Ms Alison Simmons

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: Ms Alison Simmons

Teacher reference number: 3572260

Teacher's date of birth: 06 December 1969

Location teacher worked: Boston, East of England

Date of professional conduct panel: 19 January 2026 to the 30 January 2026

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 Ms Alison Simmons formerly employed in Boston, East of England.

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.

Ms Alison Simmons: Professional conduct panel hearing outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education January 2026 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Witnesses 5 Decision and reasons 6 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 23 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 28 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Ms Alison Simmons Teacher ref number: 3572260 Teacher date of birth: 6 December 1969 TRA reference: 21311 Date of determination: 30 January 2026 Former employer: Build A Future Independent School, Boston Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 19 January 2026 to 30 January 2026 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Ms Alison Simmons. The panel members were Mr Terry Hyde (teacher panellist – in the chair), Mr Paul Hawkins (lay panellist) and Ms Rosemary Joyce (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Rebecca Hughes of Birketts LLP solicitors. The presenting officers for the TRA was Mr Mark Millin from 19 January 2026 and Mr Lee Bridges for 28 and 29 January 2026, both instructed by Kingsley Napley LLP solicitors. Ms Simmons was not present and was not represented. The hearing took place in public, save that portions of the hearing were heard in private, and were recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of proceedings dated 17 September 2025. It was alleged that Ms Simmons was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute in that whilst working as deputy headteacher at Build A Future (“the School”): 1. Between 28 September 2020 and 28 January 2021, she: a. Engaged in and/or allowed inappropriate behaviour with pupils, in that she: i. Brought eggs on a trip in or around December 2020, to be thrown at pupils and/or allowed the throwing of eggs at pupils. b. Allowed and/or failed to prevent colleagues using inappropriate language regarding pupils, as set out in Schedule 1; c. Stated to one or more colleagues that she had not witnessed and/or heard inappropriate behaviour and/or comments by staff members, or words to that effect, when this was not the case. 2. Between 28 September 2020 and 28 January 2021, within her role as Designated Safeguarding Lead, she did not safeguard the welfare of pupils and/or staff at the School. 3. Her conduct at paragraph 1c) was: a. Dishonest; b. Lacked integrity. Schedule 1 i. You allowed and/or failed to prevent staff referring to Pupil F as “fat tits” and/or pupils as “fat bastard”, or words to that effect; ii. You allowed and/or failed to prevent Colleague D saying that Pupil E was “as wide as a bus”, or words to that effect; iii. You allowed and/or failed to prevent Colleague D stating that he had told Pupil B that he had “wanked over [REDACTED] mum’s tits”, or words to that effect. 5 Ms Simmons denied allegations 1(a)(i), 1(b), 1(c), 3(a) and 3(b) and made no admissions as to allegation 2 in her written statement dated 24 April 2023. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology, list of key people and anonymised person list – pages 9 to 13 Section 2: Notice of hearing and response – pages 14 to 46 Section 3: TRA witness statements – pages 47 to 102 Section 4: TRA documents – pages 103 to 1270 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 1271 to 1312 Service Bundle for [REDACTED] – pages 1313 to 1357 Service Bundle for [REDACTED] – pages 1358 to 1396 Service Bundle for [REDACTED] – pages 1397 to 1447 Service Bundle for Ms Alison Simmons – pages 1448 to 1498 Application to adduce hearsay – pages 1499 to 1819 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing. In the consideration of this case, the panel had regard to the document Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession 2020 (the “2020 Procedures”). Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by the presenting officer: Witness A – [REDACTED] Witness B – [REDACTED] Witness C – [REDACTED] 6 Witness D – [REDACTED] Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. On 6 May 2017, Ms Simmons commenced employment at the School. Ms Simmons was later appointed as Designated Safeguarding Lead and a deputy headteacher and was employed in these roles at the relevant time (September 2020 to January 2021). On 28 January 2021, a police investigation commenced as a result of anonymous whistleblowing allegations made against [REDACTED], Ms Simmons, [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]. On 3 February 2022, Collinson Grant LLP (previously Watershed) was instructed to conduct an internal investigation into [REDACTED], Ms Simmons, [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] following the police investigation. Witness A carried out this investigation. Following these investigations, allegations against Ms Simmons came to light. On 17 November 2022, the matter was referred to the TRA. The panel noted that [REDACTED], [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] were also facing allegations before this professional conduct panel hearing. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel considered all the evidence, including Ms Simmon’s statement in response to the TRA dated 24 April 2023 (“written statement”), the record of interview with Ms Simmons dated 27 January 2021 (the “record of the police interview”), the notes of the meeting with Witness A and Ms Simmons on 30 March 2022 (“the investigation meeting notes”), the notes of the disciplinary hearing dated 26 September 2022 and her notes on these (“disciplinary hearing notes”). The panel noted Ms Simmons did not attend the hearing to give evidence. The panel reviewed Ms Simmons’ written statement, which had been submitted by [REDACTED]. In her response, she denied the allegations, stating that her office was intended to be a safe space for staff to express concerns. She explained, however, that she did not permit staff to use derogatory language about students. 7 The panel also noted the character references for Ms Simmons within the bundle. The panel observed that the references did not make clear whether all of the authors were aware of the allegations, and further, that the references were unsigned. The panel considered the written and oral evidence of Witness B, who explained that she began recording the events at the School. The panel noted that Witness B [REDACTED] and that Ms Simmons was arrested and ceased teaching on around 28 January 2021. Accordingly, anything Witness B witnessed occurred during the relevant period. The panel questioned Witness B in her oral evidence about when and how she made her notes. The panel considered that some of the notes were contemporaneous, having been written on the day of the incident. Witness B’s evidence was that she made notes as events occurred, but that some were written at the end of the day, and others were written slightly later. The panel considered the handwritten notes and noted that some were dated, and some were not, consistent with her account that some were made immediately and others retrospectively. They also noted that several entries stated, ‘date not known’, which further indicated that not all notes were written on the day of the incident. The panel were therefore satisfied that they could attach weight to these notes. The panel also noted that Witness B confirmed in her oral evidence that she made these notes around the third week of September. The panel considered Witness B to be a credible witness. The panel considered the written evidence of Witness D, who explained that she had also begun collecting evidence in preparation for providing a statement to the police, and that she had recorded these during the week she was invited to give a statement to the police. The panel noted that, in her oral evidence, Witness D was not clear about whom she had collated the evidence for, and this was prepared during the relevant period (January 2021). The panel considered that, given the passage of time, it was likely that she experienced some minor difficulty recalling precisely when in 2021 she had collated this material. The panel noted that Witness D [REDACTED] and that Ms Simmons was arrested and ceased teaching on around 28 January 2021. Accordingly, anything Witness D witnessed occurred during the relevant period. The panel also considered Witness D to be a credible witness. The panel noted that while Ms Simmons did not attend the professional conduct panel hearing to give evidence, she denied in her written statement, the allegations. The panel considered both the written and oral evidence of Witness B and Witness D, which were consistent with each other and aligned with their contemporaneous notes. 8 The panel found Witness B and Witness D to be credible witnesses and therefore preferred their evidence wherever there was a factual dispute. The panel noted that their evidence was consistent with the other accounts regarding the prevailing culture at the School. The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved, for these reasons: Whilst working as deputy headteacher at Build a Future (“the School”): 1. Between 28 September 2020 and 28 January 2021 you: a. Engaged in and/or allowed inappropriate behaviour with pupils, in that you: i. Brought eggs on a trip in or around December 2020, to be thrown at pupils and/or allowed the