Home / Inquiries / Southport Inquiry / SP34
← SP33 SP35 →
SP34

Neurodiversity training for Prevent practitioners

Southport Inquiry · The Southport Inquiry Report: Phase 1 · Issued 13 April 2026 · Addressed to: Counter Terrorism Policing

Government responseHome Office: Accepted (Jul 2026)

DeliveryNo statement from Counter Terrorism Policing found

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

Counter Terrorism Policing Headquarters should review its neurodiversity training for Prevent practitioners (including, where appropriate, drawing in wider healthcare advice) to ensure that they sufficiently equip practitioners with a proper understanding of:
1. How autism may influence risk in the context of a Prevent referral.
2. The importance of timely referrals to the Clinical Consultancy Service to obtain advice on how neurodiversity, including autism, may affect the risks in any individual case. Counter Terrorism Policing Headquarters should ensure that this remains a consistent priority across regions. Counter Terrorism Policing North West should review its own processes in this regard.

Southport Inquiry, The Southport Inquiry Report: Phase 1 · 13 Apr 2026 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

AI-generated evidence summary

In July 2026, HM Government stated that findings from an internal strategic policy review of mental ill-health and neurodivergence in Prevent would complement work by Counter Terrorism Policing to build understanding of how autism may influence risk in a Prevent referral and the importance of obtaining advice from the Clinical Consultancy Service (Home Office response, Jul 2026). The record holds no update since the government's response of July 2026 (Home Office response, Jul 2026).

Sources

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 26 Sep 2026.

Report-level response context

The government's response to Phase 1 (CP 1623, 2 July 2026) agreed with all 67 recommendations in one sentence, and names only 39 of them individually. Where a recommendation is not named, the response shown is the passage the response gives for the group it belongs to (the recommendations for organisations outside central government, or the recommendations to policing bodies), which is not a response to that recommendation alone; the response does not list the members of any group. The 10 recommendations for Phase 2 of the Inquiry to consider show no response: the response introduces them (paragraph 20) but answers none of them. The government accepts the recommendations that are for central government to deliver. Where a recommendation is for an organisation outside central government, the government's agreement is not that organisation's acceptance.

Government response

●Home Office · Accepted · 2 Jul 2026

Words of: HM Government, Government Response to Phase 1 of the Southport Inquiry (CP 1623), presented to Parliament by the Home Secretary, 2 July 2026

The internal strategic policy review of mental ill-health and neurodivergence in Prevent also includes recommended improvements to policy and training. The findings from this review will complement work by CTP in relation to recommendation 34 to build understanding of how autism may influence risk in the context of a Prevent referral and the importance of obtaining advice from the Clinical Consultancy Service (CCS) on such risk.

Extract from: Government Response to Phase 1 of the Southport Inquiry

Delivery

No statement on delivery from Counter Terrorism Policing has been found in the sources searched. This is separate from the response above.

How this page is built

The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.