All Saints Catholic High School

Yes if the mission or values page leads with identity and “equity,” not knowledge. “Diversity, inclusion, belonging, decolonise, anti-racist, LGBTQ+ affirming” appear in the first screen of About / Vision / Ethos; subject excellence or meritocratic ambition is secondary or missing.

No policy text on sex, gender identity, toilets or records appears on the provided homepage.

Yes if protected-characteristic branding is house style. Rainbow lanyards, Progress flags, “pronouns in bio,” and staff email signatures with she/they are default on the public site and official social accounts, not limited to a one-day awareness post.

No social-transition or pastoral-care pathway is described.

Yes if sex and gender are treated as interchangeable in policy. Behaviour, uniform, toilets, sport, or trips documents say pupils may use facilities or teams “matching gender identity,” with no parallel sentence protecting single-sex provision.

No race or equality policy content is present.

Yes if a published “trans inclusion” or “affirmation” toolkit sits in the policies list, while there is no equally prominent sex-based safeguarding note.

No curriculum or ethos statements on migration or colonialism are shown.

Yes if curriculum pages advertise activism as learning: “decolonising the curriculum,” “white privilege,” “lived experience as evidence,” or compulsory anti-racism training announced as a moral upgrade.

No climate, net-zero or moral-duty language appears.

Yes if recruitment and governor ads require DEI allegiance. Check vacancies pages and the school’s LinkedIn company and jobs listings.

No RSE or masculinity-related pastoral text is included.

Yes if the calendar and social media over the past 12 months are campaign-led (Pride Month, Trans Day of Visibility, slogan work year-round).

No speech, inclusion or social-media policy is quoted.

Yes if speech and “hate” policies list misgendering or “denying identity” as harm, but do not protect sex-realist belief.

No safeguarding or identity-affirmation statements are visible.

Yes if partners are one-sided (Stonewall, Mermaids, Diversity Role Models, BLM-branded groups) with no viewpoint-diverse counterparts.

No staff EDI or allegiance requirements are published on the page.

Yes if “lived experience” or microaggression reporting is treated as settled authority, with no mechanism to challenge the framework.

No SEND, wellbeing or identity-labelling content is present.