Ending the exclusion pipeline to youth justice

When it comes to the link between excluded children, those with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and those entering the youth justice system, the evidence is stark. Yet Stephanie Roberts-Bibby, Chief Executive of the Youth Justice Board says there is a “glaringly obvious solution” for policymakers which is being overlooked.  

Children with SEND, including those who are neurodivergent, face significantly higher rates of exclusion from school than their peers. This pattern of exclusion not only disrupts education but also increases the vulnerability of these children, making them more likely to become victims or perpetrators of crime. 

A 2025 report from the Youth Endowment Fund and the University of Oxford highlights the extent of this issue. It shows that needs such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, and especially speech, language and communication difficulties are frequently missed, misdiagnosed, or identified far too late. Behaviour driven by unmet needs is often misunderstood and punished — with exclusion used as a disciplinary response, rather than an opportunity to provide support. The report also reveals that children from lower-income backgrounds are less likely to be identified early, exacerbating inequalities and increasing the risk of contact with the youth justice system. 

The YJB Chief Exec, said: “Youth justice services tell us that they are routinely seeing children with undiagnosed SEND who have been excluded from school. Despite a very clear link between offending, exclusion and SEND, we have not seen any indication of policy to reflect early intervention.” 

A 2025 report from the Children’s Commissioner highlights the deep educational disadvantage faced by children in custody. A quarter of children in a secure setting had been permanently excluded in the years leading up to custody, underscoring the urgent need for earlier intervention and inclusive education.  

Roberts-Bibby continued: “Educators are stretched, and I am sympathetic to the challenges they face in the classroom. I do understand the difficulties in seeing past complex, and often violent behaviour of one child, when faced with large class sizes and increasing demands on their time. But we see lots of examples of exclusion prevention across the country and how it is steering children away from offending and creating meaningful outcomes for them. Now is the time to reflect this in policy.”

Wokingham’s replicable model for change

The Exclusion Prevention Programme (EPP) in Wokingham is an example of how prevention can bring measurable change for children at risk of exclusion and criminalisation. Originally launched as a pilot in 2022, the programme expanded borough-wide in 2023 and now sees rising demand, with referrals increasing by 91% in its second year. Built on the Child First evidence base that informs youth justice principles[RS1]  of seeing children as children and building on their strengths, the 14-week intervention combines assessment, co-production, and targeted support — addressing behaviours like violence, weapons use and sexually inappropriate conduct before they escalate.

Bea Nigolian, Team Manager at the Wokingham Prevention and Youth Justice Service, said: “We start by assessing a child’s behaviour, then co-produce a support plan with them that we deliver together. It’s a strength-based approach underpinned by the YJB’s Child First framework that looks beyond the behaviour to the underlying causes.

“Many children have undiagnosed or unmet communication needs, sometimes linked to neurodivergence. When children struggle to access the curriculum, it can show up as disruption or violence—what we’re seeing is commonly a response to unmet need. EPP is now identifying and meeting this need”.

The results are striking. Between the first two academic years, EPP received a 91% increase in referrals into the programme. For the two-year period there have been 47 children referred in, and of those who have completed the programme, only one became a first-time entrant into the criminal justice system.

Suspensions also dropped — from an average of 2.6 days before the intervention to 1.5 days after. Engagement has been consistently strong, with a 60% completion rate — significantly higher than the 40% seen in other voluntary prevention pathways. Children have reported improved relationships with teachers, a reduced need for behaviour support, and a more positive mindset, while parents described the change in their child as “amazing”.

Nigolian added: “Fostering relationships with schools has been crucial to the programme’s success. You have to be building those relationships relentlessly. I have a dedicated manager who picks this up,  working with schools to help them recognise the importance of prevention work and who is also continually analysing anonymous suspension data and then asking schools directly – “is this child eligible for EPP?”  This approach has resulted in increased referrals and to be able scale this programme, I will now need a dedicated practitioner  who can work exclusively delivering EPP work.”

The YJB looks to identify and share examples such as Wokingham’s model to show what’s possible when education, youth justice and prevention come together with intention. But despite the model being replicable, the greater need is in system change.

“The YJB would like to see policy reflect the need for routine screening for neurodivergent traits in children who have been suspended. This will allow for Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans to be established before permanent exclusion becomes inevitable.  

“As suspensions and serious violence by children continue to rise nationally, Wokingham’s EPP approach offers not just a replicable path forward — but the evidence that early intervention, trusting relationships, and keeping children in school, holds the key to steering children from criminality”. 

Children with SEND and neurodivergence are more likely to be excluded from school, which makes them at a higher risk of becoming both victims of crime and increase their vulnerabilities. The research below highlights some of the evidence on this subject.

• Children in England and Wales with an identified special educational need (SEN) are at least 7 times more likely to be excluded from mainstream education than their peers.(Gill, K., Quilter-Pinner, H., & Swift, D. (2017).
• In 2018/19 children with SEN accounted for 44% of all permanent exclusions, and 82% of permanent exclusions in primary schools.(Vibert, S. (2021). Briefing: Five things you need to know about SEN in schools: February 2021. https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/37438/1/cco-five-things-you-need-to-know-about-sen-in-schools.pd) 
• Children with SEND support plans are five times as likely to be excluded from school as children with no identified SEND. (Gill, K., Quilter-Pinner, H., & Swift, D. (2017). 
• In 2018/19, 81% of children in Alternative Provision had an identified special educational need (Vibert, S. (2021). Despite the starkness of these figures, there is no routine screening process in place for neurodivergent traits in excluded pupils.(Kirby, A. (2021).
• The practice of ‘off rolling’28 has significantly increased in recent years. (House of Commons Education Committee. (2018). Forgotten children: Alternative provision and the scandal of ever-increasing exclusions. London: House of Commons. Forgotten children: alternative provision and the scandal of ever-increasing exclusions (parliament.uk)
• The Michael Seiff Foundation report from April 2025 reflects lots of momentum around this topic. Its foreword claims the current system can fail to prevent children with SEND and neurodivergence from unnecessarily entering into the justice system SEND-Neurodivergence-and-Youth-Justice-Report-Sieff-Foundation-2025.pdf

Linking offending and school exclusion 

• Recent research (2025) shows teenagers in England and Wales who are permanently excluded from school are twice as likely to commit serious violence within a year of their expulsion than those who were merely suspended (Cornish and Brennan, 2025).
• There is a lack of “trusted adults” when a child is excluded. While 82% of teenage children have a trusted adult outside their family, 18% do not. School staff are the most trusted adults (58%), but children who’ve been suspended, excluded or face greater risks of violence —such as drug use, exploitation or involvement with the police – are more likely than others to turn to adults outside of school settings, such as sports coaches, mentors, doctors or youth workers. (YEF, 2025)

Number of exclusions/suspensions

• The statistics around school suspensions and exclusions for 2023/2024 Autumn term illustrate there were 346,300 suspensions (the previous Autumn term recorded 247,400), and 4,200 permanent exclusions (previous Autumn term recorded 3,100). These suggest increases in suspensions and exclusions over time.

From the Annual Statistics Insights Report

• Early identification of SEND and neurodivergence is crucial. However, this is often inadequate due to a lack of awareness, training and resources in schools.
• Department for Education to seek resolution to support and regulate multi academy trusts, ensuring continued adequate provision for children from marginalised or disadvantaged social groups, challenging exclusion from school or moved to alternative provision without adequate oversight. 
• Department for Education ministers to review education policy on removing children from school to ensure children are remaining in education for as long as safely possible, our evidence and intelligence points to the need to change approaches, we ask to be involved in these discussions. 

Read the full Youth Justice Statistics 2023-24: Insights report (May 2025)