16

Review mixed justice/welfare placement risk

IICSA · Sexual Abuse of Children in Custodial Institutions: 2009-2017 Investigation Report · Issued 28 February 2019 · Addressed to: Department for Education

Government responseDepartment for Education: Not accepted (May 2021)

DeliveryDepartment for Education says in progress (May 2021)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation, D

The Chair and Panel recommend that the Department for Education and the Youth Custody Service conduct a full review of the practice of placing children for justice and welfare reasons together in SCHs to establish whether it increases the risk of sexual abuse to children. If so, appropriate action should be taken, including consideration of alternative models. The review should be completed within three months, and an action plan should be published within six months.

IICSA, Sexual Abuse of Children in Custodial Institutions: 2009-2017 Investigation Report · 28 Feb 2019 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

AI-generated evidence summary

The Inquiry recommended reviewing mixed justice and welfare placements in secure children's homes. In May 2021, HM Government stated in a response published by the Department for Education that it had commissioned research and internal data analysis to review placement practice, finding no substantial evidence that mixed placements increase risk (Department for Education, May 2021). It concluded that "we do not believe the evidence supports the need to change placement practice at this time", while planning to keep the issue under review (Department for Education response, May 2021). The response described reviewing practice through internal research, but did not mention an action plan or alternative placement models (Department for Education response, May 2021; Department for Education, May 2021). The record holds nothing dated later than the response of May 2021 (Department for Education response, May 2021).

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 19 Oct 2026.

Government response

●Department for Education · Not accepted · 7 May 2021

Words of: HM Government, The Government response to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse's investigation report, Sexual Abuse of Children in Custodial Institutions: 2009-2017, Recommendation 2, published by the Department for Education, May 2021

In conclusion, we do not believe the evidence supports the need to change placement practice at this time. We hope the Inquiry will be reassured that we have plans in place to keep this under review and are considering the broader sectoral issues through ongoing development of policy in relation to the secure estate. We will seek to maximise opportunities to listen to children’s views on SCH policy through our relationships with the network of SCHs, the Children’s Commissioner Help at Hand, Ofsted, children’s rights charities, and other advocacy routes.

Extract from: The Government response to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse's investigation report, Sexual Abuse of Children in Custodial Institutions: 2009-2017, Recommendation 2

Delivery

●Department for Education says in progress · 7 May 2021

The practice of placing children on justice and welfare grounds in the same SCH is not an issue on which we have a substantial evidence base to suggest that there is a greater level of risk to children when compared to placing children in welfare or justice only SCHs. However, the government takes recommendations from the Inquiry seriously, which is why we commissioned a short piece of research to review placement practice through a mixture of research and additional analysis of internal data.

From: The Government response to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse's investigation report, Sexual Abuse of Children in Custodial Institutions: 2009-2017, Recommendation 2

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.