Stronger vetting aftercare and randomised re-vetting
Angiolini Inquiry · Angiolini Inquiry Part 1 Report · Issued 29 February 2024 · Addressed to: College of Policing
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation, Recommendation 13
By December 2024, the College of Policing, in collaboration with all force vetting units, should develop a stronger approach to force vetting aftercare in order to monitor an individual effectively throughout their career with the police and be aware of any change in circumstances as soon as possible to ensure that potential risks/red flags are identified and assessed. In particular, that approach should include the following: a. Mandatory, randomised re-vetting should be introduced, as an additional layer to standardised vetting periods, for police officers and staff, akin to randomised drug-testing. b. In addition to police officers and staff being required to declare any material changes in their circumstances within a managed system, such as a human resources system, supervisors, or anyone with concerns relating to behaviour, welfare or performance, should report them to Professional Standards Departments at any point. c. Professional Standards Departments should systematically exchange relevant and necessary information with vetting and counter-corruption units to consider information disclosed by any individual, and any action necessary.
Angiolini Inquiry, Angiolini Inquiry Part 1 Report · 29 Feb 2024 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:
- The recommendation set a deadline of December 2024 for a stronger approach to vetting aftercare, including mandatory randomised re-vetting.
- The Angiolini Inquiry Part 2 report, published 2 December 2025, found that mandatory randomised re-vetting had not been introduced, despite the NPCC claiming the recommendation was "delivered in full" (Angiolini Inquiry Part 2 First Report, December 2025).
- The NPCC stated the "spirit of the recommendation was met" through changes to the Vetting Authorised Professional Practice (APP), which addressed sub-recommendations 13(b) and 13(c), but the key element of randomised re-vetting was not implemented (Angiolini Inquiry Part 2 First Report, December 2025).
Response — verbatim from government
●Home Office — initial response
Home Secretary James Cleverly said: "The act of pure evil committed against Sarah shocked the nation to its core. My heart goes out to Sarah's family and to all the brave victims who came forward to help inform this report and drive change. The man who committed these crimes is not a reflection on the majority of dedicated police officers working day in, day out to help people. But Sarah was failed in more ways than one by the people who were meant to keep her safe, and it laid bare wider issues in policing and society that need to be urgently fixed. In the 3 years since, a root and stem clean-up of the policing workforce has been underway and we have made huge strides – as well as making tackling violence against women and girls a national policing priority to be treated on par with terrorism. But we will continue to do everything in our power to protect women and girls. I am grateful to Lady Elish for her meticulous investigation. Her insights will be invaluable as we move forward in supporting our police to build forces of the highest standards of integrity and regain the trust of the British public."
Home Office · 29 Feb 2024 Written response →
●College of Policing — follow-up
The National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and College of Policing has at the same time committed to addressing the remaining recommendations in Lady Angiolini's report concerning police culture and increasing the robustness of police vetting. The government will follow up with further detail on how the recommendations will be delivered in partnership with the College of Policing and NPCC in due course.
College of Policing · 25 Mar 2024 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
- 9 Oct 2025 Inquiry assessment: Mandatory randomised re-vetting has not been introduced despite NPCC claiming recommendation "delivered in full". Source →
- 9 Oct 2025 · Angiolini Inquiry Part 2 Report Mandatory randomised re-vetting has not been introduced despite NPCC claiming recommendation "delivered in full". View source → Insufficient Progress
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.