child q case study

Together we are #Safeguardians

We can help you build a world class safeguarding organisation wherever you are today and whatever you need now

• Recording and Case Management​
• Better Team Working​
• Understanding your Data​
• Safeguarding Practice
• Safer Recruitment
• Concerns about Adults​
• Local Authority
• Training Provider

Knowledge Base

• Safeguarding FAQs
• Safer Recruitment FAQs

Safeguarding Training

• Legislation & Guidance
• KCSIE Legislation & Guidance
• KLS Legislation & Guidance
• IICSA Report

Total Safeguarding Solutions

The very best technology combined with excellent safeguarding practice will help you cut through the complexity of keeping vulnerable children and adults safe

Safeguarding Software

• MIS Integrations

For All Safeguardians

Valuable resources developed by fellow Safeguardians. Find insights, updates and practical answers to all types of safeguarding challenges

Find information on all updates and changes to the Keeping Children Safe in Education 2023 Guidance.

Safeguarding - The Book

Presenting a new, unique 8-point strategic model for safeguarding in education

Making a Difference

Our world class support team help you to be highly effective Safeguardians. We’re always here if you need us.

Customer Service

We bring together industry-leading technology and practices, with a sustained focus on child protection, to deliver expert safeguarding solutions and training

News & Events

We are part of Tes

Child Q: Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review

In 2020, Child Q, a Black secondary school-age female child, was strip-searched by female police officers. The search, which involved the exposure of Child Q’s intimate body parts, took place on school premises, without an appropriate adult present and with the knowledge that Child Q was menstruating. This blog examines the findings of the safeguarding practice review for Child Q and recommendations made by the reviewers.

The review was written by Jim Gamble QPM, Independent Child Safeguarding Commissioner and Rory McCallum, Senior Professional Advisor and was released in March 2022. Read the full review HERE .  

*Please note this blog will discuss the strip search of a child under the age of 18. Discretion is advised  

The Day of The Search  

On the day of the search, teachers believe Child Q smelt strongly of cannabis and they suspected she might be carrying drugs. Once questioned Child Q denied having used or having any drugs in her possession. Her bag, blazer, scarf and shoes were searched and nothing significant was found.  

The teachers sought advice from the Safer Schools Police Officer and were advised to call 101 and ask for a female officer to come to the school. Four officers arrived at the school, two of whom were women, and after discussions between the police and teachers, Child Q was escorted to the medical room and strip-searched.  

There was no appropriate adult present during the search and Child Q’s parents or guardians were not contacted in advance of the search. No drugs were found during the search, after which Child Q was later allowed to return home.  

After the Search  

Once home Child Q disclosed the events of the strip search to her mother. She described how she had been strip-searched while menstruating and was extremely distressed. Her mother took her to the family GP, due to the levels of her distress, the GP in turn made a referral for psychological support. This led to contact with Hackney Children and Families Services which initiated a Rapid Review and this local safeguarding practice review.  

Three questions were addressed by the review which included:  

• Was the rationale and practice to strip search Child Q sufficiently attuned to the rights of children as set out in the relevant articles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child?  
• Was practice involving Child Q sufficiently focused on her potential safeguarding needs?  
• Is the law and policy, which informs local practice, properly defined in the context of identifying potential risk and furthermore, does law and policy create the conditions whereby practice itself can criminalise and cause significant harm to children?   

The findings of the review   

It was the opinion of the review that Child Q had suffered harm from exposure of this traumatic event. The impact of the event on Child Q’s emotional health was ongoing and the incident also illustrated issues of the potential impact of disproportionality and racism and how these factors might have influenced the actions of organisations and individual professionals.  

The review made eight findings:   

• The school was fully compliant with expected practice standards when responding to its concerns about Child Q smelling of cannabis and its subsequent search of Child Q’s coat, bag, scarf and shoes. This demonstrated good curiosity by the involved staff and alertness to potential indicators of risk  
• The decision to strip search Child Q was insufficiently attuned to her best interests or right to privacy  
• School staff deferred to the authority of the police on their arrival at school. They should have been more challenging to the police, seeking clarity about the actions they intended to take. All practitioners need to be mindful of their duties to uphold the best interests of children  
• School staff had an insufficient focus on the safeguarding needs of Child Q when responding to concerns about suspected drug use  
• The application of the law and policy governing the strip-searching of children can be variable and open to interpretation  
• The absence of any specific requirement to seek parental consent when strip-searching children undermines the principles of parental responsibility and partnership in working with parents to safeguard children  
• The Covid-19 restrictions in place at the time appeared to have frustrated effective communication between school staff and the Safer Schools Officer  
• Having considered the context of the incident, the views of those engaged in the review and the impact felt by Child Q and her family, racism was likely to have been an influencing factor in the decision to undertake a strip search  

Local Facts and Figures  

During 2020/2021 25 children in Hackney, under the age of 18 were the subject of searches by local police officers from the Central East Basic Command Unit of the Metropolitan Police Service.  

 East BCU of the MPS. 22 (88%) of the searches were negative for drugs or illegal substances with an outcome of no further action recorded in 20 (80%) of the cases. In terms of ethnicity, (as per the codes used by the police), 15 (60%) of the children searched were Black, 2 (8%) were White, 6 (24%) Asian and 2 (8%) Arab or North African.  

Child Q’s and her family’s experiences  

During the review Child Q was spoken to and shared accounts of her experiences. Here are statements made by Child Q her experience.   

Child Q : “ Someone walked into the school, where I was supposed to feel safe, took me away from the people who were supposed to protect me and stripped me naked, while on my period.” 

“All the people that allowed this to happen need to be held responsible. I was held responsible for a smell.” 

“…… I need to know that the people who have done this to me can't do it to anyone else ever again. In fact, so NO ONE else can do this to any other child in their care.” 

Child Q’s mother and maternal aunt were engaged in the review and expressed their shock at what Child Q experienced and the ongoing impact the incident has had upon the whole family. There was a perception within the family that not only had Child Q been criminalised and let down by professionals who should have had her best interests at heart, but above all that Child Q was treated differently because she is Black.  

Child Q’s Mother : “…the incident that happened (was) treated not as a safeguarding issue. (It was) treated as a criminal matter.”   

“Child Q was searched by the police and was asked to go back into the exam without any teacher asking her about how she felt knowing what she had just gone through. Their position in the school is being part of the safeguarding team, but they were not acting as if they were a part of that team. This makes me sick - the fact that my child had to take her sanitary towel off and put the same dirty towel back on because they would not allow her to use the restroom to clean herself. I was also wondering if the officer's body cameras were on while my child was stripped of her clothes, are they re-watching it?”  

Child Q’s Aunt : “The family do not believe that the officers would have treated a Caucasian girl child who was on her monthly periods in the same way.”   

“Child Q was racially profiled due to her being black and her extremely large head of locks.”  

“She was made to bend over spread her legs, and use her hands to spread her buttocks cheek whilst coughing.”  

“She is now self-harming and requires therapy. She is traumatised and is now a shell of the bubbly child she was before this incident.”  

Recommendations  

The review made fourteen recommendations for improving practice:  

• The Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel (CSPRP) should engage the Independent Office for Police Conduct with a view to developing national guidance on the IOPC’s interface with the Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review process  
• The MPS should review and revise its recording system for stop and search to ensure it clearly identifies and allows for retrieval of the full range of activity under stop and search powers   
• The Department for Education should review and revise its guidance on Searching, Screening and Confiscation (2018) to include more explicit reference to safeguarding and to amend its use of inappropriate language  
• The Metro Police Service should update its guidance note and local policy to better emphasise the requirements for engaging an Appropriate Adult   
• The City & Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership should review and revise its awareness-raising and training content to ensure the Child Q case is referenced  
• Relevant police guidance governing the policy on strip searching children should clearly define a need to focus on the safeguarding needs of children and follow up actions that need to be considered by way of helping and protecting children at potential risk  
• The Central East BCU should engage the local stop and search monitoring group, ACCOUNT, and other representative bodies to consider the lessons from this review and how the effectiveness of safeguarding can be overseen through their respective activities  
• Where any suspicion of harm arises by way of concerns for potential or actual substance misuse, a safeguarding response is paramount  
• The MPS should engage The College of Policing to explore potential improvements to the guidance concerning reasonable grounds involving stop and search activity with children  
• Alongside Recommendation 3, the Department for Education should review and revise its guidance on Searching, Screening and Confiscation (2018) to include much stronger reference to the importance of keeping records and engaging parents as part of best safeguarding practice  
• The Home Office and the National Police Chiefs Council should seek to strengthen the Revised Code C, PACE 1984 to better define the engagement of parents/carers/guardians when strip searches that involve the exposure of intimate parts of the body are undertaken on children  
• The CHSCP should engage ACCOUNT, Safer Schools Police Officers and other community organisations to develop an awareness-raising programme across schools and colleges about stop and search activity by the police  
• The CHSCP should continue with its rolling programme of multi-agency adultification training  
• The CHSCP should expedite its work on developing an anti-racist charter and practical guides that support the eradicating of racism, discrimination, and injustice across its local safeguarding arrangements  

Read the full review HERE .  

29th August 2022

Related resources

Searching, Screening and Confiscation in Schools: Department of Education Guidance

Behaviour in Schools: Department for Education Guidance

Bullying: Reporting and Managing Allegations of Bullying  

Georgia latief.

• Safeguarding

Cookie tracking for the best experience

By selecting "Accept tracking", you agree The Safeguarding Company can use cookies, pixels, tags and similar technologies to improve your website experience and provide more personalized services to you, both on this website and through other media for Marketing and Functional purposes, like featuring personalised ads and improving the website. To find out more about the cookies we use, please visit our Cookies section.

Manage Tracking

Please select and accept your tracking preferences:

IOPC calls for review of police strip search powers following Child Q investigation

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is calling for a substantial review of policing powers under the laws relating to the strip searches of children, to improve safeguarding and prioritise the welfare of minors. It’s one of a series of learning recommendations we’re making to the Home Office, National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and the College of Policing (COP) to review and make changes to national guidance, policy and training relating to searches involving the exposure of intimate body parts. The recommendations follow independent investigations into multiple incidents where children have been strip searched by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), including the search involving the exposure of intimate body parts of a 15-year-old Black girl – known as Child Q – at a school in Hackney, north-east London in 2020. The investigation into the ‘strip search’ of Child Q, which began in May 2021 after the MPS referred complaints to us made on behalf of the child and the school, was recently completed. We can now confirm that four MPS officers will be facing disciplinary proceedings for their actions and conduct during the incident. The search of Child Q occurred on 3 December 2020 after police were called to the school following suspicions by staff that Child Q was in possession of cannabis. This followed a search by staff of her bag and outer clothing where no drugs were found. The child was subject to a search involving the removal of clothing by two female officers under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, while two male officers and school staff remained outside the room where the search took place. No drugs were found during the search. Our investigation looked into whether the grounds for the search and the conduct of officers complied with relevant local and national policies, procedures, guidance and legislation. We also investigated whether officers treated Child Q differently because of her race and sex, and the officers’ communication with school staff during and after the incident. Following the conclusion of our investigation, we determined that three MPS officers should face a gross misconduct hearing for potential breaches of the police standards of professional behaviour relating to duties and responsibilities, discreditable conduct, and equality and diversity. Some of the allegations the three police constables face are that: • the decision to undertake the search was inappropriate • there was no consultation with a supervisor to obtain authorisation before carrying out the search • there was no appropriate adult present during the search • Child Q was discriminated against by officers because of her race and sex A fourth officer, a police constable will face a disciplinary meeting relating to there being no appropriate adult present during the search. They will also undergo the reflective practice review process to consider further learning opportunities. We have recommended that the MPS consider sending formal letters of apology to Child Q and her mother. IOPC director Steve Noonan said: “The ‘strip search’ of Child Q, a 15-year-old girl, at her school in Hackney caused widespread concern. We have investigated the circumstances surrounding how this child was treated that day as fully as possible. “We’ve found that four officers involved in the incident should face disciplinary proceedings for the parts they played. Ultimately it will be for that disciplinary panel to decide whether the allegations against them are proven. We will now be liaising with the Met Police around disciplinary proceedings. We’ve kept Child Q’s representatives and the officers involved updated throughout our investigation. “Since this incident came to our attention, we have investigated four other incidents following referrals from the Met where children were strip searched in custody. “Any person subject to a search involving the exposure of intimate body parts is in a vulnerable position and they are entitled to be treated with respect and courtesy. While strip searches can be necessary for the safety of both the subjects and officers, it’s important that it’s only carried out when absolutely essential, particularly when used on children. “As a result of our investigations, we have identified a series of recommendations that we believe are pivotal to make effective changes to legislation and improve national guidance and training for officers to ensure the safety and welfare of children are prioritised when subject to searches involving the exposure of intimate body parts. “One of the areas of learning we’ve identified is around ensuring that officers across England and Wales understand their duties and responsibilities regarding the role of an appropriate adult during a strip search.” These recommendations follow learning recommendations we previously issued to the Met Police last year while our investigations were ongoing. We also held a roundtable meeting earlier this year with relevant policing bodies and key stakeholders concerning strip searches of children to discuss how organisations need to work together ensuring the wellbeing and safeguarding needs of children are met. We have begun consulting with relevant policing bodies and the Home Office on our latest national recommendations on the use of searches involving the exposure of intimate body parts and these will be published in due course. 

Other child strip search investigations

The IOPC has investigated a total of five cases involving the strip search of children following referrals by the MPS. All but one of the investigations has now concluded. A brief summary of the four other investigations: • An incident where a 15-year-old girl was arrested and detained on suspicion of knifepoint robbery and then transported to custody where they were subject to a wand search and outer clothing search at Walworth Police station in December 2020. While in custody, a sharpened wooden item fell from her clothing. The child subsequently handed over a Stanley knife and was then subject to a strip search in custody. We found the strip search was carried out in line with policy and procedures. However we found a police sergeant should face a misconduct meeting for breaching the standards of professional behaviour of duties and responsibilities, including allegations they failed to sufficiently supervise the wand or physical search carried out by another officer. Three other officers will also undergo the reflective practice review process relating to issues identified around the supervision of the girl in custody and the initial wand search.    • The strip search of a child in custody by MPS officers in 2022 where there were concerns about the suitability of the appropriate adult given her understanding of English and where no interpreter was sought. We found a custody sergeant should face a misconduct meeting for breaches of the standards of professional behaviour for allegations relating to their actions during the incident, including that they failed to ensure a suitable appropriate adult attended the strip search. We also found the child may have been treated less favourably due to their race.  • The arrest and subsequent strip search of a 16-year-old boy in Ilford, east London in January 2020, which was referred to us by the MPS in June 2022. We investigated a complaint which included allegations of excessive force by police during the arrest. We found no evidence to indicate any force used was unnecessary or unreasonable and we found the strip search, although there was no appropriate adult present, was carried out in line with MPS policy and policing powers. We found no indication that any officer behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.  • The arrest and subsequent strip search of a 16-year-old boy at Bethnal Green Police station in October 2020. Our investigation began in June 2022 following a complaint referral from the MPS and is in its final stages. At this stage there is no indication that any officers may have behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings. 

• Share to Twitter [open in new window]
• Share to LinkedIn [open in new window]
• Share to Facebook [open in new window]
• Share via email [open in new window]
• Copy to clipboard [open in new window]

Giving all children a voice

All the Children’s Commissioner’s work is driven by what children told us is important to them

How can we help?

• General contact
• Help at Hand

Child Q and the use of strip searching: progress so far

Just over one month ago, I published the findings of a major piece of research into the use of strip searching by police forces against children.

The headlines have been well documented.

Of the 2,847 children aged 8-17 who were strip searched by police forces in England and Wales between 2018 and 2022:

• Nearly a quarter (24%) involved a child aged between 10-15 years old;
• Over half (52%) took place without an Appropriate Adult present;
• 38% were carried out on Black children;
• 95% were carried out on boys;
• 51% resulted in no further action;
• 37% happened at a police station;12% at a home address; and 45% at an unrecorded location;
• 14 cases happened in a police vehicle or a school – the majority of these were in schools;
• 1% were conducted within public view; and
• 6% were conducted with at least one officer of a different gender than the child being searched present.

The resulting debate has been impassioned and picked up across the political spectrum. It has led to an Urgent Question in Parliament and multiple interventions by Peers in the House of Lords.

We cannot forget that this work stemmed from the bravery of one 15-year-old girl who told her story: Child Q, who was strip searched while at school in Hackney. I made it my mission to investigate the use of strip searching after hearing her experience, hoping to find that it was terrible but unique. It was not.

On Tuesday night, I was pleased to contribute to a special joint scrutiny commission meeting at Hackney Town Hall, where councillors and the Hackney Youth Parliament held local partners accountable for their response to Child Q’s case in March 2022. Representatives of the Metropolitan Police, the Mayor’s Office for Police and Crime (MOPAC), Hackney Council, and the City & Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership spoke about the action they’ve taken since that case came to light. It considered the recommendations being taken forward in Hackney specifically and how these are progressing.

There remain many hard questions to answer, both on a local level but also – as evidence by my most recent findings – a national one. I welcome the work that Hackney is already doing to review Child Q’s case, and I hope to see many other areas mirroring this approach – because this is not a ‘London issue’, or even an isolated incident.

There is collective shock that these searches have been carried out with such little care, minimal safeguarding and in hugely varied ways depending on where in the country they occur. I made a series of recommendations to tackle these issues, including better training among police forces and a child-first approach to policing led by the National Police Chiefs Council, strengthened and clarified guidelines, and improved data collection and monitoring.

I’m reassured that we are already seeing some progress made against these recommendations, and by the commitments that have been made since they were published last month.

The Home Office has committed to considering the three key recommendations that I have made to them. These include making amendments to the PACE Codes of Practice, making data collection and reporting on strip searches mandatory for all police forces, and reviewing existing legislation around searches. I was gratified to see the Safeguarding Minister, Sarah Dines MP, accepting the former two recommendations during the Urgent Question debate.

The College of Policing has updated its strip search guidance in line with one of my recommendations, to ensure that officers are considering the safety and welfare of any child stopped and strengthening it so that there is full clarity over the use of Appropriate Adults during all searches.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has welcomed the recommendations and is working with my office on following up on cases of concern at 28 police forces.

I want to express my gratitude to Child Q again, and to her family, for their bravery in setting this essential work in train. It is thanks to her, and them, that scrutiny on this issue is increasing; not because of a whistle-blower, or an inspection report, or any kind of accountability measure, but because she spoke out.

We simply cannot tolerate any further cases of this nature – children must be treated as such, and their welfare must be the primary concern.  

More About This Topic

• Strip search of children in England and Wales
• Strip search of children by the Metropolitan Police Service – new analysis by the Children’s Commissioner for England
• The Children’s Commissioner requests information on all strip searches of children by police forces in England and Wales
• Child Q – Sorry needs to mean it won’t happen again

Related News Articles

How should schools respond to the ‘Child Q’ review?

This week the City of London and Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership published a child safeguarding practice review examining the case of “Child Q”, a black female child of secondary age who was strip-searched by female police officers because school staff believed the child smelled of cannabis and suspected that she was carrying drugs.

The search, although undertaken by police officers, took place at the child’s school and involved exposure of her intimate body parts, and it was additionally humiliating because she was menstruating at the time of the search.

School staff remained outside of the room, no appropriate adult was present for the search and the child was asked to return directly to an exam afterwards.

• Safeguarding: The key proposed changes to government guidance
• Online safety: How to assess online safeguarding risk
• Tougher safeguarding rules: All teachers need to know

The review focuses on a number of areas where failures occurred and says that, ultimately, the best interests of the child - a key tenet of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child - were not upheld by those who should have been protecting her.

Strip-searching the child as a response to the initial concern did not put the safeguarding needs of the child first, and the report says that the child’s race was significant in the decisions made about the response. The review concludes that “ one feature believed to have a significance to the experience of Child Q is that of adultification bias… [which is where] adults perceive black children as being older than they are ”.

As a result, the child’s vulnerabilities were not considered and appropriate action was not taken to identify risk and provide help and protection.

The voice of the child within this review is especially powerful. Child Q said: ” I need to know that the people who have done this to me can’t do it to anyone else ever again. In fact, so NO ONE else can do this to any other child in their care […] Things need to change with all organisations involved. Even I can see that .”

The purpose of child safeguarding practice reviews is to consider improvements that should be made to better safeguard and promote the welfare of children, and all schools can and should learn from the experience of Child Q and improve their processes to prevent anything like this from happening again.

Safeguarding: What schools can learn from the Child Q case

So what can school leaders do now as a result of this report? In order to respond, schools could take these five steps:

1. Review their approach to searching, screening and confiscation

The school approach to searching, screening and confiscation should be detailed within relevant school policies and it is essential that the school procedures reflect a “safeguarding first” approach with a clear understanding that all children should be protected from harm at all times when being searched. Guidance on this is available , but the review recommends that this is both updated and strengthened. In particular, the report mentions both “keeping records and engaging parents” as best safeguarding practice.

2. ‘Smelling of drugs’ is first and foremost a safeguarding issue

If children smell of drugs or are suspected of carrying drugs, this is a safeguarding issue first and foremost.

Appropriate responses should be put in place to ascertain the contextual risks to that child and what else may be happening that has meant that they may have drugs on the school site. Punitive action without a safeguarding response is not sufficient.

3. Train staff on the rights of the child

Designated safeguarding leads and school leaders should ensure that all safeguarding leads and teams are trained and confident in multi-agency working.

This review says that the school “ deferred to the authority of the police ”, and should have been more challenging. Understanding local protocols (such as escalation policies) is important to ensure that agencies work together effectively and hold each other to account when appropriate action is not being taken.

4. Update training for all staff and governors

All staff working in a school should be trained in anti-discriminatory practice - including understanding adultification bias - and the appropriate language to use and actions to take to avoid victim-blaming or victim-shaming.

Avoiding victim-blaming is particularly pertinent where children may be the victims of child criminal exploitation and the Children’s Society’s Appropriate Language guide may assist in this.

5. Review policies considering the voice and experience of the child

The voice and experience of the child should always be considered, and this is an essential component within Article 3 of the UNCRC, which states that “ the best interests of a child must be a top priority in all decisions and actions that affect children ”.

This is integral to school statutory guidance (Keeping Children Safe in Education) and should already be embedded within school policies, but schools may wish to consider how the views of the child are ascertained and listened to in situations involving searching, screening and confiscation.

Lessons to be learned

The overarching point that underpins all safeguarding practice is that we must always take the time to look, listen and consider what is happening and if it is the right action to keep the child and other children safe. If it isn’t, staff must challenge this to ensure that children are protected and to prevent circumstances like those impacting on Child Q from ever happening again.

Elizabeth Rose has 15 years of experience working in secondary schools as a designated safeguarding officer, and as the safeguarding education officer in children’s services at Coventry City Council

You need a Tes subscription to read this article

Subscribe now to read this article and get other subscriber-only content:.

• Unlimited access to all Tes magazine content
• Exclusive subscriber-only stories
• Award-winning email newsletters

Already a subscriber? Log in

You need a subscription to read this article

Subscribe now to read this article and get other subscriber-only content, including:.

topics in this article

• Learning & Improvement
• Annual Report & Priorities
• TUSK Briefings
• Worried about a Child?
• Allegations against Staff & Volunteers
• Child Protection Procedures
• Practice Guidance
• Policy Guidance
• Schools & Colleges
• Events & Courses
• Info & Advice
• What is Child Abuse?
• Guidance & Top Tips

Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review – Child Q

In 2  020, Child Q, a Black female child of secondary school age, was strip searched by female police officers from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The search, which involved the exposure of Child Q’s intimate body parts, took place on school premises, without an Appropriate Adult present and with the knowledge that Child Q was menstruating.

Due to the level of her distress, Child Q’s mother took her to the family GP who made a referral for psychological support leading to contact with Hackney Children and Families Services (Hackney CFS).

Following a multi-agency Rapid Review, the City and Hackney Safeguarding Children’s Partnership commissioned a Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review. The report and statement of the CHSCP’s Independent Child Safeguarding Commissioner, Jim Gamble QPM, can be found HERE .  

Child Q: Case of girl, 15, being strip-searched by police 'should horrify us all'

The family of the girl - known as Child Q - is suing the Metropolitan Police and her school over the incident, which happened in December 2020.

Sunday 27 March 2022 13:11, UK

The case of a 15-year-old girl strip-searched by police at her school "should horrify us all", a government adviser has said.

Nimco Ali, an independent government adviser on tackling violence against women and girls, told the Sophy Ridge On Sunday show: "I think the idea of a child being strip-searched - be they female or male - should be something we shouldn't be able to tolerate in this country."

The family of the girl - known as Child Q - is suing the Metropolitan Police and her school over the incident , which happened in December 2020.

It came to light this month in a safeguarding report , which found that racism "was likely to have been an influencing factor".

The Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review, conducted by City & Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership, revealed that the teenager was pulled out of an exam to be searched after teachers called the police .

Two female officers conducted the strip search, in which the schoolgirl's intimate body parts were exposed and she was made to take off her sanitary towel, according to the review.

Family members described her as changing from a "happy-go-lucky girl to a timid recluse that hardly speaks", who now self-harms and needs therapy.

More from UK

Sir Keir Starmer: Prime minister says things 'will get worse before it gets better'

Londonderry: PSNI open murder probe after woman found dead after 'heinous and evil' attack in flat fire

Notting Hill: Thousands of police officers expected at carnival in wake of UK riots

There is more for us to do on racism

When asked about the possible role of racism in the incident, Ms Ali said: "This country is one of the most tolerant countries in Europe.

"Is there more for us to do? Yes there is.

"COVID has really brought out a lot of seedy people - I've kind of experienced that in the last two years - really horrific experiences of racism, which I never thought that the UK could be capable of."

She added: "Ultimately, we have to talk about the Met Police and institutional racism."

Scotland Yard has apologised over the incident and said it "should never have happened".

The Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC) has investigated three police officers for misconduct.

Ms Ali also raised concerns about the Homes For Ukraine programme, which allows Britons to host Ukrainians who have fled the war in their own country.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Safeguarding issue for refugees

Ms Ali, who came to the UK as a refugee at the age of seven, said there could be a safeguarding issue, saying there was not as much importance being placed on this as there had been with Syrian and Afghan refugees.

"Those who want to take advantage of vulnerable people will use this opportunity where people are looking for safety, in order to abuse them.

"We have to be wary and conscious of the fact that there are going to be some people who don't necessarily have the best intentions when they talk about taking refugees in."

Subscribe to the Sophy Ridge on Sunday podcast on Apple podcasts , Google podcasts , Spotify , Spreaker

The scheme pays hosts £350 a month if they house a refugee for at least six months, but it has been criticised for not working quickly enough to grant visas.

Last week it was reported that more than 150,000 people in Britain had registered their interest in hosting a refugee but the government has not said how many applicants have been successful.

Lessons from The Case of Child Q

First, I will start by outlining the case of Child Q. Although there was widespread outrage and comprehensive coverage of the case, some of my international readers may be unfamiliar with it.

A summary of the Child Q case

In 2020, a Black female child, referred to as Child Q, was strip searched by two female police officers. The search took place on school premises without any supervision from a member of staff at the school. The search involved intrusive inspection of the child’s intimate body parts. During this search, Child Q was forced to remove her tampon for inspection of her genitals. The details of the case are graphic, and some parts are hard to write. Reading the Safeguarding Practice Review on the case was emotionally taxing for me and there were times I wanted to put it down and leave it alone. But this case warrants significant in-depth exploration.

I write this piece not to follow the latest sensational story or play identity politics. I write this piece as an act of process reform so that this does not happen again. The remaining contents of this article will devote itself to several recommendations for schools and their safeguarding practices. I do not write this as a safeguarding expert, but as an education professional seeking to do better for all children where we can eradicate discrimination in various ugly forms. Misconduct, mismanagement, and malpractice give us an opportunity to reform our behaviour and clean up house. The following recommendations I have set out serve to this end.

General Safeguarding Tips

• Never defer a situation to the police without having an Appropriate Adult present. An Appropriate Adult should be the DSL, DDSL or member of the Senior Leadership Team. Every member of staff should know who their DSL and DDSL is. Child Q was left alone whilst she was strip searched. This was an egregious failure on the part of school leadership. If possible, parents should be present.
• Always inform parents during any critical scenarios such as fighting or violent conduct, suspicion of drugs or prohibited substances, carrying of weapons or anything that may require intervention from the police or external agencies. The only exception to this should be cases where informing parents could potentially place the child at greater risk.
• Take a child centric approach in all matters concerning safeguarding. Schools should build a culture driven by the spirit of Article 3 in the UNCRC (best interests of the child). Such an approach can serve as a north star, putting at the forefront the child’s wellbeing, welfare, development, and protection. I’d also advise colleagues to look closely at Article 12 of the UNCRC “Respect for the views of the child”. The Safeguarding Practice Review for the Child Q case claims that the young girl asked for her mother to be present during the event, but this was denied. If this is true, then clearly her rights, in the context of Article 12, were violated. The full convention for children’s rights can be found here .
• I think there’s a significant need for schools to have Counsellors on site. These professionals can provide a particularly child-centric perspective during a vast array of situations involving child welfare. Unlike SLTs, they are not overly focused on KPIs, league tables and teaching and learning targets, subsequently allowing them to put students at the centre.
• Practise a range of case studies as mock simulations. Although nothing can fully prepare us for dealing with real life situations, having a range of mental models acquired through rehearsals can provide opportunities for school staff to devise appropriate actions and responses. It’s interesting that we conduct regular fire drills but seldomly or never for matters of safeguarding and critical incidents. Following these simulations, I’d recommend conducting ‘post-mortems’ to identify and explore appropriate and weak responses from colleagues

This post is by no means exhaustive. Perhaps the most significant factor in the Child Q case is that of race. This aspect warrants a whole exploration of its own. There are qualified experts in this area whom we need to listen to. I can say with certainty, if we approach safeguarding cases from a child-centred perspective, I feel we can mitigate many of the potential dangers and pitfalls of making devastating mistakes.

If you found this content useful or helpful in any way, subscribe to my blog and get future material delivered straight to your inbox.

Related Articles

On the development of a pastoral curriculum.

In Uncategorized

How to Discuss Challenging Issues in the Classroom

It is the taking part that counts…, one thought on “ lessons from the case of child q ”.

• Pingback: The Case of Raheem Bailey – KEYS

Comments are closed.

Discover more from KEYS

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

Subscribe to the KEYS Education blog

Join my mailing list to receive email notifications when I publish new posts and the occasional tip or offer that I think might prove useful to you.

I will not send you SPAM and you are free to unsubscribe at any time.

• 💳•••► £ CONTRIBUTE
• 🇵🇸 FREE PALESTINE
• ® BLM LICENSING
• HISTORY OF BLM
• REPORTS & REVIEWS
• ARTICLES & PUBLICATIONS
• TALKING RACE PODCAST (Spotify)
• BLACK KIDS MATTER UK
• BLACK QUEEN OF ENGLAND
• OLAUDAH EQUIANO
• IGNATIUS SANCHO
• MARY SEACOLE
• FREDERICK DOUGLAS
• HARRIET TUBMAN
• NELSON ROLIHLAHLA MANDELA
• JAMES BALDWIN
• MARTIN LUTHER KING JNR
• STOKELY CARMICHAEL
• NIKKI GIOVANNI
• DESMOND TUTU
• JAMES BROWN
• SISLIN FAY ALLEN
• MUHAMMAD ALI
• ANGELA DAVIS
• DR CORNEL WEST
• BARACK OBAMA
• MICHELLE & OPRAH
• BERNIE PAUL DIANNE
• BLACK PANTHER PARTY (BPP)
• DAWN BUTLER
• DAVID LAMMY
• SHOLA MOS-SHOGBAMIMU
• CHADWICK AARON BOSEMAN
• COLIN KAEPERNICK
• LEWIS HAMILTON
• JOHN BOYEGA
• MARCUS RASHFORD
• MEGHAN & HARRY
• KAMALA HARRIS
• PARTNERS & PROJECTS
• THE NOD FILM
• TOO AUTISTIC FOR BLACK
• BLACK VOICES
• 360 EXHIBITION
• JAMAL EDWARDS
• YOUTUBE MOODS
• BLACK & BRITISH NARRATIVES (BBC COLLECTION)
• BLACK ENGLISH SCOTTISH AND IRISH
• FREE ONLINE FILMS & STAGE SHOWS
• FREE BLACK LIVES ON FILM BFI Player
• S.M.I.L.E-ing BOYS PROJECT
• THOMAS ROUGHAN
• TOMI KHATIM
• SHOLA ADEWALE SANDY
• CONSTANTINE
• IJE MCDOUGALL
• QAIS HUSSAIN
• DIONNE SIMPSON
• MELISSA OWEN
• ASHLEY L SMITH
• BLAKE EVERITT
• MIKE CURTIS
• LESLIE KITCHEN
• MARK NELSON-BAVIN
• WHITE ALLIES
• BLACK PEOPLE 18TH CENTURY
• BLACK LIVES 18th CENTURY GB
• THE BRITISH MONARCHY
• BRITISH SLAVE TRADE DEBT
• SPOTIFY: Slavery Remembrance Playlist
• MODERN DAY SLAVERY
• UNSOLVED DEATHS
• CHRISTOPHER ALDER STORY
• SHEKU BAYOH
• GEORGE FLOYD
• THIN BLUE LINE
• 2 SIDES OF POLICING
• CRIME & JUSTICE STUDIES - BLM
• •••► USEFUL LINKS
• •••► HELP & SUPPORT
• •••► CONTACT US

March 2022  BLACKLIVESMATTER.UK   we wrote to at least 14 people in public office to share parents and the nations shared outrage at the treatment and lack of safeguarding for   Child Q. We still have grave concerns for Black children’s human rights and dignity. Sadly their rights, safeguarding and protection are all too often denied in institutions, from people in environments having power over them. It’s not uncommon for our children to be left unprotected from harm whilst they are in the care and supervision of local authority, care and services.

The outright lack of care from professionals in this instance is heinous, and all involved must not get away with treating children with little respect and human dignity even on a basic level.

A review found racism   played a part in the unlawful strip search of a Child Q at a school and with Teachers and police shared and equal involvement and responsibility. Both failed dismally. Each step of the way the 'so called ‘professionals showed inadequacy in their positions. They have a duty of care, and now they   must   to be held accountable.

Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review

Racism 5.63 Finding 8: Having considered the context of the incident, the views of those engaged in the review and the impact felt by Child Q and her family, racism (whether deliberate or not) was likely to have been an influencing factor in the decision to undertake a strip search.

The outraged was nationwide, highlighted with protests taking place at Stoke Newington police station on Friday 18th and Sunday Hackney Town Hall 20th March 2022.

While our email is being passed to another Home Office’s Direct Communications Unit we sharing a letter received with you, see below .

Hackney Council

Email Letter Format: 25/03/2022

“ Dear whom it may concern

Thank you for writing to the Council regarding the Local Child Safeguarding Practice review into the case of Child Q. As Group Director for Children & Education, I am responding on behalf of the Council.

My thoughts are first and foremost with the child and her family. We know that there will have been a traumatic impact on this girl, her family and those closest to her. Please be assured that the Council is continuing to offer support to Child Q and her family, who are our utmost priority.

The anonymity of Child Q is paramount and anything said or done to identify her would be wrong.... ”

Jacquie Burke Group Director (Children & Education) 2nd Floor, Hackney Town Hall 020 8356 8032 Executive Support Officer:

[email protected]

Education Department

Email Letter Format: 11/04/2022

"Dear Correspondent

Thank you for your recent correspondence following the publication of the local child safeguarding practice review on 14 March 2022, and the concerns you have raised on behalf of Child Q.

I hope you will appreciate that, whilst many people have contacted the department to find reason and justice on Child Q’s behalf, it is of paramount importance that the anonymity of Child Q and her family, and that of the  chool, are preserved. The department is in touch with the local authority, and they are supporting Child Q.

I am sure you will also appreciate that the ongoing Independent Office for Police Conduct investigation means it would be inappropriate for us to comment further on the actions taken by the police.

Nothing is more important than a child’s welfare and everyone who comes into contact with children has a role to play in ensuring that their welfare considerations remain paramount. There is a shared responsibility between organisations and agencies to safeguard and promote the welfare of all children in a local area at all times. Further, it is the duty of the statutory safeguarding partners, police, local authority and health  to join up the activities and policies of all multi-agency partners to ensure children are safe... "

Department for Education

[email protected]

'To contact the Department for Education please call the National Helpline on 0370 000 2288 or use the contact form which can be found at  www.gov.uk/contact-dfe . We will endeavour to provide you with a response within 15 working days, or 20 working days if your request was made under the Freedom of Information Act.

If you have concerns that a child is at an immediate risk of harm, please contact your local authority or the Police on 101.

If you are concerned about extremism in a school or organisations that works with children, or if you think a child might be at risk of extremism, contact the National Helpline.'

Home Office

Email & Letter Format : April 2022

“ Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your email of 17 March to the Minister for Safeguarding about the deeply concerning report released by City and Hackney Safeguarding Partnership into the strip search of a 15-year-old schoolgirl (Child Q) by police officers in 2020. Your email has been passed to the Home Office’s Direct Communications Unit for a reply.

This experience will have been traumatic for the child, her family and the community, and the impact upon her welfare should not be underestimated. Strip search is one of the most intrusive powers available to the police and the law is very clear that the use of police powers to search must be fair, respectful and without unlawful discrimination. Any use of strip search should be carried out in accordance with the law and with full regard for the welfare and dignity of the individual being searched, particularly if that  ndividual is a child.

If police judge it operationally necessary to strip search a child, they must do so in the presence of the child’s appropriate adult. ”

Stephen Gearing

Email: [email protected]

Direct Communications Unit 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Tel: 020 7035 4848

www.homeoffice.gov.uk

Dame Rachel de Souza Quote:

"i was also shocked, but sadly not surprised after the experiences of child q, to learn that of all boys who were strip searched, 58% were black, as described by the officer., 53% of all strip searches of children resulted in no further action taken, which calls into question how justified these intrusive and traumatising searches were." .

• Childrens Comminsioner Statement
• Foreword & Full Report
• New Analysis Here

[1] Children’s Commissioner for England, Business Plan 2022/23, 2022. Available at : https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/about-us/corporate-governance/business-plan-2022-23 . Accessed on 04/08/22.

[2] Children’s Commissioner for England, The Big Ask: The Big Answer, 2021. Available at:

https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/about-us/corporate-governance/business-plan-2022-23 . Accessed on 04/08/22.

[3] Under the Police and Criminal Evidence (PACE) Act (1984), it is a requirement that an Appropriate Adult is present when a child is strip searched, except in cases of urgency where there is a risk of serious harm to the child or others. As defined in the Act, an Appropriate Adult is usually a parent or guardian, but can be a social worker, or representative of a local authority or charitable organisation the child is in the care of. An Appropriate Adult can be any responsible person over the age of 18 who is not a police officer, and local schemes exist for volunteers to play this role.

STOP ✋🏽 WAR on Black kids in Britain. Protect and safeguard Black kids. Black children are at serious harm, neglect and traumatised perpetrated by racist institutions, not least the @metpoliceuk who physically as well as mentally injure Black kids @PoliceChiefs #BlackKidsMatterUK — BLACK KIDS MATTER🐦 (@BLMKidsUK) June 30, 2022

There’s a literal war on Black children, to harm, dehumanise and control young people! Trauma will go on for generations to come. Face your evil make up you institutional racist horrible thugs. We hold deep rooted contempt and repugnance, zero respect. @metpoliceuk @PoliceChiefs https://t.co/L3EL4PfPL3 — BLACK KIDS MATTER🐦 (@BLMKidsUK) June 29, 2022

Black schoolgirl strip searched by police while on her period – report

A safeguarding review found that ‘racism was likely to have been an influencing factor’.

No Police in Schools Demo  - 4pm Friday 18th March Stoke Newington Police Station

BLACK KIDS MATTER🐦 (@BLMKidsUK) / Twitter

Child Q Case Reviews  

Case Reviews | chscp

•••► Statement by Jim Gamble QPM - Child Q

•••► Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review - Child Q

Girl, 15, was strip-searched ‘because of racist attitudes’

Metropolitan Police officers based at Stoke Newington Police Station were almost certainly influenced by racism, racist attitudes and perceptions and adultification of Black girls when they decided to strip-searched a 15-year-old Black schoolgirl who was menstruating.

The MET has now apologised after the secondary school pupil, who was wrongly suspected of carrying cannabis, was searched without another adult present, in a breach of the rules.

Diane Abbott MP on Twitter: "The indignities that Child Q was subjected to are not an aberration, they're part of a bigger picture of institutional racism and discrimination within policing. I’m appalled this happened in Hackney and I've written to the Borough Commander demanding an urgent meeting #ChildQ 

@HackneyCopWatch  and other groups are organising against the harms of policing in schools and elsewhere. For further reading on the issue of police in schools you can find a range of resources here: Resources | No Police In Schools

Stoke Newington Police Station Demo

•••► Friday 18th March 2022 @4pm

#NoPoliceInSchools

IT'S WAY OVER TIME

Hackney council has challenged the met police to again accept institutional racism.

Hackney council has challenged the Met to “again, accept that institutional racism as defined in the Stephen Lawrence report – is a consistent factor in the relationship between the police and the Black and Global Majority communities, and in their wider experiences”. They said this might prevent a similar incident happening again and restore trust and confidence.

The girl was strip-searched at her east  London  school by two female officers in Hackney in December 2020, after being wrongly suspected of carrying drugs.

Protests were held in London last month after a report by the City & Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership, which found that Child Q – who was having her period at the time – was made to remove her clothing, underwear and a sanitary pad, spread her buttocks and cough.

The review concluded that racism was “likely” to have been a factor, Child Q should never have been strip-searched and there was an  absence of a safeguarding-first approach .

Read more in the guardian - click here

We believe in a world where everyone belongs and we reject racism that stands in the way.

MAKE THAT STAND WITH US

ZERO TOLERANCE TO RACISM

#BlackLivesMatter

•••► If you notice a broken link that is no longer working please let us now!

If you support the cause, and our work, appreciate our content and would like to contribute to the upkeep and running of the site so we may continue to keep Black Lives Matter awareness alive, to educate helping to eliminate and eradicate racism, please click the donate button below.

[email protected]

 © Copyright includes text, graphic images displayed on this web-plaform.

All rights reserved.

BLACKLIVESMATTER.UK

Blog The Education Hub

https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2024/08/20/gcse-results-day-2024-number-grading-system/

GCSE results day 2024: Everything you need to know including the number grading system

Thousands of students across the country will soon be finding out their GCSE results and thinking about the next steps in their education.   

Here we explain everything you need to know about the big day, from when results day is, to the current 9-1 grading scale, to what your options are if your results aren’t what you’re expecting.  

When is GCSE results day 2024?  

GCSE results day will be taking place on Thursday the 22 August.     

The results will be made available to schools on Wednesday and available to pick up from your school by 8am on Thursday morning.  

Schools will issue their own instructions on how and when to collect your results.   

When did we change to a number grading scale?  

The shift to the numerical grading system was introduced in England in 2017 firstly in English language, English literature, and maths.  

By 2020 all subjects were shifted to number grades. This means anyone with GCSE results from 2017-2020 will have a combination of both letters and numbers.  

The numerical grading system was to signal more challenging GCSEs and to better differentiate between students’ abilities - particularly at higher grades between the A *-C grades. There only used to be 4 grades between A* and C, now with the numerical grading scale there are 6.  

What do the number grades mean?  

The grades are ranked from 1, the lowest, to 9, the highest.  

The grades don’t exactly translate, but the two grading scales meet at three points as illustrated below.  

The bottom of grade 7 is aligned with the bottom of grade A, while the bottom of grade 4 is aligned to the bottom of grade C.    

Meanwhile, the bottom of grade 1 is aligned to the bottom of grade G.  

What to do if your results weren’t what you were expecting?  

If your results weren’t what you were expecting, firstly don’t panic. You have options.  

First things first, speak to your school or college – they could be flexible on entry requirements if you’ve just missed your grades.   

They’ll also be able to give you the best tailored advice on whether re-sitting while studying for your next qualifications is a possibility.   

If you’re really unhappy with your results you can enter to resit all GCSE subjects in summer 2025. You can also take autumn exams in GCSE English language and maths.  

Speak to your sixth form or college to decide when it’s the best time for you to resit a GCSE exam.  

Look for other courses with different grade requirements     

Entry requirements vary depending on the college and course. Ask your school for advice, and call your college or another one in your area to see if there’s a space on a course you’re interested in.    

Consider an apprenticeship    

Apprenticeships combine a practical training job with study too. They’re open to you if you’re 16 or over, living in England, and not in full time education.  

As an apprentice you’ll be a paid employee, have the opportunity to work alongside experienced staff, gain job-specific skills, and get time set aside for training and study related to your role.   

You can find out more about how to apply here .  

Talk to a National Careers Service (NCS) adviser    

The National Career Service is a free resource that can help you with your career planning. Give them a call to discuss potential routes into higher education, further education, or the workplace.   

Whatever your results, if you want to find out more about all your education and training options, as well as get practical advice about your exam results, visit the  National Careers Service page  and Skills for Careers to explore your study and work choices.   

You may also be interested in:

• Results day 2024: What's next after picking up your A level, T level and VTQ results?
• When is results day 2024? GCSEs, A levels, T Levels and VTQs

Tags: GCSE grade equivalent , gcse number grades , GCSE results , gcse results day 2024 , gsce grades old and new , new gcse grades

Sharing and comments

Share this page, related content and links, about the education hub.

The Education Hub is a site for parents, pupils, education professionals and the media that captures all you need to know about the education system. You’ll find accessible, straightforward information on popular topics, Q&As, interviews, case studies, and more.

Please note that for media enquiries, journalists should call our central Newsdesk on 020 7783 8300. This media-only line operates from Monday to Friday, 8am to 7pm. Outside of these hours the number will divert to the duty media officer.

Members of the public should call our general enquiries line on 0370 000 2288.

Sign up and manage updates

Follow us on social media, search by date.

Comments and moderation policy

• Share full article

For more audio journalism and storytelling, download New York Times Audio , a new iOS app available for news subscribers.

• Apple Podcasts
• Google Podcasts

At the Democratic Convention, a Historic Nomination

What story did the democrats tell about kamala harris and will it be enough to win.

Hosted by Sabrina Tavernise

Featuring Astead W. Herndon and Reid J. Epstein

Produced by Lynsea Garrison Rob Szypko Jessica Cheung Asthaa Chaturvedi and Shannon Lin

Edited by Rachel Quester

Original music by Rowan Niemisto Marion Lozano Dan Powell and Diane Wong

Engineered by Chris Wood

Listen and follow ‘The Daily’ Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube | iHeartRadio

Last night, at the Democratic National Convention, Vice President Kamala Harris accepted her party’s nomination, becoming the first woman of color in U.S. history to do so.

Astead W. Herndon and Reid J. Epstein, who cover politics for The Times, discuss the story this convention told about Ms. Harris — and whether that story could be enough to win the presidential election.

On today’s episode

Astead W. Herndon , a national politics reporter and the host of the politics podcast “ The Run-Up ” for The New York Times.

Reid J. Epstein , who covers politics for The New York Times.

Background reading

Kamala Harris promised to chart a “new way forward” as she accepted the nomination.

“The Run-Up”: It’s her party now. What’s different?

There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.

We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.

The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Michael Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.

Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson, Nina Lassam and Nick Pitman.

Astead W. Herndon is a national politics reporter and the host of the politics podcast “The Run-Up.” More about Astead W. Herndon

Reid J. Epstein covers campaigns and elections from Washington. Before joining The Times in 2019, he worked at The Wall Street Journal, Politico, Newsday and The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. More about Reid J. Epstein

Advertisement