EdSafe

How I work

The aim is focused intervention, not minimal involvement

I work at points where leadership decisions carry real consequence — such as platform adoption, AI use, or digital considerations intersecting with safeguarding and wellbeing.

My involvement focuses on judgement and accountability: supporting leadership teams in deciding what genuinely requires formal structure, and what can be addressed through clear reasoning and proportionate evidence without unnecessary compliance activity.

The aim is focused intervention, not minimal involvement — enabling decisions leaders can explain, evidence, and stand behind under scrutiny.

Recommending proportionality and defensible governance.

I work proportionately within the governance expectations of data protection, privacy, and AI, focusing on the context and consequence of the decision rather than maximal or theoretical interpretations of regulation.

Where additional structure does not materially improve governance defensibility, I will not recommend it.

Judgement before process

Within data protection, privacy, and AI governance, process is only valuable when it follows a clear decision.

My role is to support leadership teams in first establishing:

  • what decision is actually being made,

  • what accountability it creates,

  • and what evidence is reasonably required to support it.

Only then does formal process have purpose. Where process does not materially strengthen decision defensibility, I will advise against expanding it.

Decisions that can be explained, evidenced, and stood behind

Accountability for decisions remains with school leadership.

My role is not to take responsibility away from schools, but to support leadership teams in reaching decisions they can explain, evidence, and stand behind if later questioned by boards, parents, inspectors, or regulators.

This preserves leadership authority while ensuring decisions are taken with a clear understanding of consequence and scrutiny.

Boundaries

Clarity in governance also comes from being explicit about where support begins and ends.

What I will do

I will:

  • Support leadership teams in framing and testing difficult decisions

  • Help clarify what genuinely needs governing, and what does not

  • Reduce unnecessary compliance activity that adds burden without improving defensibility

  • Apply independent, context-aware judgement at points of consequence

  • Step in where decisions are unclear, contested, or exposed to scrutiny

  • Provide targeted staff-facing briefings or talks where this supports shared understanding of governance decisions, expectations, or boundaries

This support is deliberate, focused, and time-bound.

What I won’t do

I won’t:

  • Offer blanket compliance, total coverage, or the elimination of all risk

  • Act as a substitute for a DPO, legal adviser, or internal leadership role

  • Implement systems, tools, training programmes, or operational controls

  • Produce documentation solely to create reassurance

  • Remain involved once sufficient clarity and defensibility has been achieved

Knowing when to stop is part of the work.