Children known to children’s services who are at risk of serious violence or harm outside the home are not getting the support they need. New national guidance from the Youth Endowment Fund (YEF), published today, calls for one safeguarding pathway, one plan and one owner accountable for keeping them safe. 

While children’s services have clear responsibilities for responding to harm or neglect within the home, the charity warns that support to protect the same children from harm outside the home — known as extra-familial harm — is less consistent. For these children, risk can extend beyond the front door — present on the way to school, in the park or in the messages on their phone. Yet while multiple professionals may be involved in their lives, often no single person has a complete picture — or clear responsibility — for keeping them safe outside the home. 

Too many meetings, too little clarity 

The guidance highlights that, in many areas, responses to harm outside the home have developed alongside statutory safeguarding processes rather than within them. This means children can be discussed in meeting after meeting and subjected to plan after plan, without clear oversight of their safety or the statutory safeguarding protection they may need. 

New research illustrates the scale of this fragmentation. In six case study areas, children affected by extra-familial harm were discussed in as many as 7 to 11 core meetings.  

Unequal oversight and visibility 

A survey of 66 chairs of Multi-Agency Child Exploitation (MACE) and similar panels — local forums coordinating responses to extra-familial harm — found that fewer than half included serious violence in their remit. As a result, in some areas, children at risk of serious violence may not be consistently identified, discussed or protected through local safeguarding arrangements. 

The survey also raises concerns about whether responses are fair and consistent for all children. Only 52% of MACE and similar panels routinely collect data on protected characteristics, and just 5% review it at every meeting. This makes it harder to understand whether different groups experience different outcomes in how they are identified, supported or escalated through the system. Where patterns of disproportionality are identified, only 29% of panels always take action.  

This lack of oversight matters. Black children are overrepresented in cases involving extra-familial harm. They are also more likely to experience escalation into care or custody and are less likely to receive early or preventative support. 

Care, instability and exposure to harm 

The need for consistent protection from harm outside the home is particularly important for children in care. They are more likely than other children to come into contact with the youth justice system, including receiving cautions or convictions. 

Frequent placement changes, instability in trusted adult relationships and out-of-area placements can disrupt a child’s sense of stability and continuity. In some cases, they can also increase exposure to exploitation and serious violence. 

The YEF recommends that care and placement plans include a clear assessment of risks linked to extra-familial harm and serious violence. Plans should also set out how those risks will be reduced and how the child’s wider needs will be met. 

What needs to change 

The YEF’s guidance makes clear that safeguarding children from harm outside the home and serious violence should be a core safeguarding priority for children’s services, not a separate area of work. 

The guidance sets out evidence-based recommendations for local authorities and safeguarding partners to put this into practice. It’s designed to support leaders as they implement wider reforms to children’s social care, including the Families First Partnership programme and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. 

The YEF’s seven recommendations 

1. Make safeguarding children from extra-familial harm, including serious violence, a core strategic priority. 
2. Provide one pathway, one plan and one owner for children affected by extra-familial harm. 
3. Strengthen multi-agency capability to respond to extra-familial harm.  
4. Offer high-quality mentoring for children at risk of involvement in violence. 
5. Provide evidence-based parenting and family therapy programmes to improve parenting practices and family functioning and reduce behavioural difficulties in children. 
6. Support access to therapy for children who are at risk of involvement in violence. 
7. Proactively safeguard children in care from violence.  

Gail Gibbons, Assistant Director for Children’s Services at YEF, said: “For children experiencing harm outside the home, the system can feel fragmented and confusing at exactly the moment they need stability and protection. Too often, they are passed between services without anyone clearly accountable for their safety. 

“Our guidance is about putting that right — strengthening how services work together so children are better protected. 

“Children’s services and social care are undergoing historic reform, and this is a real opportunity to strengthen safeguarding for children at risk of serious violence.” 

Children’s Commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza said: “Children who experience serious violence or exploitation outside of the home need the same protection and support as children experiencing harm within their family. Too often, services designed to support children do not work together leading to a fragmented responses and missed opportunities to keep children safe. Clear accountability, joined up safeguarding and a single plan for each child are essential if we are to provide the consistent support that vulnerable children need and deserve.” 

Carlene Firmin, Professor of Social Work at Durham University, said: “It’s really important for children’s services to prioritise extra-familial harm as part of the reform conversation because at the moment it straddles community safety and criminal justice pathways and safeguarding pathways. That means there’s always a risk children will be criminalised before they are protected or lack an efficient and effective safeguarding response.”  

Watch the full conversation here. 

Nio, YEF Youth Advisory Board member, said: “One thing I found as a young person [is] my school, my social worker and my foster carers, not only did they struggle to work together, but sometimes there would be hostility between them because there would be conflicting opinions or conflicting approaches. It only made it harder for me because you don’t know what path to go down – you’re the one who’s vulnerable, in need of support.” 

Watch the full conversation here. 

Chair of the Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel, Sir David Holmes, said: “The Panel welcomes this important guidance from the Youth Endowment Fund, which rightly highlights the urgent need for a more joined-up approach to protecting children at risk of serious violence or harm beyond the home. Extra-familial harm can have far-reaching consequences across entire communities, so it is vital that safeguarding systems are clear, coordinated and focused on delivering consistent support for every child, no matter the circumstances.   

“The emphasis on shared responsibility, strong multi-agency working, and a single, accountable plan is particularly encouraging. The Panel encourages all safeguarding partners and agencies to engage fully with this guidance and take concrete steps to embed these recommendations into local practice.”