Introduction

Half of children who went into care for the first time after the 2011 Census were from lone parent households, according to new analysis.

Office for National Statistics (ONS) analysis of 3.8m children aged 10 to 17 years in the Growing Up in England (GUiE) dataset builds on work currently published by the Department for Education on children looked after in England.

It found nearly 30,000 of the cohort (0.8%) entered local authority care for the first time between 2011 and 2015, with an average age of 14 years.

Entering care was more likely among those who had previously lived in socially rented accommodation, experienced greater deprivation, or missed more time at school.

Health, education, housing and family circumstances were all important characteristics separating those who did and did not enter care in this period.

What happened to children in care varied across sex and ethnicity.

Those entering a children's home or young offenders' institution were more likely to be boys, and girls were more likely to be fostered.

While abuse or neglect was the most likely reason for entering care, it was most common among the Asian and Asian British ethnic group, and around one in four White children entered care because of family dysfunction.

Which children went into care?

Children who went into care for the first time between 2011 and 2015 were more likely to have poorer health, live in deprivation, or be from lone parent families or large households.

Black and Mixed children accounted for a higher percentage of children (9% and 7%, respectively) entering care after the 2011 Census in the Growing up in England (GUiE) dataset than those who did not go into care (4% for both ethnic groups).

Children from Black and Mixed ethnicities accounted for a larger percentage in the “in care” group than the “not in care” group

Distribution of ethnicity by care group, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding

The sex divide among those who went into care (49% female and 51% male) was relatively even, which reflects the divide among those who did not enter care (50% female and 50% male).

Deprived backgrounds

Around 8 in 10 children (81%) who went into care for the first time after the 2011 Census were living in a household that was deprived in at least one dimension, compared with 50% among those who did not go into care.

A household is considered as deprived if it meets at least one of the following criteria over four dimensions:

• Employment deprivation is where any household member, who is not a full-time student, is either unemployed or long-term sick
• Education deprivation is where no household member has a Level 2 qualification (for example, GCSE at grades A* to C or equivalent) and no person aged 16 to 18 years is a full-time student
• Health and disability deprivation is where any household member has general health that is "bad" or "very bad", or has a long-term health problem
• Housing deprivation is where the accommodation is either overcrowded (with an occupancy rating of negative 1 or less), or is in a shared dwelling, or has no central heating

Around 8 in 10 children that went into care were living a household that was deprived in at least one dimension

Distribution of household deprivation by care group, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding

The largest gaps in deprivation were in education and health.

Almost half (49%) of children who went into care after the 2011 Census were living in a deprived household in the health and disability dimension, and 39% in the education dimension.

This compares with 16% and 25% of children not in care who were living in a household deprived in the education and health and disability dimensions respectively.

A larger percentage of children who went into care were reported as having a health problem that limited their day-to-day activities by a little or a lot (17%) compared with children not in care (5%).

Children in care were more likely to have been living in deprivation

Percentage of children in each care group living in households experiencing a specific type of deprivation, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Challenging family and home life

Family dynamics and household composition were important characteristics among children who went into care in the Growing up in England (GUiE) dataset.

Half of the children who went into care were in lone parent families at the time of the 2011 Census. This was only 26% for children who did not go into care.

Around 7 in 10 (71%) children who did not go into care were in couple families compared with 45% of children in care. 

Half of the children who went into care in GUiE were in lone parent families at the time of the 2011 Census

Distribution of family type by care group, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding 

Children in care were almost twice as likely to have been living in an overcrowded household than children that did not go into care (21% and 11%, respectively).

Just over 4 in 10 (42%) children who entered care had lived in a household with five or more people, compared with 35% for children not in care.

Children who went into care were more likely to be living in larger households

Distribution of household size by care group, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding 

While two-thirds of children who did not go into care after the 2011 Census lived in a household that was owned (66%), this was only 29% for children that went into care.

Around half of the children (51%) that went into care were living in a household that was socially rented compared with 21% of children that did not go into care.

Children that went into care were less than half as likely to be living in a household that was owned

Distribution of tenure type by care group, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding

School absences and exclusions

The analysis of the Growing up in England (GUiE) dataset shows large differences in school absence rates (authorised and unauthorised) between children entering care between 2011 and 2015 and those who did not.

A little over a third (35%) of children entering care with at least one school absence had missed at least 15% of their school sessions in the previous academic year. This compared to 6% of children not in care in the 2011 to 2012 academic year.

Children in care who were absent from school were more likely to miss more school sessions than those not in care

Distribution of absence status at the 15% threshold by care group, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding

Children in care with at least one school absence missed an average of 16 sessions during the last academic year before entering care. Children not in care missed an average of 6 sessions.

Among children who were suspended from school and subsequently went into care, 58% were suspended on more than one occasion in the previous three terms. In contrast, most suspended children (65%) who did not enter care were suspended only once.

Of children entering care who had been suspended from school, 58% were suspended on two or more occasions in the previous three terms before going into care

Distribution of the number of suspensions for pupils with at least one suspension by care group, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding

Children in care were also three times more likely to be permanently excluded (9%) than children not in care (3%).

The proportion of children excluded for persistent disruptive behaviour was higher among children in care with at least one exclusion (40%) compared with around a quarter of children (26%) not in care with at least one exclusion.

Exclusions for persistent disruptive behaviour were more likely among children who went into care

Percentage of excluded pupils in each care group excluded for a specific reason, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages will not sum to 100 as a pupil can be excluded on separate occasions for different reasons

Similarly, 42% of excluded children who then went into care were excluded for verbal abuse, compared with 32% of those who were excluded but did not enter care.

Why did these children go into care?

The most common reasons (known as category of need) for children going into care were abuse or neglect (43%).

Around one in five (21%) children entered care because of family dysfunction (where parenting capacity is chronically inadequate). One in seven (14%) had a family in acute stress (a temporary crisis meaning the child’s needs were not being met).

Low income was the least likely reason for a child going into care. However, this may be because of the hierarchical nature of the options provided in the category of need form that social services are required to select. While there will often be multiple reasons a child enters care, just one reason is reported for each new period of care in the data.

While abuse or neglect was the main reason for entering care across all ethnic groups it was most common among the Asian and Asian British ethnic group (55%).

Entering care because of abuse or neglect was most common among the Asian and Asian British ethnic group

Distribution of category of need by ethnicity, unweighted, England 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding
2. Some categories of need have been omitted from the graph to prevent statistical disclosure

Black children were twice as likely to enter care due to socially unacceptable behaviour than White children (12% and 6%, respectively).

Only around 4% of White children who went into care did so because of absent parenting. This rose to 11% among Black children and 16% among Asian children.

Abuse or neglect was a more common reason for girls to enter care, with half of the girls entering care for this reason compared with around a third of boys (36%).

Around one in ten boys (11%) entered care because of socially unacceptable behaviour; a higher proportion than among girls, with only 3% entering care for this reason.

Boys were also twice as likely as girls to enter care because of their disability or absent parenting.

The reasons children entered care varied by sex

Distribution of category of need by sex, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding
2. 'Low income' has been omitted from the graph to prevent statistical disclosure

Where do children in care go?

Overall, just under two-thirds (63%) of children that went into care were placed in foster care as their first placement.

The second most common placement type for first placements were children’s homes or secure children’s homes (19%) followed by independent or semi-independent living (10%).

The type of placement children entered for their first time in care differed across sex and ethnicities.

Girls were more likely to enter fostered placements, with around three-quarters of all girls (74%) entering care after the 2011 Census in the Growing up in England (GUiE) dataset being fostered, compared with 54% of boys.

Boys were more likely to be placed in a children’s home or secure children’s home (24%) compared with girls (14%). Boys were also more likely to be placed in a young offender institution or secure training centre (6%), as their first placement.

Girls were more likely to be placed in foster care while children’s home and youth offenders' institution placements were more common among boys

Distribution of placement type by sex, unweighted, England, 2011 to 2015

Notes:

1. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding
2. "Placed for adoption" and "Residential employment" have been suppressed to prevent statistical disclosure

Children were more likely to enter a young offenders' institution or secure training centre if they were Black, with 7% of Black children placed in these facilities. This compared with 2% of white children, 3% of Asian children and 5% of children from mixed ethnic groups.

Overall, children in this analysis had challenging lives before entering care. They were more likely to have worse health, live in deprived households, be in socially-rented accommodation or be absent from school for longer periods of time compared with children not in care. They were also more likely to have more permanent exclusions from school. They commonly entered care because of abuse or neglect and were primarily placed in fostered placements, though there are some interesting differences across sex and ethnic groups.

This article is the first in a series exploring children in care in England. Future pieces of work include the experiences of children while in care, and educational outcomes for those who are in care.