Government has more to do to reduce family justice delays
|
Children and families are still waiting too long to have their
cases resolved – as of December 2024 over 4,000 children were in
proceedings lasting nearly two years or more - because complex
accountability arrangements and limited information on the biggest
causes of delays make it difficult to target improvements to where
they will have best effect, says the NAO. Delays can mean children
waiting longer for permanent care and living or contact
arrangements, increasing risk...Request free trial
Children and families are still waiting too long to have their cases resolved – as of December 2024 over 4,000 children were in proceedings lasting nearly two years or more - because complex accountability arrangements and limited information on the biggest causes of delays make it difficult to target improvements to where they will have best effect, says the NAO. Delays can mean children waiting longer for permanent care and living or contact arrangements, increasing risk of harm, anxiety, instability and disrupted friendships or education, all of which were reinforced to the NAO by other stakeholders in the family justice system. The latest report from the NAO reviews the government's approach to improving family court services for children in England and Wales. Family courts have recovered much better than crown courts following the COVID-19 pandemic, as of December 2024, there were 47,662 outstanding family court cases brought by local authorities (10,121) and families (37,541) related to the living and contact arrangements for children. The number of outstanding cases has reduced by over a quarter since August 2021, although many cases still take too long to complete. Government has a range of initiatives underway to reduce delays and to improve the experiences of vulnerable court users. Government introduced a statutory time limit to resolve most cases started by local authorities within 26 weeks, but this legal deadline has never been met since it was introduced in 2014. There is no equivalent time limit for cases brought by parents. Responsibilities for family justice are dispersed across several government bodies, these include Ministry of Justice (MoJ), Department for Education (DfE), His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS), and the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) in England, all of whom were audited for this report. There is no single body accountable for overall performance, nor is there a shared understanding of what good quality support looks like from the perspective of a child. Due to a lack of joined-up data, at present it is not yet possible to follow a child through the family justice process from beginning to end. The government does not yet have the data it needs on family justice to understand what the biggest causes of delays across the whole system are, or what the impacts are on different groups. The NAO analysed the findings of performance reviews undertaken by government bodies to identify reasons for delay and inefficiencies in family justice cases. The reviews identified more than 25 different issues, which vary across local areas and between different types of cases, including:
Case durations vary significantly by region. Wales performs best with average durations of 24 weeks for cases brought by local authorities and 18 weeks for cases brought by parents. London and the South-East perform poorly, with London averaging 53 weeks and 70 weeks respectively. In December 2024, nearly two-thirds of the 4,000 cases that had been open for 100 weeks or longer were in London and the South-East, reflecting issues like lower judicial capacity in those areas. Delays can lead to even further delays as evidence or assessments need to be updated, and costs grow. For example, between 2018 and 2022, average spending on legal aid for a case brought by a local authority doubled, from about £6,000 to about £12,000, mainly due to cases taking longer. This represents an annual increase of £314 million legal aid spending for these cases. Due to the number of organisations involved in family justice it is not easy to identify only family-justice-related costs, as these services share assets and staff with other services. Therefore, the government does not know how much is spent on family justice – the NAO estimated the cost to be more than £1.8bn in 2023-24. The government established a ministerial-led Family Justice Board (FJB) to help organisations work together more effectively, but a high turnover in ministers has led to inconsistent political leadership, the NAO report found, with the Board frequently refocusing its role and priorities. MoJ has several initiatives to improve case progression in family justice. For example, the pathfinder pilot in five areas, is designed to improve the court experience and outcomes for children and parents involved in private family law proceedings, including those who have experienced domestic abuse. Early evaluations in two pilot sites showed that the redesign reduced delays and staff reported improved experiences for children and domestic abuse victims. The Department for Education (DfE) and MoJ also have initiatives seeking to reduce the number of people needing to use family courts, through encouraging earlier support for families and out of court mediation. The number of new cases coming to family court has reduced since 2020 although there is no evidence that take-up of mediation has increased. The NAO has several recommendations for MoJ, DfE, His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS), and the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) in England, to improve the efficiency of family justice and outcomes for children in England and Wales, including:
Gareth Davies, head of the NAO, said: “The government has a range of initiatives to improve family justice services for families and the number of children waiting for court decisions is reducing. But many cases still take too long to complete and further action is needed to remove the barriers to a more efficient system, including poor quality data and fragmented decision-making.”
ENDS Press notices and reports are available from the date of publication on the NAO website. Hard copies can be obtained by using the relevant links on our website.
|