New Youth Justice Board chair Phil Bowen warns youth justice system continues to deliver unequal outcomes for children with complex needs across England and Wales

Phil Bowen, the new interim chair of the Youth Justice Board (YJB), is raising the alarm on one of the system’s most stubborn problems: children with complex needs are still facing a postcode lottery.

According to Bowen, where a child lives often determines the level and quality of support they receive, and he insists that evidence-led approaches are essential to closing this gap and ensuring fairness.

A Tale of Progress and Persistent Challenges

The latest Youth Justice Insights Report tells a mixed story.

On the positive side, there are fewer first-time entrants into the system, declining rates of children in custody, and continued reductions in reoffending.

Yet, alongside these gains, a more troubling issue persists: disparities in how children are treated depending on their background and location.

This inconsistency, rather than the system’s overall performance, has become the core challenge.

The government’s recent paper, A Modern Youth Justice System: Foundations Fit for the Future, doesn’t propose starting over.

Instead, it focuses on narrowing the gap between high-performing areas and those that lag behind, ensuring that best practices informed by the Child First evidence base are implemented consistently nationwide.

Persistent Inequalities Affecting Children

While the majority of children in the system are White, Black and Mixed heritage children remain disproportionately represented at crucial points such as stop-and-search procedures and custody decisions.

These disparities are not isolated incidents—they are systemic.

But the inequities extend beyond youth justice itself.

Many children enter the system through routes marked by school exclusions, unmet special educational needs, care experience, inconsistent access to support, or varying interactions with police.

These factors affect children across different demographics—from White boys in deprived areas of the northeast to Black boys in South London.

Data gaps also compound the problem.

Incomplete or inconsistent recording masks crucial differences between groups, making it harder to identify trends or intervene early.

Bowen emphasizes that real fairness requires understanding these patterns in detail and acting proactively.

Geography Shouldn’t Determine a Child’s Future

The Insights Report highlights a stark truth: children’s needs don’t vary dramatically from one area to another, but local systems do.

Decisions at the “front door”—whether to divert a child or process them formally—can depend more on local policies and partnerships than on actual evidence.

Some areas have robust, multi-agency support systems that respond quickly to children’s needs.

Others struggle with fragmented health services or delays in education support.

These gaps are not due to a lack of dedication but reflect systemic inconsistency.

The government’s commitment to multi-year funding and clear expectations aims to address this, but lasting change will require active leadership, strong partnerships, and innovative approaches.

Remand as a Test for Reform

One of the most striking statistics is that nearly 62% of children remanded to custody in 2024–25 did not ultimately receive a custodial sentence.

Research shows that even brief periods on remand can cause significant disruption and harm.

If custody is genuinely to remain a last resort, courts need credible community-based alternatives that are widely accessible, not just in high-performing regions.

Reducing unnecessary remand is a key measure of whether reforms are working in practice.

Diversion Works When Applied Consistently

Evidence consistently shows that diverting children from formal justice contact can lower reoffending and improve wellbeing.

However, access to diversion still varies significantly.

Informal police-led interventions aren’t always recorded, thresholds differ, and information sharing can be uneven.

Bowen stresses that if the Child First evidence base is to guide practice meaningfully, diversion should be the default approach where it is safe and appropriate.

This means implementing it consistently, transparently, and ensuring rapid access to necessary support.

Driving Improvement and Innovation

Some local services already deliver exceptional outcomes for children and victims alike, but the system lacks uniform quality.

The YJB’s evolving role is to bridge this gap.

The next stage of reform calls for an active improvement and innovation function—one that converts data into actionable insights at the local level, identifies and spreads effective practices, supports underperforming areas, strengthens multi-agency cooperation at the “front door,” and continues to build the evidence base for what works.

The YJB’s renewed focus is on connecting national reform ambitions to frontline realities, translating policy into operational change.

Tools like practice networks, the Youth Justice Resource Hub, and pathfinder programs demonstrate how practical support and peer learning can accelerate improvements when grounded in evidence.

The next step is to scale these approaches nationally.

From Patchwork Progress to Reliable Quality

The youth justice system has reached record lows in first-time entrants and custody rates.

But a system that excels in some places while underperforming in others cannot yet claim fairness.

Closing this gap requires clarity of purpose, dependable funding, and relentless focus on improvement.

Moving from patchwork excellence to consistent quality is the mission for the next phase of reform, and the YJB’s leadership is pivotal in driving that change.

What’s Next?

The focus now is on implementing reforms that ensure consistent, evidence-led youth justice practice across the country.

Policymakers, local authorities, and frontline services will need to collaborate closely to expand diversion programs, reduce unnecessary remands, and address disparities rooted in geography or ethnicity.

Active monitoring, innovation, and data-driven strategies will be crucial in turning policy ambitions into measurable results.

Summary

Phil Bowen’s message is clear: while the youth justice system has made impressive gains, inequities persist based on location, background, and access to services.

Achieving fairness means applying best practices consistently, expanding diversion programs, reducing unnecessary custody, and using data to drive decisions.

The YJB’s renewed focus on improvement, innovation, and evidence-based leadership is central to bridging the gap between the system’s strongest and weakest areas, ensuring every child receives equitable support and outcomes.