Barcelona Field Studies Centre


This is Part 2 of a 3-part supplement to Health and Safety of Pupils on Educational Visits: A Good Practice Guide (HASPEV). See also HASPEV, Health and Safety: Responsibilities and Powers and the other parts of this supplement: Standards for LEAs in Overseeing Educational Visits and A Handbook for Group Leaders.


HASPEV Chapter 8, paragraphs 172-174, advises on school-led adventure activities. This part of the supplement develops that advice and concentrates in particular on the responsibilities and tasks of the supervisor, the educational visits co-ordinator and the technical adviser.

Some 950 licences are held under the Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 1996. These regulations are explained in paragraphs 157-162 of HASPEV.  Licensing follows inspection and advice from the Adventure Activities Licensing Authority’s (AALA’s) inspectors.

Adventure activities, in this supplement, have a twofold definition. First, they are the core activities as defined in the 1996 Regulations (climbing, caving, remote trekking, waterborne activities). Secondly, they include the range of other activities that present hazards over and above those in everyday life. These, equally, need to be controlled through careful supervision, normally by a competent person with specialist skills in the activity.

Some of the guidance in this part will be useful for all kinds of school visit, therefore, whether overtly adventurous or not. Tragedies can happen on ordinary visits where the risks, such as those presented by road traffic, are not obvious.  Routine educational visits may seem safe but the requirement of good risk assessment and management remains. This wider range of visits might include visits to a musical event elsewhere in the UK or even a local museum.

Amendments to the good practice supplement will be needed from time to time. We will make these amendments to the website version of this supplement. The web version will thus become a 'living' document, changing over time. Holders of the hard copy version of the supplement are advised to check the web from time to time to see whether amendments have been made - at

The supplement does not seek to replace local or other professional guidance or regulations.  Community and voluntary controlled schools should follow LEA guidance as a first recourse. No guidance should be taken as an authoritative interpretation of the law. That is for the courts.

Like HASPEV, the supplement can be adopted or adapted by LEAs or others for their own purposes. Please acknowledge the Department as the source for any such use and declare any local variation of the text.  

Enquiries about the content of this Supplement should be addressed to the Department’s Pupil Health and Safety Team on 020 7925 5536.

Organisation of School-Led Adventure Activities

  Adventure and Adventurous Activities Categories

Risk Assessment


Further Guidance


The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, wrote in support of the Campaign for Adventure, English Outdoor Council, in September 2001:

"I am happy to place on record that the government supports the role of adventure as part of active education, especially in helping young people to learn about assessing and managing risk, in offering them new and exciting challenges, and in helping them to gain skills in leadership and team working that will be of huge value in their progression to adulthood.

Providers of adventure activities play a vital role in this learning opportunity. However, they have a duty to ensure that those put in their care do not come to harm. To ensure safety, while still providing exhilarating experiences, providers must take all reasonably practicable measures so that the sense of excitement and danger is achieved without causing harm to the participants and leaders."

Extract from "Aims for the School Curriculum", The National Curriculum, Department for Education and Skills & QCA, 1999:

"The school curriculum should….enable pupils to respond positively to opportunities, challenges and responsibilities, to manage risk and to cope with change and adversity."


1.  It is good practice for each school to have an educational visits coordinator (EVC). This does not mean that the school should create and fund a new post. Rather, the formal recognition of the EVC function will help the school fulfil its health and safety obligations for visits. It also helps the head teacher to delegate the tasks involved in overseeing the school’s educational visits.  The EVC should be competent in those tasks and have the authority to carry them out. If no EVC is appointed, the tasks fall automatically to the head teacher.  See Standards for LEAs in Overseeing Educational Visits for a discussion of the role of the EVC.

2.  The EVC should seek advice from the LEA’s outdoor education adviser or an appropriately qualified technical adviser as necessary.

3.  Many schools are now using licensed facilities as offered by commercial firms, charitable organisations or local authorities. For details of current licence holders see the AALA website at  A licence means that the Licensing Authority has inspected the provider, and is satisfied with their management of safety of adventure activities, as defined on the face of the licence.

4.  Nevertheless, a significant number of schools continue to organise and lead their own core adventure activities.  Under current legislation these are not subject to national inspection and licensing. This is because schools are not required to hold a licence when making provision to their own pupils.

5.  School-led adventure activities are subject to the management and approval of the education employer under health and safety law. This is because the employer must, in law, ensure the health and safety of both pupils and staff. The local education authority (LEA) has this responsibility for community and voluntary-controlled schools. The governing body is the employer in foundation and voluntary aided schools. The proprietor is the employer in independent schools.  Health and Safety: Responsibilities and Powers explains the legal framework for each type of school. Standards for LEAs in Overseeing Educational Visits gives guidance on the role of the LEA, with read-across for other types of education employer.

6.  The Independent Schools Adventure Activities Association - ISAAA - (, currently based at Malvern College, is working with the AALA. It aims to help its members match the safety standards required of licence-holders by the AALA.


7.  A key role of the EVC is to ensure that activities are supervised by people of suitable competence.  LEA guidance may prescribe the levels of competence required.  In leading adventure activities, teachers or other school staff will have the great advantage of knowing their pupils well. But, unlike centre instructors, they may not regularly instruct an activity nor be as familiar with the activity site.  This could affect their awareness of specific risks.

8.  For some activities, teachers may need to hold a national governing body leader or instructor qualification.  But paper qualifications will need to be supplemented by the verification of other qualities (such as maturity, general supervision skills, ability to supervise different types of group, relevant experience). For other activities, teachers may have their competence ratified in-house by a suitably competent person, if their employer considers that appropriate.

Means of Verifying Competence

9.  The LEA, as employer, should set the standards required of leaders and supervisors for specific visits and activities. For adventure activities the outdoor education adviser will be able to consider the following evidence of competence:

  • National Governing Body (NGB) Awards/Qualifications;

  • National Vocational Qualifications (NVQs);

  • OCR Off-Site Safety Management Certificate;

  • local or in-house validation;

  • site specific assessment;

  • experience confirmed by assessment in the field.

National Governing Body Awards/Qualifications

10. Appropriate NGB and other relevant leader/instructor qualifications are listed in the matrices set out in Guidance to the Licensing Authority on the Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 1996 as follows:


ABRS Association of British Riding Schools
BASI British Association of Ski Instructors
BCU British Canoe Union  
BELA Basic Expedition Leader Award (CCPR)
BHS British Horse Society
BMG British Association of Mountain Guides
CIC Cave Instructor Certificate (NCA)
CCPR Central Council of Physical Recreation
ESC English Ski Council
LCMLA Local Cave and Mine Leader Assessment (NCA)
MLTB Mountain Leader Training Board
MIA Mountain Instructor Award (UKMTB)
MIC Mountain Instructor Certificate (UKMTB)
ML Mountain Leader Award (UKMTB/SMLTB/WMLTB) or Mountain Walking Leader Award (MLTB)
NCA National Caving Association
RYA Royal Yachting Association
SCOW Ski Council of Wales
SMLTB Scottish Mountain Leader Training Board
SNSC Scottish National Ski Council
SPSA Single Pitch Supervisors Award (MLTB)
SRA Scottish Rafting Association
WMLTB Wales Mountain Leader Training Board
UKMTB United Kingdom Mountain Training Board
WCA  Welsh Canoeing Association

Some of these may change over time. Further details about appropriate levels of competence are available from the Adventure Activities Licensing Authority on 029 20 755715



11.   NVQs are work-related, competence-based qualifications that reflect the skills and knowledge required to do a job effectively.  NVQs represent national standards that are recognised by employers throughout England . They are based on the National Occupational Standards (NOS) and will be most relevant to outdoor learning where they incorporate the relevant NGB qualification.

12.  The Level 2 Activity Leadership NVQ is intended for people who are supervised by someone qualified to lead groups on their own, and the Level 3 Outdoor Education, Development Training and Recreation NVQ is for people who can safely run activities solo and unsupervised. (Scottish Vocational Qualifications (SVQs) are equivalent to NVQs.)

OCR (Oxford & Cambridge RSA) Off-Site Safety Management Certificate

13.  This is of particular relevance to teachers planning to lead or supervise curricular visits within their subjects, including fieldwork and adventurous activities. It is exam-based and teachers can combine it with practical experience.

In-House Validation

14.  In-house validations are approval systems that usually have local rather than national relevance. They are for restricted stated environments; they are for employees of the operating organisation (e.g. the LEA); they are not automatically transferable to other organisations.

15.  The body responsible for granting the validation would normally be the LEA, commercial company or other employer, or, in the case of an independent school, the ISAAA.  To ensure the robustness of in-house leader validation arrangements for adventure activities (particularly those in category C below) it is vital that these are monitored by a suitably qualified technical adviser.

Site-Specific Assessment

Site-specific assessment refers to a situation in which an individual is trained to cope with the particular demands of a named location or activity. This assessment will take place on location and will generally be in the charge of a suitable technical adviser for the activity. For activities that would be licensable (if not school-led) see Guidance to the Licensing Authority on the Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 1996 (which includes the text of the regulations). For activities not in-scope (such as a water-margin studies visit), a technical adviser would be a highly experienced practitioner in the field with knowledge of the venues, varying local environments and their likely effect upon the pupil groups.

17.  The responsible body for approving the assessment would normally be the LEA or other employer  (who would use the appropriate technical adviser with the relevant site knowledge). For visits or activities such as a walk in the park a site specific induction, rather than a formal assessment, might be sufficient so long as supervisory competence in general had been satisfactorily assessed, perhaps by the EVC or other senior member of school staff.  This assessment might include the ability to hold the attention of a group during the visit and to brief pupils in a range of circumstances.


18.  Competence in adventure activities derives from a balance of personal experience (trial and error and learning from errors) and related training. Technical competence can be attained through formal training. But safety judgements are most soundly based on enlightened experience, which takes time to accumulate.

19. Proof must therefore exist of suitable and sufficient experience in the activity. This will normally be verified by the outdoor education adviser, typically with the help of the technical adviser.

Role of the Technical Adviser

20.  Technical advisers have a high level of competence in a particular activity. They will be able to make judgements about the technical and supervisory competence of others within their area of expertise in relation to a particular pupil group. Typically they will have a record as a trainer and assessor of the activity. For adventure activities that would be licensable (if they were not school-led), technical advisers should be qualified to the level recognised as satisfactory by the Adventure Activities Licensing Authority (See Guidance to the Licensing Authority on the Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 1996).

21.  The technical adviser will usually hold the relevant NGB Award where it exists. But it might also be possible to become a technical adviser on the basis of experience alone. For example, a senior teacher with extensive experience of running geography field studies could have the needed expertise to advise on a category A field visit (see below) led by a less experienced teacher.

22.  Suitable technical advisers may be found within a local authority or a commercial or other provider and may be contacted through the LEA’s outdoor educational adviser, the ISAAA (for independent schools), NGBs, or professional or trade associations.

23.  In general, a technical adviser should give advice only on activities within their own level of competence. Otherwise he or she should obtain the view of a more specifically competent technical adviser.

24.  An employer who is unsure about assessing the competence of an individual to lead a particular activity should seek the guidance of a technical adviser.


25.  Outdoor education advisers and EVCs may find it useful to consider categories of activities, when determining an appropriate course of action in respect of activities presenting different levels of potential risk.  The following categorisation may prove useful.  However, accidents can happen in any activity regardless of whether it is classified as high or low risk.  It is important to be aware that low risk does not mean no risk.

Category A

26.  These comprise activities that present no significant risks.  They should be supervised by a teacher who has been assessed as competent by the LEA or EVC, as appropriate, to lead this category of educational visit.  There is no need for NGB or other accreditation, but the activities should be conducted following the LEA’s or school’s standard visits procedures. Some LEAs classify these as activities needing level 1 supervisory skills. Examples might include:

  • walking in parks or on non-remote country paths;

  • field studies in environments presenting no technical hazards.

Category B

27.  These comprise some higher-risk or higher profile activities. Safe supervision requires that the leader should, as a minimum, have undergone an additional familiarisation process or induction specific to the activity and/or the location. He or she will be approved as appropriately competent by the LEA, or by the EVC following LEA guidance.

28.  An NGB award such as the Basic Expedition Leadership Award (BELA) or the Activity Leadership NVQ may be relevant as a measure of competence for teachers leading certain activities in category B.  Examples of activities might include:

  • walking in non-remote country;

  • camping;

  • cycling on roads or non-remote off-road terrain;

  • low level initiative challenges.

Guidance on the activities to be included in category B may be available from the LEA.  Where an EVC validates colleagues for leadership of category B activities, he or she should be experienced in leading the activity or should seek the advice of a suitably qualified technical adviser. He or she should also be aware of the responsibilities that are integral to such leadership. The EVC and LEA outdoor education adviser should agree which of these higher risk visits should be approved by the EVC, and which by the LEA.  Some LEAs classify these as requiring level 2 supervisory skills. Note: Several of the school-visit incidents in recent years have happened on visits that might be deemed category B or even category A.

Category C

30.  This is the most demanding category. It includes all those activities that, if not school-led, would be in scope of the Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 1996. It also includes activities that fall outside the scope of licensing, or are less commonly pursued by pupil groups, such as motor sports, whose safe supervision requires that the leader should normally complete some prior test of his or her specific competence.  Such testing might include a recognised course of training, the recorded accumulation of relevant experience, or an assessment of competence by an appropriate body.

31.  At the employer’s discretion, category C may also include activities not currently licensable such as high ropes courses, sub-aqua activities or canoeing in placid waters.  In these cases a leader’s competence should normally be demonstrated by the possession of the relevant NGB Award or an in-house assessment conducted by an NGB qualified technical adviser.  Category C skills are comparable with some LEAs’ level 3 supervisory skills.  A Level 3 NVQ in Outdoor Education, Development Training and Recreation, supplemented by one or more NGB Award, would be an appropriate paper qualification.

Environmental Considerations

32.  In assessing the appropriate category in which to place an activity, the EVC and outdoor education adviser should take account of the environment in which the activity will take place. An activity might be rated in a higher category if it takes place:

  • in or near water;

  • in winter conditions;

  • on or near cliffs or steep terrain;

  • in an area subject to extremes of weather or environmental change.

33.  For example, field study activities next to open water, such as pond dipping, might rate as category B.  Winter camping might rate as category C, as might off-road cycling over steep terrain.

34.  Category C includes any activity in water. See Get Safe for Summer issued by the Amateur Swimming Association July 2002 (more details in Further Guidance).


35.   Risk assessment is a process. It would be good practice for a group leader to first draw up a plan and timetable for the visit (Why? Who? What? When? Where? How?)  The group leader would consider what could go wrong and how to avoid the risks or, for overtly adventurous activities, how to manage them.  The plan will need modifying until the control measures are satisfactory.  Any new information arising out of a visit should be fed back into the process. There should be regular re-assessment.

36.  Risk assessment for educational visits can be usefully considered as having three levels (see Standards for LEAs in Overseeing Educational Visits for further details):

  • generic activity risk assessments, which are likely to apply to the activity wherever and whenever it takes place;

  • visit/site specific risk assessments which will differ from place to place and group to group; and

  • ongoing risk assessments that take account of, for example, illness of staff or pupils, changes of weather, availability of preferred activity.

Forms of Written Risk Assessments

37.  The LEA’s outdoor education adviser or the school’s EVC may need to consider whether existing written procedures will suffice as a risk assessment. Good practice allows for a wide range of written evidence to be used as part of the risk assessment procedure. This is likely to include:

  • the approval form, as completed by the group leader, is so designed as to lead him or her through a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks. See, for example, HASPEV page 45/47 Form One. This can be modified as necessary.

  • minimum evidence of risk assessment could comprise: a reference to the generic risks associated with that activity; the corresponding qualifications and experience of the leader (who should be included on the LEA’s register of approved leaders for this activity); a list of site-specific hazards (e.g. accident black spots); and a corresponding list of control measures to be applied which takes account of the age and abilities of the pupil group. See Standards for LEAs in Overseeing Educational Visits.

  • for higher risk activities, a comprehensive induction would establish the significant hazards and how these will be met.  An appropriately completed induction check-list (measures which each party leader will have adopted prior to being added to the register of approved leaders) would be a useful part of the risk assessment.

38.  It could also include NGB guidelines etc. especially if only NGB staff will be deployed.

39.  The Young Explorers’ Trust has a well-established system of scrutinising the plans of overseas expeditions of young people and offering advice to their leaders.

Acknowledgement of Risk

40.  HASPEV offers advice on what parents and pupils need to know before the visit. It is good practice for a school to share aspects of the risk assessment with parents and pupils.  Both should be made aware of the likely risks and their management so that consent can be given or refused on an informed basis.  Some visits organisers ask parents to formally acknowledge the risks of a visit. Neither this nor parental consent absolves the LEA or school staff of their responsibilities under health and safety law.

Reviewing Risk Assessments

41.  Assessing risks also means re-assessing them.  Re-assessment might be necessitated by objective observation (for example, changing the route of a mountain walk because of adverse changes in the weather) or by reason of subjective feelings (for example, where someone in the group becomes frightened or over-tired).


The safety and suitability of equipment is primarily the responsibility of the employer. However, the employer will expect the employee to be vigilant, to address and report defects and to maintain a system of scheduled inspection. A logbook is an effective means by which to note the movement of a piece of equipment. Users can make comments in the log.  The logbook can also show when an item was last checked, who checked it, and when it should be checked again.


43.  For every educational visit there should be a group leader who manages the whole visit (see HASPEV Chapter 3).   However, for individual activities within the visit, it is better for groups to be small, each with a supervisor, who will normally be a teacher or another member of the school or employer’s staff.  Further advice is available in A Handbook for Group Leaders.

44.  Supervision is most effective when:

  • the aims and objectives of the visit are clearly understood by all the supervisors and ideally the pupils;

  • the visit and activities have been carefully risk-assessed and will be managed safely;

  • supervisors and pupils have contributed to the overall plan, including the risk assessment and risk management;

  • the group leader has laid down clear guidelines for standards of behaviour and everyone on the visit has agreed them;

  • supervisors have a reasonable knowledge of the pupils, including any special educational needs, medical needs or disabilities;

  • each activity has a bad weather alternative (plan B).

45.  If a supervisor is not a member of the school staff, he or she will have provided evidence of appropriate competence and Criminal Records Bureau clearance as appropriate. This is usually expected for residential supervision but may not always be necessary in other circumstances. See Standards for LEAs in Overseeing Educational Visits, which discusses this issue at greater length, and the relevant guidance listed under Further Guidance.

46.  Supervision can be close or remote but is always 24 hours:

  • close supervision occurs when the group remain within sight and contact of the supervisor;

  • remote supervision occurs when, as part of planned activities, a group works away from the supervisor but is subject to stated controls (e.g. during certain Duke of Edinburgh’s Award expeditions). The supervisor is present though not necessarily near or in sight, but his or her whereabouts are known;

  • down time or recreational time - for example during the evenings - may involve close or remote supervision, but should not be unsupervised - the supervisors continue to be in charge.

47.  Close supervision normally means that all supervisors:

  • have prior knowledge of the group;

  • carry a list/register of all group members;

  • regularly check that the entire group is present;

  • have appropriate access to First Aid.

48.  In addition when supervision is remote:

  • groups must be sufficiently trained and assessed as competent for the level of activity to be undertaken, including First Aid and emergency procedures. Remote supervision will normally be the final stage of a phased development programme;

  • pupils will be familiar with the environment or similar environments and have details of  the rendezvous points and the times of rendezvous;

  • clear and understandable boundaries will be set for the group;

  • there must be clear lines of communication between the group, the supervisor and the school. Do not rely exclusively on mobile phones;

  • the supervisor should monitor the group’s progress at appropriate intervals;

  • the supervisor will be in the expedition or activity area and able to reach the group reasonably promptly should the group need support in an emergency;

  • there should be a recognisable point at which the activity is completed;

  • there should be clear arrangements to abandon the activity when it cannot be safely completed.

49.  It is essential that everyone involved in the visit understands the supervision arrangements and expectations. Potential danger points can occur when rearranging groups, in particular:

  • when a large group is split into smaller groups for specific activities;

  • when groups transfer from one activity to another and change supervisor;

  • during periods between activities;

  • when small groups re-form into a large group.

50.  It is therefore important that the supervisor:

  • clearly takes responsibility for the group when their part of the programme begins, particularly making certain that all group members are aware of the changeover;

  • clearly passes on responsibility for the group when their part of the programme is concluded, together with any relevant information ensuring that the group members know who their next supervisor is.

51. There may be some benefit in differentiating between a group leader/supervisor (i.e. the school representative), and an activity leader (who may, for example, be an instructor at an outdoor centre).

Supervision Ratios

52.  HASPEV discusses ratios in various places, notably in Chapter 3.  Ratios may vary in the course of the visit. The ratios will normally fall out of the defined educational objectives and the risk assessment. The factors to be taken into consideration will include the:

  • particular activity;

  • experience of the group involved, and the needs of individuals within the group including those with special educational needs;

  • environment and conditions in which the activity will take place;

  • experience of the staff (e.g. newly qualified teachers);

  • nature of the venue.

53.  Supervisors may include other school staff (e.g. support assistants or bursars), activity provider’s staff or parent volunteers.  All supervisors must be assessed as competent to undertake the role.

54.  Supervisors who are not employed by the LEA or school cannot hold the same responsibility as school staff. They should not normally be given sole charge of any pupils in the group unless, perhaps, for a short time in clearly defined circumstances where the teacher is readily to hand.

55.  It is not unknown for a pupil assessed as competent to become a supervisor of younger pupils in certain teacher-controlled circumstances or for a technically competent pupil to instruct (but not to supervise) a teacher who will remain as the pupil’s supervisor.

56.  A condition or set of circumstances may be hazardous to one group, or to one group member, more than to another. No assumptions should be made, especially where the pupils’ individual levels of knowledge are uncertain.

57.  Supervision also involves the school management, typically through the EVC.  For each visit it is good practice for the EVC to ensure that:

  • the group leader and supervisors are provided with a named contact of someone who is not on the visit and is contactable at all times;

  • there is an intermediary between the group, school and parents. This is generally the named contact;

  • the group’s progress is monitored by or on behalf of the EVC;

  • an alert is provided should groups not report back when expected;

  • appropriate emergency back-up services are provided where necessary.

Further Guidance

Department for Education and Skills

Health & Safety of Pupils on Educational Visits (HASPEV), and supplement
Health & Safety: Responsibilities & Powers
Guidance on First Aid for Schools
Supporting Pupils with Medical Needs: A Good Practice Guide
Work experience: A guide for secondary schools 2002
Work Experience: A guide for employers 2002
Child Protection: Preventing Unsuitable People from Working with Children and Young Persons in the Education Service. DfES May 2002.
Safety Education Guidance Leaflet
Chief Medical Officer Advice on Farm Visits: A Department of Health Press Notice 12 April 2000.
Guidance to the Licensing Authority on the Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 1996 (HSC £9)
A Guide to Risk Assessment Requirements -
Avoiding ill health at open farms: Advice to teachers AIS23 new edition 28 June 2000 of advice mentioned in HASPEV).
Five Steps to Risk Assessment . (
Adventure activities centres; five steps to risk assessment (£4.50)
The New General Teaching Requirement for Health and Safety, QCA/HSE, 1999
Managing Health and Safety in Swimming Pools revised edition 1999. HSG 179 £10.50
Reducing Risk Protecting People 2001
Preparing Young People for a Safer Life (issued with Cheshire County Council and The Institute of Occupational Safety and Health – tel 0116 257 3100). This has a model risk assessment for a sponsored walk.
Adventure activities centres: five steps to risk assessment  (£4.50)
Adventure Activities Industry Advisory Committee (AAIAC): Statement of Risk Perception in Adventure and Outdoor Activities


Information about adventure activity providers covered by the Adventure Activities Licensing Scheme
The Wales Tourist Board, the Scottish Tourist Board and the British Activity Holiday Association (see next) provide voluntary inspection schemes to complement licensing for providers of activities that are out of scope of licensing
The British Activity Holiday Association, 22 Green Lane, Hersham, Surrey, KT12 5HD. Tel/Fax: 01932 252994.
Safe Supervision for Teaching and Coaching Swimming.  Amateur Swimming Association and others. 2nd edition 2001  Tel: 01509 618700. Advice on ratios in HASPEV paragraph 187, which are pupil year-based, should be read in conjunction with the competence-based ratios in Safe Supervision
The Royal Lifesaving Society UK, River House, High St, Broom, Warwickshire B50 4HN (Tel: 01789 773994)
Minibus Safety: A Code of Practice - RoSPA and others 2002
Safety on School Trips A Teachers and the Law Booklet  - The Professional Association of Teachers. Revised edition 2002
Educational Visits - NASUWT 2001
Guidance published by the National Governing Bodies (NGBs) for various adventure activities as in HASPEV. NGBs also maintain leader training and assessment programmes.
Safe and Responsible Expeditions and Guidelines for Youth Expeditions - Young Explorers’ Trust, c/o RGS-IBG Expedition Advisory Centre. £5 inc. p & p or free from website:
The Royal Geographical Society (with IBG)’s Expedition Advisory Centre, 1 Kensington Gore, London SW7 2AR provides advice, information and training to anyone planning an overseas expedition. Tel 020 7591 3030
The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award has its own clear structure, procedures and guidelines
Guidance is produced by many of the voluntary youth organisations
Guidelines for Off-Site Educational Visits and Activities in the United Kingdom Nottinghamshire CC September 2001 has a section on camping pages 75-79.
Safe Kids Campaign Report 2000, Child Accident Prevention Trust
Transport for London provides free transport for school groups on the underground, buses, Thameslink and the Docklands Light Railway.  The advice line for the scheme is 0207 918 3954 and the website is at  The general travel advice line can offer information on route planning and station layouts. Apart from its commitment to the safety of its passengers Transport for London does not offer specific advice on health and safety for school groups but refers them to HASPEV and HSE risk assessment guidance.
The Waterways Code (leaflet) and The Waterways Code for Boaters (video) are available from British Waterways -  - tel: 01923 201120
The Suzy Lamplugh Trust has produced a range of guidance on personal safety, including booklets, videos and training courses