At least once every academic year. That's the DfE's filtering and monitoring standard, which KCSIE expects schools to meet. But a once-a-year tick isn't enough on its own: you should also review whenever something significant changes – and AI has made that happen a lot more often.
The short answer
Review your filtering and monitoring provision at least annually, and also when a safeguarding risk is identified, when there's a change in working practice (such as remote access or new devices), or when new technology is introduced – including AI tools.
That comes from the DfE's filtering and monitoring standards for schools and colleges. KCSIE requires governing bodies and proprietors to ensure appropriate filtering and monitoring is in place and its effectiveness is reviewed, with the DSL taking lead responsibility. See our KCSIE filtering and monitoring summary.
When to review between annual checks
- A safeguarding incident or concern linked to online activity.
- New devices – a Chromebook rollout, new iPads, a BYOD scheme.
- New AI tools approved for staff or pupils, such as Copilot for students or Gemini.
- A change of filtering or monitoring provider.
- Evidence pupils are bypassing the filter. See pupils bypassing filters for AI.
Who should be involved
- The DSL – lead responsibility.
- A senior leader – responsible for the standards being met.
- Your IT provider – technical checks and reports.
- A link governor – oversight and reporting to the board.
Want a hand with your filtering and monitoring review?
Tell me what you're trying to sort out — a tool, a policy, a parent question, a workload problem — and I'll give you a straight answer.
What the review should check
- Roles and responsibilities are clear and current.
- The filter blocks harmful content without over-blocking teaching.
- Monitoring alerts reach the right people, and are acted on.
- Coverage: all devices, all users, on and off site where applicable.
- AI: which AI tools are allowed, blocked and in use, and whether approved tools meet the DfE's product safety expectations.
- Staff know how to report concerns.
How to record it
Keep a short written record: date, who was involved, what was tested, what was found, and actions with owners and deadlines. Report the outcome to governors. If an inspector or the local authority asks, that record is your evidence.
Related quick answers
For the AI timeline in safeguarding guidance, see which safeguarding documents mention AI. For updating your safeguarding policy, see updating your KCSIE policy for AI.
Frequently asked questions
How often should the effectiveness of filtering and monitoring be reviewed?
At least once every academic year, under the DfE filtering and monitoring standards, and also when risks change, practice changes or new technology is introduced.
Who is responsible for filtering and monitoring in schools?
The DSL takes lead responsibility, working with a senior leader and IT staff, with governors ensuring it is in place and reviewed.
Does the filtering and monitoring review need to cover AI?
Yes. AI tools are new technology, and KCSIE links to the DfE's generative AI product safety expectations under filtering and monitoring.
What should a filtering and monitoring review include?
Roles, filter effectiveness without over-blocking, monitoring alerts and response, device and user coverage, AI tools and staff reporting.
Do we need to record the review?
Yes. A short written record of what was checked, findings and actions, reported to governors, is good practice and your evidence.