KCSIE, Duty of Care, and Concussion: What Headteachers Need to Know in 2026

Key takeaways

• KCSIE does not mention concussion by name, but head injury during school sport falls squarely within its safeguarding and duty-of-care framework.
• The current 2026 edition of Keeping Children Safe in Education, effective September 2026, reinforces the expectation that schools have documented, operable safeguarding procedures for all foreseeable physical risks.
• The UK Concussion Guidelines for Grassroots Sport (Sport and Recreation Alliance, November 2024 update) set the clinical standard; KCSIE sets the governance expectation that the standard is actually followed.
• Governors have a specific oversight responsibility, and most have not been briefed on concussion governance as a safeguarding matter.
• A documented concussion framework is the practical bridge between legal duty and demonstrable practice.

---

The start of a new academic year is when safeguarding procedures get reviewed, updated, and signed off. For most schools, that means reading the latest edition of Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) and updating policies accordingly. What many headteachers do not realise is that concussion sits inside this conversation, not alongside it. Getting this wrong is no longer a theoretical risk; it is an increasingly scrutinised gap.

This article explains exactly where concussion sits within the KCSIE framework, what the 2026 edition adds, and what a headteacher needs to have in place before the first rugby or football fixture of the year.

---

Does KCSIE actually mention concussion?

Not directly. The 2026 edition of Keeping Children Safe in Education does not include the word concussion. What it does do, in detail, is establish that schools must safeguard children from all foreseeable harm, including physical harm arising from school activities, and that this duty requires documented procedures, trained staff, and evidence of implementation.

Sport is a school activity. Head injury during sport is foreseeable. The logical chain is not difficult to follow, and it is the chain that inspectors follow too.

The KCSIE 2026 edition retains the emphasis on:

• The designated safeguarding lead (DSL) having oversight of all safeguarding procedures.
• Governing bodies and proprietors having strategic responsibility for safeguarding effectiveness.
• Schools being able to demonstrate that procedures are not just written but practiced.

Each of those requirements applies to concussion management as directly as it applies to any other safeguarding domain.

---

What does "duty of care" actually mean for concussion?

The legal basis for a school's duty of care in sport arises from common law (the neighbour principle established in Donoghue v Stevenson and its descendants) and from the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, which applies to employees and extends to pupils in school settings. This is not abstract: it means a school must take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm.

The courts have generally interpreted "reasonable steps" by reference to the standard that a reasonable professional in that role would follow. For concussion, the benchmark is now clearly set by the UK Concussion Guidelines for Grassroots Sport (Sport and Recreation Alliance, November 2024 update). A school that does not follow this standard - or cannot demonstrate that it does - is exposed.

The important word is "demonstrate." Having a policy buried in a shared drive that no staff member has read is not the same as demonstrable duty of care. KCSIE's emphasis on evidence of practice, not just policy, directly mirrors what the civil courts ask about when these cases arise.

---

What the 2026 KCSIE edition means in practice for concussion

The 2026 edition continues the trajectory of recent editions: moving from a compliance mindset (have you got a policy?) to a practice mindset (can you show it works?). Three specific expectations matter here.

Training and awareness. KCSIE expects staff who work with children to have appropriate safeguarding training for their role. A PE teacher or games coach who has not received concussion identification training is an identifiable gap. The CRT6 concussion recognition tool, endorsed by the Concussion in Sport Group and referenced in the UK Grassroots Guidelines, takes around fifteen minutes to learn. There is no reasonable case for omitting it from induction or annual safeguarding training for sports staff.

The DSL's oversight. The DSL is not expected to manage every concussion; that sits with sports staff and, where available, school nurses or first aiders. But the DSL is expected to have oversight of procedures in domains where children face foreseeable harm. Concussion is that domain. Most DSLs have not been briefed on concussion management as part of their safeguarding remit. Rectifying that is a straightforward conversation, and it should happen at the start of this term.

Governor scrutiny. KCSIE is explicit that governors and trustees have strategic oversight of safeguarding effectiveness. They are entitled, and in some readings obliged, to ask whether the school has a documented, reviewed concussion procedure. If that question was asked at your last governor meeting and no one had a confident answer, that is the gap to close first. Section 7 below sets out the questions governors should put to the headteacher.

---

Where most schools fall short

After reviewing concussion governance across UK schools, the same gaps surface repeatedly.

A policy exists but no one can find it. The policy is written, perhaps well-written, but staff cannot locate it in the moment they need it. A sideline protocol that lives in a staff handbook nobody reads is not a working protocol.

Training has not reached non-PE staff. The school nurse, form tutors, and cover supervisors will interact with a concussed child during the recovery period. They need to know what to watch for and who to tell. Most have had no briefing.

Return to sport is treated as a medical sign-off, not a documented process. Many schools treat concussion as a matter of "GP says fit to return, job done." The UK Grassroots Guidelines require a six-stage graduated return-to-sport (GRAS) process with a minimum 21-day stand-down for confirmed concussion in under-18s. A GP letter does not replace this; it supplements it.

Documentation is absent or sparse. When the question arises about what the school did after a head injury incident, the answer needs to be on paper. Date and time of incident, symptoms observed, action taken, parent contacted, clinical referral, return-to-sport stages completed. The absence of this record is a problem in both safeguarding reviews and, potentially, legal proceedings.

Fixture and away-game protocols have not been considered. A child sustains a suspected concussion on an away fixture at another school's ground. Who is responsible for following the protocol? Who has the CRT6? Who contacts the parents? Most schools have not written this scenario into their procedure.

---

What a headteacher needs to have in place

The practical checklist below is not exhaustive, but it covers the minimum an inspector or insurer would expect to find.

A written concussion policy, reviewed within the last twelve months, covering identification, immediate management, return to school, and return to sport. It should name the roles responsible at each stage, not just describe the stages.

Evidence of staff training, at a minimum for all coaches, PE staff, and the school nurse. Training records, dated and signed, filed alongside the policy.

A documented return-to-sport process, aligned to the UK Grassroots Guidelines' GRAS protocol. This is not discretionary; it is the standard a reasonable professional would follow.

A concussion log, recording every suspected or confirmed concussion incident, including the steps taken and the dates of each GRAS stage.

Governor sign-off, recorded in governor meeting minutes, that the policy has been reviewed and the above elements are in place.

Schools using the Luca Safe Concussion Framework have this structure built into an operational system rather than having to construct it from scratch. The framework maps directly onto the UK Grassroots Guidelines and the KCSIE governance expectations, which is why it is the tool of choice for an increasing number of UK independent and maintained schools.

---

Questions governors should ask the headteacher

These five questions will surface any meaningful gap within a single agenda item.

1. Can you show me our current written concussion policy and confirm when it was last reviewed?
2. Which staff members have received concussion identification training, and when was it last updated?
3. Can you describe the return-to-sport process we follow after a confirmed concussion, and where it is documented?
4. How many concussion incidents have we recorded in the last twelve months, and can you show me the records?
5. Does our concussion procedure cover away fixtures and external coaching providers?

A confident, specific answer to all five suggests the school is in a defensible position. Hesitation or vague answers on any of them identifies where to focus before the first match.

---

Concussion as a safeguarding matter, not just a medical one

The most important mindset shift for school leadership is this: concussion is not a sporting inconvenience or a purely clinical matter. It is a safeguarding issue. A child who sustains a head injury at school, is returned to play too early, and goes on to suffer harm has been failed by the school's safeguarding procedures, not just by a medical protocol.

KCSIE's framework exists precisely for this kind of gap, and the 2026 edition makes the evidence-of-practice standard clearer than ever. The good news is that the clinical standard is published, free, and not complex. The UK Concussion Guidelines for Grassroots Sport (Sport and Recreation Alliance, November 2024 update) set out clearly what good looks like. The job for school leadership is to embed it, train to it, document it, and be able to show the evidence when asked.

---

What to do before the first fixture

1. Pull your current concussion policy. If it is more than twelve months old or does not reference the November 2024 UK Grassroots Guidelines, update it now.
2. Book a thirty-minute briefing for your DSL on concussion as a safeguarding domain.
3. Confirm that all sports staff have completed the CRT6 training (available free via the Concussion in Sport Group website).
4. Check that your policy covers away fixtures and external coaching providers.
5. Set up a concussion log if you do not already have one, even a simple spreadsheet will do for now.
6. Put concussion governance on the next governor agenda as a standing item, not a one-off.

---

Practical takeaway

The new academic year is the right moment to close this gap. The clinical guidance is clear, the governance expectation is established, and the cost of not acting is rising. Start with your policy, move to your training records, and make sure your governors have been briefed. If you want a structured starting point, the Luca Safe Concussion Framework is free to download and covers every element above.

---

Photo: Ian S, CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Sources

1. Department for Education. Keeping Children Safe in Education 2026. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/keeping-children-safe-in-education--2
2. Sport and Recreation Alliance. UK Concussion Guidelines for Grassroots Sport (November 2024 update). https://sportandrecreation.org.uk/files/uk-concussion-guidelines-for-grassroots-non-elite-sport---november-2024-update-061124084139.pdf
3. Concussion in Sport Group. CRT6 and SCAT6 Tools. https://concussioninsportgroup.com/scat-tools/
4. Health and Safety Executive. Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. https://www.hse.gov.uk/legislation/hswa.htm

---

Audit your current concussion policy against the seven domains of the Luca Safe Concussion Framework, free to download at /lscf/. It is built around the UK Grassroots Concussion Guidelines and the KCSIE governance expectations, giving your school the documented, operational standard that inspectors, insurers, and governors are increasingly asking to see.