P2-56 Accepted

Clarify casualty bureau purpose and limitations

Grenfell Tower Inquiry · Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Phase 2 Report · Issued 4 September 2024 · Addressed to: National Police Chiefs Council

Source — verbatim from the inquiry

Inquiry recommendation

That what in the past has been called by the police a 'casualty bureau' be described in a way that makes it clear that it does not provide information to the public about people affected by the emergency. (113.78)

Grenfell Tower Inquiry, Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Phase 2 Report · 4 Sep 2024 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:

- The National Police Chiefs' Council accepted this recommendation in February 2025 (Government Response to Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report, MHCLG, February 2025).
- The NPCC delivered this recommendation by updating standard operating procedures to make clear that the casualty bureau does not provide information to the public about people affected by emergencies (Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Recommendations Dashboard, MHCLG, updated March 2026).
- The government's dashboard states this recommendation is complete and has been fully discharged (Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Recommendations Dashboard, MHCLG, updated March 2026).

Response — verbatim from government

National Police Chiefs Council — initial response

The National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) accepts this recommendation. The NPCC has been working to discharge a similar recommendation made in 2018 by the Kerslake independent review of the Manchester Arena bombing. It has updated the standard operating procedures for the casualty bureau and will continue to assure delivery against them. Although the casualty bureau will continue to be known as such, the NPCC has worked with force communication leads on how to clearly describe the functions of a casualty bureau and is working with local government to ensure that communications in the event of a critical incident are clear to the public. The recommendation has been fully discharged.

National Police Chiefs Council · 16 Jan 2025 Written response →

National Police Chiefs Council — follow-up

The National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) accepts this recommendation. The NPCC has been working to discharge a similar recommendation made in 2018 by the Kerslake independent review of the Manchester Arena bombing. It has updated the standard operating procedures for the casualty bureau and will continue to assure delivery against them. Although the casualty bureau will continue to be known as such, the NPCC has worked with force communication leads on how to clearly describe the functions of a casualty bureau and is working with local government to ensure that communications in the event of a critical incident are clear to the public. The recommendation has been fully discharged.

National Police Chiefs Council · 26 Feb 2025 Written response →

Evidence trail — what's actually happened since

  • 1 Feb 2026 The National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) has updated the standard operating procedures for the casualty bureau and will continue to assure delivery against them. Although the casualty bureau will continue to be known as such, the NPCC has worked with force communication leads on how to clearly describe the functions of a casualty bureau and is working with local government to ensure that communications in the event of a critical incident are clear to the public. The recommendation has been fully discharged. Source →

Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.

How this page is built

Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.

This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.