New research reveals uneven access to Family Group Conferences, ahead of new statutory duty

Report published today shows marked disparities in referrals and take up of Family Group Conferences in local authorities across England, says Foundations, the national What Works Centre for Children & Families

The new research, funded by Foundations, and conducted by Coram in partnership with Family Rights Group and Cardiff University, reveals significant variations in families’ access to Family Group Conferences (FGCs) across England, with low referral and take-up rates relative to the numbers of children in contact with social services or at risk of abuse or harm. 1  

Today’s report is timely, coming as local authorities prepare for a new legal duty to offer Family Group Decision Making (FGDM) to all families before initiating care proceedings. 2 Family Group Conferences are a well-evidenced form of FGDM that involve families coming together with their wider network to make a safe plan for a child at risk of entering care.

For this study, 92 local authorities (60% of all local authorities in England) provided information on the number of FGC referrals, consents to referrals, and the number of FGCs that took place in 2023/24.  The research found that only one in ten of all child referrals for an FGC happened at the stage before care proceedings, despite robust evidence on their effectiveness in diverting children from care at this stage and in reducing the length of time spent in care. 3 Overall, only 53% of all referred children went on to have an FGC in 2023/24.

When the research took place, although 80% of local authorities in England had an FGC service, with a further 5% developing one, referral levels were low as a proportion of the number of children in contact with children’s social care services. Across the local authorities that took part, 33,128 children were referred for an FGC in 2023/24, compared to the number of Children in Need (399,500) and children subject to a Child Protection Plan (49,900) in the same local authorities that year. 4

The study also uncovered differences in referral rates between local authorities, eligibility criteria, and timing of FGC offers, and suggested unequal experiences among families.Findings include:

  • Lower referral rates for older children, who are significantly less likely to be offered or proceed to an FGC, but are the fastest growing age group entering care
  • Evidence of some disparities in referrals, consent and take up for children from different minoritised ethnic groups
  • Data gaps obscuring the picture for children and parents with disabilities: for almost a quarter of children with an FGC referral, it was not known whether a child had a disability. 5

The main barriers to families being referred for an FGC by a local authority included service capacity and local eligibility criteria; limited referrer understanding, knowledge, and awareness of FGCs; and high workloads and turnover of social workers and other professionals who may refer families.

Families reported that barriers to participation included stigma, fear of family conflict, delays in the process, and past negative experiences with social care. Enablers included good relationships with referrers, clear information about FGCs, and the independence of FGC coordinators.

To help support local authorities to prepare for the new duty, the report makes practical recommendations for local leaders and national policy makers, including:

  • Establish a local authority-wide culture of promoting the value of Family Group Conferences, with senior leadership buy-in;
  • Strengthen workforce understanding and confidence through enhanced training and information, including policies on when and how FGCs are offered to families;
  • Improve equity monitoring, with stronger, standardised national data on referrals, consent, and take‑up;
  • Embed culturally responsive and accessible practice, particularly for minoritised ethnic groups, disabled children and parents, and families experiencing multiple disadvantages
  • Build strong relationships between families, referrers and FGC coordinators and improve ways to ensure consent is informed and ongoing
  • Increase children’s participation, including co‑designed approaches to capturing children’s voices.

Dr Jo Casebourne, Chief Executive of Foundations, said: 

“Evidence shows that Family Group Conferences (FGCs) have the potential to make a difference for families where there are concerns about a child, but today’s report reveals that access is currently uneven, and some children are missing out. The low use of FGCs for families at risk of care proceedings is a missed opportunity, given strong evidence they can divert children from entering care, lessen the time they spend in care and reduce the costs of care to local authorities.

“As the new statutory duty is set to come into force, it is vital that local services are supported to increase access to FGCs, to strengthen equity and to ensure families can meaningfully choose to take part. Our findings highlight clear, practical steps to help local services prepare for implementation. These steps are essential to ensure that the new duty delivers on its promise to help keep children safely within their family networks.”

Max Stanford, Managing Director of Research at Coram and author of the report, said:

“This is an incredibly timely and important piece of research that points to the need to ensure better access to FGCs for families through improved referrer knowledge and processes, as well as capacity within FGC services to support families throughout the FGC process. It also highlights the need for the collection of national data on FGC access and take up and more research into the barriers and enablers for older children, those with a disability and those from ethnic minority groups.”

Cathy Ashley, Chief Executive of Family Rights Group, said:

“Family group conferences are a family-led process which enables all who know and love the child, including parents, relatives and friends to come together with the child to address concerns or needs. Family group conferences are proven to enable children to live safely within their families and communities, preventing children entering or remaining in the care system at significant costs savings to the Treasury. Their strength is they enable plans for the child to be built upon the insights, support and commitment of the family network, alongside that of the local authority and other agencies and services within the community. 

“There are more than 12,000 children in the care system than a decade ago and our care system is in crisis. Yet despite the evidence on the benefits of family group conferences, this groundbreaking research has highlighted that the vast majority of children in need or at risk are not being offered a family group conference, and that those who are disabled, older or from ethnic minorities may be even less likely to be offered one than other children. The findings highlight the urgent need for local and national leaders to address this, in the interests of children and their families, and to the benefit of society and the public purse.”

For further information, please contact Lucy Burns, Head of Communications and Public Affairs: lucy.burns@foundations.org.uk / 0777925088 or Silvia Tadiello, Senior Communications Officer: silvia.tadiello@foundations.org.uk


Notes to editors

[1] The number of children referred across the 92 local authorities that provided data was33,128. This is low when compared to the number of Children in Need (399,500) and children subject to a Child Protection Plan (49,900) across the same local authorities in the same year (2023/4).

[2] In November 2024, the UK government announced that local authorities will be required to offer Family Group Decision Making (FGDM) to all families where there are child welfare concerns that have reached the pre-proceedings stage (DfE, 2024). FGDM is an umbrella term for different methods for engaging families in decisions about their children, of which FGCs are an evidence-based model. This requirement is soon to be mandated in law as part of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. The Bill mandates the offer of FGDM to all families before a local authority applies for a care or supervision order (unless the local authority deems it not to be in the child’s best interest). Keeping families together through FGDM is also a central pillar of the government’s Families First Partnership (FFP) programme guide, which outlines delivery expectations for safeguarding partners in England.

[3] For more information on the evidence on the effectiveness of FGCs in the pre-proceeding stage, see https://foundations.org.uk/our-work/publications/family-group-conferencing-at-pre-proceedings-stage/

[4] As there is no published data on the number of children eligible for an FGC, we used national data on the number of Children in Need as an indication of the eligible population for comparison. Note that the proportions provided were for all local authorities (not just those that provided data) because this data is not available at a local authority level.

[5] 9% of children referred for an FGC were said to have a known disability, but 46% of Children in Need in 2023/24 had SEN support, compared with 18% of the population.

About the research

This explorative research was commissioned by Foundations and carried out by Coram in partnership with Family Rights Group and Dr Lorna Stabler of Cardiff University. The research began in October 2024 and concluded in September 2025.

The study draws on national data from 92 local authorities, and six ‘deep dives’ involving focus groups and interviews with parents, kinship carers, children, referrers, and FGC coordinators, and extensive engagement with families with lived experience. It identifies systemic variations, equity gaps, and opportunities to improve both access and practice.

About Foundations 

Foundations is the national What Works Centre for Children & Families. We believe all children should have the foundational relationships they need to thrive. To achieve this mission, we generate and champion actionable evidence to improve outcomes for vulnerable children and their families.

About Coram

Coram is the UK’s first and longest continuing children’s charity. Established as the Foundling Hospital in 1739, today we are a vibrant and growing charity group of specialist organisations, supporting hundreds of thousands of children, young people, families and professionals every year.

As the Coram Institute for Children, we are the only recognised UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Independent Research Organisation embedded with children’s social care.   

Through the Coram Institute we deliver cutting edge research to inform policy and practice and deliver lasting change. This includes the first Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) of FGCs to have been carried out in the UK and the largest RCT of FGCs carried out in the world, as well as research looking at local authority data and monitoring of FGCs.

About Family Rights Group

Family Rights Group is a national charity working to ensure children can live safely in their family, and children in the care system have loving relationships they can turn to throughout life. The charity is the leading authority on FGCs in the UK having introduced the approach into the UK in the 1990s. The charity hosts the national FGC Network and runs a quality accreditation scheme for FGC services. In December 2025 they published a new edition of their Family Group Conference Toolkit.

Cost ratings:

Rated 1: Set up and delivery is low cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of less than £100.

Rated 2: Set up and delivery is medium-low cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £100–£499.

Rated 3: Set up and delivery is medium cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £500–£999.

Rated 4: Set up and delivery is medium-high cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £1,000–£2,000.

Rating 5: Set up and delivery is high cost. Equivalent to an estimated unit cost of more than £2,000.

Set up and delivery cost is not applicable, not available, or has not been calculated.

Click here for more information.

Child Outcomes:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.

Supporting children’s mental health and wellbeing: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing child maltreatment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Enhancing school achievement & employment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing crime, violence and antisocial behaviour: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing substance abuse: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing risky sexual behaviour & teen pregnancy: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Preventing obesity and promoting healthy physical development: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.

Evidence ratings:

Rated 2: Has preliminary evidence of improving a child outcome from a quantitative impact study, but there is not yet evidence of causal impact.

Rated 2+: Meets the level 2 rating and the best available evidence is based on a study which is more rigorous than a level 2 standard but does not meet the level 3 standard.

Rated 3: Has evidence of a short-term positive impact from at least one rigorous study.

Rated 3+: Meets the level 3 rating and has evidence from other studies with a comparison group at level 2 or higher.

Rated 4: Has evidence of a long-term positive impact through at least two rigorous studies.

Rated 4+: Meets the level 4 rating and has at least a third study contributing to the Level 4 rating, with at least one of the studies conducted independently of the intervention provider.

Rating has a *: The evidence base includes mixed findings i.e., studies suggesting positive impact alongside studies, which on balance, indicate no effect or negative impact.

Click here for more information.