Mr Nana Opong

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions themselves. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel. 

Teacher's name: Mr Nana Opong

Teacher reference number: 9635308

Teacher's date of birth: 22 March 1969

Location teacher worked: Birmingham, West Midlands

Date of professional conduct panel: 10 April 2025

Outcome type: Prohibition order

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with The Teacher's’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, a professional conduct panel was convened to consider the case of Mr Nano Opong, formerly employed in Birmingham, West Midlands.

Teacher misconduct

Ground Floor, South

Cheylesmore House

5 Quinton RoadCoventryCV1 2WT

Email TRA.Casework@education.gov.uk

Telephone 020 7593 5393

Information about regulating the teaching profession and the process for dealing with serious teacher misconduct.

Mr Nana Opong: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education April 2025 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Statement of agreed facts 6 Decision and reasons 6 Findings of fact 7 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 13 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 17 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Nana Opong Teacher ref number: 96/35308 Teacher date of birth: 22 March 1969 TRA reference: 22697 Date of determination: 10 April 2025 Former employer: Sutton Coldfield Grammar School for Girls, Sutton Coldfield Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 10 April 2025 by way of a virtual meeting, to consider the case of Mr Nana Opong. The panel members were Ms Emma Hendry (lay panellist – in the chair), Mr Alan Wells (former teacher panellist) and Ms Gill Lyon (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Delme Griffiths of Blake Morgan LLP Solicitors. In advance of the meeting, after taking into consideration the public interest and the interests of justice, the TRA agreed to a request from Mr Opong that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Opong provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of a presenting officer, Mr Opong or any representative appointed on his behalf. The meeting took place in private. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 2 April 2025. It was alleged that Mr Opong was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that, whilst employed as a teacher at Sutton Coldfield Grammar School for Girls between September 2019 and October 2023: 1. He failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries with one or more pupils/former pupils, by; a. Sending Pupil A and/or Pupil B one or more surveys of a personal nature; b. Using a personal email address to communicate with Pupil A on one or more occasions; c. Requesting Pupil A send photographs of herself to him on one or more occasions; d. Advising Pupil A that he “look at photos of her from time to time” or using words to that effect; e. Making one or more inappropriate comments to Pupil A, namely by; i. Stating to Pupil A “Well you look well and rested. I am trying not to say too much... You know - I call you Princess [Pupil A] behind your back” or using words to that effect; ii. Stating to Pupil A “I remember once seeing you wearing flowers on your head like tiara. But the great thing about you, is how intelligent and hardworking you are. You will certainly go very far whatever you set your mind to” or using words to that effect; iii. Stating to Pupil A “When I say you are different, I mean I love the fact that you like things like cuddly toys, Disney films and go to the baby section of shops. You have these child like qualities and make no apologies for it. However at the same time you have an amazing cognitive ability to process and understand challenging topics such as psychology, chemistry and biology. Two contrasting parts in the same person. Add to that is the fact that you look amazing, and have a gentle and kind personality” or using words to that effect; iv. Stating to Pupil A “No - I will never get bored with you so I wouldn't stop talking to you. However I know like a beautiful! butterfly, you will one day fly away. It is just the fact of life and rightly so. We are just at 5 the wrong / opposite side of the spectrum” or using words to that effect; f. Inviting Pupil A to communicate with him once a week; g. Telling Pupil A that her pictures “make [him] happy” or using words to that effect; h. Declining to delete photographs that Pupil A sent of herself alone and/or with other pupils on one or more occasions. 2. He sought to conceal the contact he had with Pupil A by; a. Asking Pupil A to “delete everything” or used words to that effect; b. Suggesting to Pupil A that he would get in trouble at work for talking to her and/or indicating that if Pupil A blackmailed him, he would retaliate by throwing eggs at her window. 3. His conduct at allegation 2 lacked integrity and/or was dishonest. Mr Opong admitted the facts of all of the allegations and that his conduct amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the meeting, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology – page 5 Section 2: Notice of meeting and response – pages 7 to 25 Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 26 to 36 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 38 to 218 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 217 to 218 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the meeting. In the consideration of this case, the panel had regard to the document Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession 2020, (the “Procedures”). 6 Statement of agreed facts The panel considered a statement of agreed facts which was signed by Mr Opong on 14 February 2025. Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. In advance of the meeting the TRA agreed to a request from Mr Opong for the allegations to be considered without a hearing. The panel had the ability to direct that the case be considered at a hearing if required in the interests of justice or in the public interest. The panel did not determine that such a direction was necessary or appropriate in this case. Mr Opong was previously employed as a teacher and head of computer science at Sutton Coldfield Grammar School for Girls (“the School”). He commenced that role on 1 September 2019. On 4 September 2023, a former pupil at the School reported concerns about Mr Opong to another teacher. The pupil is referred to as a Pupil A for the purposes of these proceedings. Pupil A had been a pupil in [READCTED] in the previous school year. On 5 September 2023, following a meeting with Pupil A at the School, a referral was made to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO). Pupil A reported that they had been communicating with Mr Opong via his personal email address, that he had made inappropriate comments and requested images of Pupil A. Pupil A provided several screenshots of their conversations, advising that others had been deleted. On 7 September 2023, the LADO confirmed that the School could conduct an internal investigation and Mr Opong was suspended from duties. A referral was also made to the police, which resulted in no further action being taken. On 18 September 2023, Mr Opong attended an investigatory meeting. 7 On 21 September 2023, Mr Opong was referred to a disciplinary hearing, which was held in his absence on 6 October 2023. Whilst the panel was notified of the outcome of that hearing, it was disregarded for the purposes of its deliberations. The panel made its own, independent decision based on the evidence presented. On 27 October 2023, Mr Opong was referred to the TRA. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: 1. You failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries with one or more pupils/former pupils, by; The panel considered particulars 1(a) to (h) of allegation 1 before going to on determine the stem of the allegation, namely whether by his actions Mr Opong failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries with one or more pupils/former pupils. a. Sending Pupil A and/or Pupil B one or more surveys of a personal nature; The panel was presented with two surveys sent by Mr Opong, one relating to computing and one described as a ‘general’ survey. Mr Opong admitted sending the latter to Pupil A and Pupil B. There was also evidence that the pupils provided a response. The panel was satisfied that the content of this survey was personal, asking questions such as “what do you love” and “what thoughts or things instantly make you more relaxed”. They were sent to just the two pupils, one of whom Mr Opong did not teach. There was no explanation as to why this survey was sent, particularly noting it was unrelated to educational matters and outside of the school year. On the basis of Mr Opong’s admission, which was consistent with the evidence presented to the panel, it found particular (a) of allegation 1 proved. b. Using a personal email address to communicate with Pupil A on one or more occasions; The panel was presented with various emails deriving from Mr Opong’s work email address sent to Pupil A. Whilst examples were not included in evidence, Mr Opong also admitted that he communicated with Pupil A via a personal email address. This was referenced and acknowledged at various parts of the case papers. On the basis of Mr Opong’s admission, which was consistent with the evidence presented to the panel, it found particular (b) of allegation 1 proved. However, in the 8 absence of these communications the panel was unable to determine the extent to which the content of the emails was appropriate or otherwise. c. Requesting Pupil A send photographs of herself to you on one or more occasions; Mr Opong accepted that he requested Pupil A send photographs of herself to him on at least one occasion. On the basis of Mr Opong’s admission, wh