What did the research involve? 

Every year, thousands of children in England and Wales come into contact with the criminal justice system (CJS) – often for the first time. These children are some of the most vulnerable in society, which is why these interactions with the CJS should be treated as both a safeguarding and public protection opportunity.  

Commissioned by the Youth Endowment Fund as part of our joint research programme with the Department for Education, this exploratory study by Cordis Bright examined how well the system supports children following police contact. It combined a national survey of YJSs, expert interviews, deep dive site visits, and journey mapping with children themselves. 

 

Key conclusions 

Child-centred policing is delivered inconsistently  
While some police officers are adopting ‘Child First’ principles – centering compassion, developmental needs, and diversion – the application remains inconsistent. High staff turnover and limited training mean that children are not always seen as vulnerable individuals in need of safeguarding. Children from minoritised backgrounds, particularly Black and Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller communities, are more likely to be adultified or distrusted, reducing opportunities for effective diversion.  

Clear OOCR pathways are essential but implementation varies widely  
OOCRs allow police to resolve cases without court, but the consistency and timeliness of these pathways vary. Police knowledge of referral options depends on local training and support structures. In some areas, seconded YJS police officers streamline this process; in others, bottlenecks cause delays, especially when children are under investigation for extended periods. Good practice includes training officers on the voice of the child, including prompts in referral forms and providing feedback on referral quality.  

Multi-agency working is strong in pockets, but information sharing remains a barrier  
YJSs, police, and children’s services often work together effectively through co-located teams and joint decision-making panels. However, inconsistent access to key data—especially from health and education—undermines assessments and timely intervention. Children frequently move between services without continuity or shared understanding of their needs.  

Timely, tailored and evidence-based support is not equally accessible  
While some areas embed support into custody environments (e.g. dedicated staff or trauma-informed spaces), others lack the infrastructure to make a difference. YJSs provide a broad range of support – mental health, education, substance use – but access to these services is uneven, especially in rural areas. Neurodivergent children often go unidentified, and mental health waiting lists are long. Just a third of YJSs report their support for diverted children as being ‘very well aligned’ to the evidence-base, with many citing training gaps, resource limitations and operational constraints as barriers to engagement with evidence.   

Children’s interactions with professionals shape perceptions of the justice system and their engagement with diversionary support  
Journey mapping interviews showed that children value being treated with respect, being given choices, and having consistent relationships. In areas where caseworkers built trust and adapted support, children reported feeling heard and supported. In contrast, some children described custody as traumatic and confusing, with little explanation of what was happening or support.  

What will YEF do next? 

We will use the findings from this research to inform the support we provide to police forces and youth justice services through the Youth Justice Partnership. We will also work with national stakeholders to review the recommendations for improving national guidance, processes and practices.