In 2025, ABC's Four Corners aired an investigation exposing serious failures in the Australian childcare sector. One aspect of the reporting revealed that some childcare workers had alleged or proven histories of child sexual offences and that weaknesses in recruitment, supervision and regulatory oversight meant that these individuals were able to work across multiple services undetected.
Regulators' data showed large numbers of expired, unverified or missing Working with Children Checks, highlighting systemic gaps in basic safeguards.
Schools manage the same underlying risks as early learning centres; access, trust, authority and opportunities for unobserved contact with children.
A Working with Children Check (WWCC) is best understood as a risk filter, not a guarantee. While it is designed to screen out people with known, recorded risks, it is unable to identify all individuals who may pose a risk to children.
In Australia, there are eight different schemes across the states and territories, each with different rules, thresholds and data sources. The outcome of a WWCC can differ depending on where a person applies and what information is available.
Critically, not all concerning behaviour ever appears on a criminal record. Many forms of grooming, boundary violations or inappropriate conduct are never reported to the police or prosecuted or take years to result in a conviction.
This is why schools should not treat a valid WWCC as the beginning and end of the screening process. It must sit alongside strong recruitment practices, careful referee checks, constant supervision and a culture where concerning behaviours are noticed and acted on promptly.
Governments across Australia have committed to strengthening employment screening and regulatory oversight. One key reform, 'banned in one, banned in all', aims for mutual recognition of negative notices, so that where a person is barred from working with children in one jurisdiction, that decision is recognised nationally.
Governments are also focusing on stronger information sharing pathways and the development of a national continuous checking capability to improve how new risk information is identified and acted on after a person has already been cleared.
These changes sit within a broader reform agenda, including the continued implementation of the Child Safe Standards. Queensland has mandated implementation of the Child Safe Standards on 1 January, 2026 for the education sector.
For schools, this means clearer expectations and increased scrutiny around how child safe practices are embedded, documented and reviewed.
At a governance level, boards and executive teams are being asked harder questions. Not just 'Do you have a WWCC?', but 'Show us your recruitment, induction, supervision and oversight systems.'
Regulators are looking for evidence that Child Safe Standards are understood, embedded and practised through supervision, reporting and culture, not simply written down.
Position descriptions and employment advertisements should highlight commitment to child safety and reference checking based on suitability to work with children.
In doing referee checks, schools should not accept 'character only' referees. Probe boundaries, complaints history, performance concerns and whether they would rehire. Verify identity, qualifications and registration.
Interview for boundaries with scenario questions such as:
"Can you tell us about a time you had to manage professional boundaries with a child or young person? What did you do and why?"
"Have you ever observed behaviour by a colleague that made you uncomfortable in relation to a child? What did you do?"
These questions test understanding of power imbalances, self-awareness and willingness to speak up.
Supervision and culture are the real controls when it comes to keeping children safe. What happens after a person is hired matters just as much as the checks that came before.
Effective induction means clearly walking staff through the Code of Conduct, being explicit about boundaries and making sure everyone understands how and where to report concerns, no matter minor it may seem.
Schools should think deliberately about visibility; reducing unnecessary one-to-one situations, using open-door practices and designing environments that minimise isolation.
A strong child safe culture is one where early reporting is encouraged and normalised. Staff, students and parents should all know how to raise concerns and feel confident they will be taken seriously.
Finally, child safety systems must be reviewed regularly and improved continuously. Annual reviews, learning from incidents and responding promptly to new information about risk demonstrate that child safety is active and ongoing, not a one-off compliance task.
Recent cases in early learning serve as a reminder that screening systems alone cannot eliminate risks to child safety. Schools must adopt a comprehensive approach combining robust recruitment practices, ongoing supervision and a culture that encourages early reporting. With regulators increasing scrutiny, now is the time for school leaders to review their systems and ensure child protection is embedded in school operations.