing. I am so glad we have them, but they are disgusting, mostly because of the way students treat them. The issue mainly comes from how small and how few they are, and it’s not uncommon that the four small bathrooms are filled with sex, drugs or vaping. We need to address these problems, or the gender-neutral bathrooms will continue to be the most disgusting in the school….I consider everything in the third floor bathroom a biohazard. Almost every time I make the mistake of going in, I leave trying to purge my mind of the horrors I just witnessed. Whether it is people having sex, poop smeared on the walls, or the toilet being clogged with an entire roll of toilet paper, horrible things have happened in that bathroom.’

According to a teacher at the school above, since the number of students who need gender-neutral bathrooms is increasing, one bathroom per floor is no longer sufficient. They have more than one-quarter of our student body identifying as LGBTQ. The bathrooms are in less prominent locations than the men’s and women’s bathrooms, making it easy for students to get away with misbehaving. These bathrooms frequently end up closed and vandalized.
Again the privacy of these bathrooms is an issue. A staff member said the job can be difficult, as bathrooms are private spaces for students, ‘It’s not great because you’ve got a private space that’s publicly accessible and difficult for school staff to monitor. It’s true of any bathroom really.’

Other problems staff and students identified with the gender neutral bathrooms were:
•a continuing issue of faculty monitoring is allotting time to stand in front of a doorway for long periods of time during the school day: ‘I just don’t have enough staff to have people sitting outside of the bathroom.’
•the possible discomfort students may face regarding their identity: ‘Especially for students who aren’t out, if they feel like they are being monitored walking into the bathrooms and getting questioned about their motives in the bathrooms, it can make people feel uncomfortable. That can have a big impact on people’s mental state.’
•Students are not comfortable using them due to state they are left in so will not go to the bathroom at all during the day. They are ‘full’, ‘too gross to use’, ‘filled with vaping at least twice a week’.
•To have enough gender neutral bathrooms for each floor would take a classroom’s worth of space.
•Creative ways of trying to reducing substance use in the bathrooms, such as posters and literature, have been met with resistance and defaced and torn off.
•The suggestion of more cameras around the corridors and common spaces was tempered by the fact they can’t be put inside the bathrooms.
•Students being late to class due to not being able to access the bathroom.

Being America, there’s a business offering a solution! I looked at this system because some schools are now using it over here. Notice the link between key words and the private, mixed sex design. The suggested key words in many of these systems include ‘stop it’ and ‘help me’:

“Smart Sensor Technology Is Keeping Single-Use Bathrooms in Schools Secure

Single-use restrooms in schools are becoming prime real estate for students to vape, vandalize, and more due to the lack of monitoring and witnesses in these restrooms. The shift of schools switching to single-use or gender-neutral restrooms further complicates the security of the school restrooms. This often leads to school restrooms being used for prohibited activities, such as loitering, bullying and aggression, unpermitted vaping, and even as extreme as drug usage and sexual activity. Devices like the HALO Smart Sensor are designed to help keep all school bathrooms safe through:

• Vape and THC detection
• Aggression and vandalism detection
• Motion and occupancy detection
• Alerts for Keywords, Panic Buttons and Occupancy counts
• Keeping bathrooms secure while also protecting the privacy of individuals”

To date the most reliable data the U.K. Parliament discussed was in 2016 (from a journalist contacting every police force) who said there were 600 rapes reported in British schools within a 3 year period. It’s difficult to establish where these happened and there’s lots of caveats to this figure. However it is obvious these are happening in private spaces. As an ex-teacher I was pretty shocked. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmwomeq/91/9105.htm

‘Everyone’s Invited’ do mention school toilets as the location of sexual assaults, including disabled toilets (the longstanding mixed sex private toilet space). Ofsted published the Review of sexual abuse in schools and colleges (2021). They said ‘It is hard to get an accurate picture of the scale and nature of sexual harassment and violence between children and young people in schools and colleges, as there is no centralised data collection …’
Ofsted said the problem of sexual abuse was so widespread, and incidents are so commonplace that ‘It recommends that schools, colleges and multi-agency partners act as though sexual harassment and online sexual abuse are happening, even when there are no specific reports’. ‘Children…especially girls…do not want to talk about sexual abuse for several reasons, even when their school encourages them to. For example the risk of being ostracised by peers or getting peers into trouble is not considered to be worth it…They think they will not be believed, or that they will be blamed. They also think that once they talk to an adult, the process will be out of their control.’

We don’t need more mixed sex, private spaces in schools.

P.s. did someone mention a character limit!

Thank you very much.

None of these detailed reasons are given by Transgender Trend in their advice re 110. in the consultation, but I can see from you that the answer to the current proposal should indeed be “No” as they suggest.

1200 😱

😱 I haven’t even tried to start writing about toilets for this yet. It pains me to work out how to cut my research down. That’s abridged and a cut and paste from a longer document 😬 with more facts.

I know, it’s really frustrating that they aren’t enabling meaningful feedback. I’ve addressed this point in response to Q61 (is anything missing).

we can’t explain our point without context and references and there isn’t space to do this

Are hyperlinks allowed?

I don’t think they’ll work. Links haven’t pasted as links in mine and I’ve had to remove all the links I wanted to include as just too many characters

Don’t take my word for it though

I suppose a quick version, off the top of my head, is something like:

To design-out crime you need to look at the design and the crime. Toilets are very sensitive spaces known for sex, drugs and vandalism eg. sexual activity in a toilet is a specific crime under Sexual Offences Act 2003 (71). They are the place pupils go when they feel ill, physically and/or mentally.

All available evidence suggests mixed sex, completely private spaces in schools should be reduced as much as possible, rather than increased, for reasons of safeguarding and health. Risk assessments and equality impact assessments on adding these completely private, mixed sex designs need to be done for: sexual assaults on girls, children who may self-harm, medical emergencies such as seizures, hypos and drug overdoses, children with invisible disabilities and medical conditions, disease control, cleaning costs, supervision costs, vandalism and building evacuation times. These should be done before considering this as policy.

——————
Please put the above in your own words though if you agree and want to comment.

I hope they will be using software to screen out mass replies that are all the same. With the toilet consultation for document T so many thousands of people cut and pasted Stonewall et al advice, they accounted for most responses and skewed the data.The government analysis showed 79% percent of responses mentioned safety concerns for trans/non-binary people. Fewer than 5% of responses mentioned safety concerns for one of the following groups: girls, boys, children, men, or disabled people. Safety concerns for women were mentioned in 75% of responses; 88% of the responses which mentioned safety concerns of women, specifically mentioned black women, lesbians, and butch women. Which looking at which organisations these specific phrases came from suggests an interesting association with mass cut-and-pastes. The consultation analysis also showed a strong association with making toilet cubicles completely private which is typically the bad solution to a mixed sex washroom outside the toilet cubicle, or only having unisex toilets. Obviously it’s fine to advocate for your cause but the health and safety implications need to be assessed with evidence. Needs not wants.