Mossbourne Academy schools’ complaints and safeguarding procedures ‘generally fit for purpose’ according to review

Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy. Photograph: Wikicommons

A review into the complaints and safeguarding procedures at Mossbourne Academy Schools has found they are ‘generally fit for purpose’ but suggests a number of changes the group could make to improve parent engagement and relations.

There are four Mossbourne Academy Schools in Hackney – secondary schools Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy and Mossbourne Community Academy, and primary schools Mossbourne Parkside Academy and Mossbourne Riverside Academy.

The school academy trust is known for its impressive academic results, made possible in part, it claims, thanks to its strict Pupil Behaviour Policy. However, some of its policies have proven controversial.

In April 2025, Mossbourne Members’ Trust commissioned an independent review conducted by barrister and part-time judge, Anne Whyte KC, in a bid to ‘increase public confidence in the application of its own internal procedures’ after a series of complaints by parents were submitted to Hackney Council’s education directorate.

Whyte found “the complaints policy and child protection and safeguarding policy are fit for purpose and broadly comply with current statutory requirements.”

However, she noted among other things that the process for submitting complaints about staff conduct towards pupils lacked clarity.

She said parents and carers had not been permitted to contact the secondary schools via email to raise complaints or concerns, and that, unlike in some schools, parents were not able to contact staff directly by phone.

Instead, parents and carers with concerns or complaints were asked to call the school reception or leave a note in students’ planners. Ms Whyte noted that some parents had not used the planner as intended, while some parents complained of not being able to get through to reception, citing ‘congested telephone access.’

“Parents’ ability to contact teachers and staff is indirect and sometimes inefficient,” the review said.

She added that “in 2025, it might be said that there should be no impediment to receiving  complaints by email as it represents an unjustified barrier.”

Ms Whyte found that while some parents expressed dissatisfaction with the length of time it had taken to receive a response from the school following a complaint, others had failed to make their complaints known to the school at all.

“A not insignificant number [of parents] felt that their expression of concern was met with an unreceptive response,” the review said.

“Obviously, I had no way of testing the accuracy of this in an individual case. Furthermore, the quality and respectfulness of a response from an individual staff member is not something that is easily monitored or controlled.

“This was a sufficiently recurring theme for me to conclude that the speed and content of communications following a contact from a parent was not always as satisfactory as it could be.”

Whyte also recommended that the school’s system of complaints record-keeping “should be expanded and developed.”

While the primary schools Mossbourne Parkside Academy and Mossbourne Riverside Academy have each introduced a ‘tracker or spreadsheet of concerns and complaints,’ at the secondary schools Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy and Mossbourne Community Academy, “complaints are not collated in such a way that would enable someone to  provide a breakdown of the numbers or categories of complaints.”

Stage One complaints – complaints made informally with the hope of a quick resolution – are not recorded at all, while complaints that progress beyond this stage are only recorded per pupil.

“Short of going through each individual pupil file, this prevented the schools from providing me with specific information, such as the number of complaints relating  to pupil welfare, the stage at which complaints had been resolved, whether complaints  disproportionately related to SEND pupils etc,” the review said.

Ms Whyte offered six key recommendations to Mossbourne leaders: 

• make the complaints policy more accessible and visible; 
• improve complaint recording and tracking;
• strengthen staff training on communication; 
• improve communication channels with parents including enabling email enquiries and improved call handling; 
• provide more clarity about the parent/staff communication policy and use communications to increase transparency about school life; 
• ensure public messaging from the schools and Federation (including messaging around the Pupil Behaviour Policy and Complaints Policy) reflects a culture of openness and fairness.

In a letter to parents and carers, Mossbourne Federation member Daniel Flitterman said Mossbourne Members’ Trust ‘fully accepts’ the findings of the review and outlined its next steps.

Mossbourne Community Academy. Photograph: Tarquin Binary / Wikicommons

“In summary, the review finds that while the schools’ policies were generally fit for purpose, there is scope to strengthen the form and substance of communications and to improve engagement with parents both generally and when responding to concerns or complaints,” the letter reads.

“The schools have already begun implementing them with the support of the Members’ Trust Board, and a task force has been established to oversee this work and agree a roadmap for implementation.”

Victoria Ward Cllr Penny Wrout said: “In an establishment like Mossbourne that strives for excellence, having a ready means to make continuous improvements, based on sound data, is important.

“It’s good to learn the Federation has accepted the report in full, and will be changing the way it monitors and uses complaints data. Other Hackney schools may be able to learn from this too.”

Cllr Wrout added Ms Whyte’s recommendation regarding complaint recording and tracking “stands out.”

“The schools had no easy way of reviewing complaints data meaningfully, to determine any patterns highlighting recurring issues or problems,” she added.

The review was commissioned by the Mossbourne Federation on the advice of the Department for Education, after two dossiers of concerns were submitted by the parent of a student at Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy to Hackney Education, Hackney Council’s education directorate, in 2024. The first, submitted towards the beginning of the year, contained 30 anonymised concerns, while the second contained more than 250.

Parent Andy Leary-May has been vocal about some of the alleged issues his eldest son faced during his time at the school.

He heads up the Educating Hackney campaign, set up in 2024 “to draw attention to links between the way behaviour policies are implemented in some schools, and potential consequences for children’s wellbeing, including their mental health and school attendance.”

Of the review, he said: “This report shows how parents often felt that raising concerns was futile or counterproductive, which is why the families most impacted may have stayed away from a review commissioned by the school itself.

“Most parents had tried desperately hard to help their children by appealing directly to the school, but there is still a suggestion that this didn’t happen. Along with Mossbourne’s responses to the broader concern this doesn’t build confidence.”

Ms Whyte’s review said many of these concerns and complaints had not been raised with the school prior to being presented to Hackney Education.

The Mossbourne Federation previously made headlines after current and former pupils, parents and former staff members alleged a ‘toxic culture’ had been perpetuated at some of its schools – particularly Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy, where a local statutory safeguarding review by City & Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership is ongoing.

This investigation is entirely separate from Whyte’s review and, given the remit of her own review, she made only passing references to the allegations where it pertained to the schools’ complaints process.

Cllr Wrout added: “We now await the results of the safeguarding review into Mossbourne Victoria Park in my own ward, conducted by the City and Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership which had more access to the original allegations, to see what conclusions it draws. 

“Similarly, I am looking forward to reading a review of school behaviour policies across the borough, by the Council’s children and young people’s scrutiny commission. All this work is important to ensure that Hackney has emotionally healthy schools.”