What should a nursery do when an unauthorised person tries to collect a child?

Keep the child in the nursery's care while authority is checked

An adult arrives at reception and says they are collecting a child because the usual parent is delayed. The adult knows the child's name and room. The receptionist does not recognise them and the collection record does not list them. The nursery should keep the child safely with staff while a designated person verifies the request. Knowledge of the child's name, a photograph on a phone or a claimed family relationship is not the same as the parent's explicit notification to the provider. Do not send the child to reception to help decide whether the adult is familiar.

The current EYFS framework for group and school-based providers says at paragraph 3.89 that children are only released into the care of individuals of whom the parent or carer has explicitly notified the provider. It also requires children not to leave the premises unsupervised, reasonable steps to prevent unauthorised entry and an agreed visitor identity procedure. These are practical safeguards at the handover point. The manager should apply the setting's collection and safeguarding policy without treating a persuasive story as a new authorisation.

Ask the adult to wait in the permitted visitor area, away from children. If they are calm, explain that the nursery must confirm the arrangement before release. A staff member should check the current authorised-collector record, any day-specific instruction and any safeguarding restriction. Another staff member should maintain supervision of the child and room. If the adult becomes threatening, tries to enter the childcare area or takes hold of a child, summon help and contact police through the appropriate emergency route. Staff should follow their safety training rather than physically confronting a dangerous person because this page says to “stop” them.

This article owns the attempted handover to an unauthorised adult. The child unaccounted for during room transition draft owns an absence discovered during movement between rooms. A child actually taken or missing may require that emergency workflow as well. The Complys EYFS overview owns general framework awareness. This page should not become a generic treatment of all parental responsibility disputes.

Verify through a trusted route

Use a contact channel already held by the setting for the parent or carer who can give collection instructions. Do not call only a number supplied by the unknown adult at the desk. A fraudulent or mistaken caller can sound convincing. If the parent answers, confirm the proposed collector's identity, the child, the date and the time, and any conditions in the current record. Follow the nursery's documented method for recording a one-off permission. The EYFS requires explicit notification, so a vague message that “someone will come” may not be enough for a safe handover.

Check whether the person giving permission is entitled to do so under the child's current plan. The family file may contain a court order, safeguarding restriction or agreed contact arrangement. Front-line staff should not interpret complicated legal documents alone. Escalate to the designated safeguarding lead and obtain legal or local safeguarding advice where the position is unclear. A parent who normally collects the child may not be able to override a current restriction through a rushed telephone call. Conversely, staff should not assume that an adult lacks parental responsibility merely because their name is absent from a convenience list. The safe response is to hold the child in care and verify the actual authority.

Keep the records current and accessible to the people who need them. A manager may know about a recent court direction while the late-shift practitioner sees an older paper form. Where an update is received, record who provided it, when it takes effect, which child it concerns and who checked it. Mark superseded instructions clearly without destroying the history needed to explain a previous decision. Restrict sensitive family information to staff with a professional need. A simple operational flag can say “refer to safeguarding lead before release” without giving every receptionist the full court file.

If the parent cannot be reached, continue caring for the child and follow the late-collection and safeguarding procedure. Do not release the child because the nursery is closing or because the adult offers to wait in the car. Escalate to the manager. If the adult leaves, record a description and any statements relevant to risk. If the child was at risk from the adult, seek safeguarding and police advice. No fixed waiting period in this article overrides the setting's emergency procedures or a child-specific plan.

A familiar adult can still need fresh confirmation

A grandparent may have collected the child last month but no longer be authorised. Another adult may be on a general list but a parent has issued a specific restriction for today. Staff should use the current record, not memory. Check photo identification if the setting's procedure requires it, but do not assume an ID card proves the right to collect. It proves who the person is. Authorisation answers a different question. Both identity and permission need to be sufficient for the case.

Where a parent sends an app message, verify the account and content through the approved channel. A screenshot forwarded by the collector is weak evidence because it may be old or altered. A call from a known number can help, but number display can also be misleading. The setting should define a proportionate method that works in normal operations and escalates exceptional risk. Staff need to know the method before a busy pick-up period, rather than inventing it under pressure.

A disputed family arrangement needs specialist review

If two adults give conflicting instructions, do not settle the dispute at reception. Keep the child with staff, protect privacy and ask the designated lead to check the current documents and legal advice. Do not tell one adult the child's location or the other adult's contact details unless the safeguarding plan permits that information. Record what each adult said in their own words. A court order may have detailed conditions, dates and exceptions. This article cannot determine who has legal authority in an individual case. The nursery should obtain advice from its legal or safeguarding support and, where necessary, police.

Manage access and conflict without exposing children

Keep the visitor boundary clear. The EYFS premises provision at paragraph 3.89 requires reasonable steps to prevent unauthorised persons entering and an agreed procedure for checking visitor identity. A reception door that is opened for every familiar-looking adult can defeat the collection rule before anyone reaches the register. Staff should know who controls entry, what to do when several families arrive together and how to prevent tailgating without leaving children unsupervised.

If the adult becomes angry, avoid debating the family history in public. Move the conversation to a safe area if possible and bring a manager. Keep another staff member with the children. If the adult threatens staff, tries to force entry or attempts to take the child, call police and follow the nursery's emergency plan. Make a factual note of words and actions, not a diagnosis of the adult's state. Do not use an ordinary collection delay as grounds to label a person dangerous. The response should match the observed risk.

If an unauthorised person gains access to the childcare area, consider every child's safety. Move children away from the incident, count them and ensure a safe exit route. The setting may need to pause collection temporarily so staff can verify who is with each child. If a child is taken or their location becomes unknown, activate the missing-child and police procedure immediately. Preserve CCTV or access logs where lawfully held. Do not let a desire to capture evidence delay protective action.

Brief staff at the handover point without broadcasting sensitive details. A concise description of the adult and the instruction to refer any attempt to the safeguarding lead may be needed. A photograph should be used only if lawful, necessary and handled under the setting's privacy controls. Do not circulate a child's family dispute to an unrestricted staff chat. If police are involved, record the incident reference and any advice about contact or evidence.

Tell the parent and record the attempt accurately

Contact the appropriate parent or carer using the established channel. Explain who attended, what they requested, what staff did, whether they entered the premises or saw the child, and whether any information was disclosed. If the adult left before verification, say so. Do not imply the child was nearly taken if the adult remained outside and the child was never approached. Equally, do not say the event was harmless if a gate was breached or an existing restriction was ignored.

The incident record should contain the time, location, staff on duty, adult's claimed identity, words used, identity documents viewed, authorisation record checked, calls made and decision. It should record the child's location and welfare and the effect on other children. Separate fact from interpretation. “The adult shouted and pushed the reception door” is more useful than “aggressive relative” without details. Note if a colleague recognised the person and from where, but keep that as a witness account rather than proof of current permission.

If the adult produced a message or document, record how it was verified. Do not copy identity documents or private messages without a lawful need and a secure storage method. A notation that ID was checked may be sufficient under the provider's policy. Follow data protection and retention procedures. The child may later need an account of what happened; maintain a clear record while keeping access proportionate.

Offer a follow-up conversation to the parent when the immediate issue is resolved. Ask whether the authorised-collector list, emergency contacts or safeguarding plan need updating. If an adult's authority has changed, request the proper evidence and document the effective date. Avoid a vague instruction such as “never let them collect again” without checking who can issue it and whether a court order changes the position. Seek specialist advice where conflict persists.

Assess safeguarding and Ofsted reporting separately

An attempted unauthorised collection can be a safeguarding concern even if the child remains safe inside. The designated safeguarding lead should consider the child's known circumstances, threats, access attempt and any information shared. A referral to local safeguarding partners or police may be needed. A routine mistake, such as an aunt arriving before a parent's one-off message, may have a different risk profile. Document the decision and advice. Do not force all events into the same reporting outcome.

Ofsted's significant-event guidance gives “an unauthorised person gained access to the childcare premises” as an example of an event where children may have been at risk. It also lists a child able to leave or missing for any period. The mere arrival of an unapproved collector outside a secure entrance is not identical to gaining access or a child leaving. The registered provider must judge the facts and current notification criteria. Ofsted's serious-incident service says reportable significant events should be notified as soon as possible and within 14 days.

Record the Ofsted assessment even if the answer is no. Did the adult enter a controlled area, reach a child, obtain information, make a threat or trigger a police or safeguarding response? Was there a failure in the provider's security or handover controls? What was the potential risk to the child? Who decided and when? If new facts emerge, revisit the decision. Do not wait until day 14 to decide whether a serious event should be reported. The official significant-event page still contains a paragraph cross-reference from the earlier framework, so the publication reviewer should verify the exact current EYFS paragraph rather than copying that number.

An allegation of harm, a child actually taken, an injury or an incident affecting someone's suitability may create further duties. Those are separate facts and routes. A submission to Ofsted does not replace a police call or local safeguarding referral. A call to police does not itself decide whether Ofsted must be notified. The manager should record each route with its own reason and reference. This avoids a single vague note saying only “authorities informed.”

Investigate how the attempt met the handover process

After the child is safe, reconstruct the path the adult took. How did they enter the building? Were visitors screened? Who could see the child from reception? Did the adult know the room because a sign displayed it or because someone disclosed it? Did a practitioner begin to bring the child forward before the collector was checked? Were there multiple children with similar names? Did shift change or a queue cause staff to rely on recognition? A safe process should verify identity and permission before the child reaches the release point.

Review the authorisation information used that day. Was it current, complete and available to the late-shift team? Did it distinguish routine collectors from one-off permissions? Could staff see restrictions without reading an entire sensitive file in front of the queue? Was the parent message attached to the correct child and date? Did a cancelled permission remain visible as active? Do not blame a practitioner for following an outdated screen if the provider failed to maintain the record. Correct the information system as well as training.

Examine the physical design. A child may be visible through the entrance window. A parent may hold the door open for the next adult. A gate code may be widely shared. Delivery staff may use the same entrance. A camera or buzzer can assist, but only if someone monitors it and staff know how to challenge a visitor. A security change must also respect fire escape and accessibility. Seek competent premises advice for locks, barriers and alarms. Do not add a bolt that traps children or blocks evacuation.

Consider the child's individual needs. A child may run toward a familiar voice or have difficulty understanding why they cannot leave with an adult. A plan should keep the child in a supervised, calm area without making them responsible for the adult's behaviour. The child's key person may need to provide reassurance. Do not question the child repeatedly about family relationships or ask them to arbitrate whether the visitor is trusted. A child may recognise someone who is still not authorised to collect them.

Test a release process that staff can use at peak time

Write the collection process as a small number of observable steps: identify the adult, check current permission, resolve exceptions through a trusted parent channel and designated lead, then release and record the handover. Specify where the child waits during verification and who supervises the room. Include a fallback when the digital system is unavailable. Staff should know how to hold the child safely if the nursery is closing and the parent is unreachable.

Rehearse an exception with the real late-shift team. A person known to one practitioner arrives but is absent from the current list. Can staff politely pause release and reach a manager? Is the trusted parent number available? Can they check a day-specific instruction without opening unrelated family records? Does the manager know where the court-order or safeguarding alert is stored? Is there a safe place for the adult to wait? Time the exercise and improve the workflow if it depends on one unavailable administrator.

Observe an ordinary busy collection period. Does verification happen before a child moves toward the door? Are staff distracted by multiple simultaneous departures? Can a person follow another family through the entrance? Are names spoken loudly enough for strangers to hear? Can a child leave with a relative while the practitioner is still updating the register? Use the observation to change positions, signage, access control or record design. A signed policy does not prove the release sequence works.

Where the incident exposed a one-off error, check a sample of later handovers. Where it exposed a systemic issue, consider a wider review of authorisation records and premises access. Do not ask all parents to reconfirm everything unless that is the best proportionate response. Target the specific weakness. The manager should set an owner, due date, evidence of correction and review date. Keep interim safeguards until the permanent change has been observed in normal use.

A handover decision record

The record should show both the immediate decision and later learning. If a parent subsequently confirms that they had intended to authorise the adult, retain the original lack of notification and add the later confirmation. Do not alter the time line to suggest permission existed at the desk. If staff made a safe refusal, recognise that the process worked, while still checking whether communication could improve. If someone gained access, keep that fact visible even if no child was taken.

Complys product truth and practical next step

The live Complys EYFS guide covers broad compliance responsibilities. Product review must verify any proposed action-register or document-control feature before this page claims it. This draft does not claim that Complys verifies identity, holds court orders, manages authorised collectors, locks doors, contacts police or Ofsted, or decides safeguarding and family-law questions. Those tasks remain with the provider and relevant professionals.

A useful related tool could be a collection exception worksheet for staff. It would prompt them to keep the child supervised, record the adult's claim, check current permission through a trusted channel, escalate restrictions and record the handover or refusal. It should not produce an automatic “safe to release” verdict or store sensitive family details without a product and privacy review. The tool should be tested at the actual collection point before release.

CTA: Walk through a busy pick-up with the late-shift team. Ask them to show how they check an unfamiliar collector, a cancelled permission and a conflicting family instruction. Fix the first point where the child can reach the door before identity and authority are verified. Seek safeguarding and legal review before publishing this draft or using it as an individual case instruction.