Children and Young Adults in the Secure Estate

Status / emerging findings

• Youth custody population has collapsed to 412 children (70% in Young Offenders Institutions, 15% in Secure Training Centres, 15% in secure children's homes), but remaining cohort is far more complex with higher rates of neurodiversity, mental health issues, and violent offences
• Smaller populations have enabled trauma-informed practice: HMYOI Wetherby reduced violence and self-harm after capacity fell from 160 to 84 children, with better staff ratios enabling relational work
• Education provision is fragmented: Secure Training Centres provide 25 hours weekly education vs YOIs' 15-hour minimum; 80% of YOI children were excluded from mainstream education
• 80% of Oakhill Secure Training Centre population held for violent offences, suggesting current system holds the most complex cases
• Witnesses cooperative but follow-up correspondence from Youth Custody Service suggests government engagement ongoing—final positions not yet formed

Why it matters

How Britain treats its 412 imprisoned children—many trauma victims themselves—determines whether the secure estate rehabilitates or warehouses the most vulnerable young people in the criminal justice system.

Tone arc

Opening session established baseline: institutional leaders presented structural and demographic data without defensiveness. Tone was collaborative problem-solving rather than adversarial, suggesting committee may be exploring improvement opportunities rather than pursuing systemic failure narrative. Follow-up correspondence indicates substantive engagement continues.

Key witnesses

Mark Scott, HMYOI Wetherby, Rachel Ashurst, Barton Moss Secure Children's Home, Phil Wragg, Oakhill Secure Training Centre, Alison Clarke, Executive Director, Youth Custody Service (HMPPS)