The Child Protection Register records all children for whom there are unresolved child protection issues and who are currently the subject of an inter-agency protection plan.

Includes unborn children. See more on the DfE website. Note: From February 2025, some previously published figures have been adjusted due to revised population estimates. As noted in the source dataset: "Rates per 10,000 children are calculated based on ONS mid-year population estimates for children aged 0 to 17 years. Revised/new population estimates for 2012 to 2022, based on 2021 Census data, were used to calculate revised rates for 2013 to 2023 in this publication." 리소스 HTML children-who-became-or-were-subject-to-a-child-protection-plan.xls

This publication contains national and local authority level figures on the number of referrals, assessment and children and young people who are the subjects of child protection plans (on the child protection register). Similar information has been published in previous years based upon data collected through the Child Protection and Referrals 3 (CPR3) return however this collection has been discontinued.

Source agency: Education

Designation: National Statistics

Language: English

Alternative title: Referrals, assessments and children and young people who are the subject of a child protection plan, England

Rreferrals, assessment and children and young people who are the subjects of child protection plans (on the child protection register) from year ending March 2009

This publication contains figures on the numbers of children referred and assessed by children's social services. It includes information on the characteristics of children in need and information on children who were the subject of a child protection plan for year ending March. Source agency: Education Designation: Official Statistics not designated as National Statistics Language: English Alternative title: Characteristics of Children in Need in England

Source agency: Education

Designation: Official Statistics not designated as National Statistics

Language: English

Alternative title: Children in Need census

The indicator measures the number who had previously been the subject of a child protection plan, or on the child protection register of that council, regardless of how long ago that was against the number of children subject to a child protection plan at any time during the Year, expressed as a percentage

Source: CPR3 statutory return form local authorities to Department for Children Schools and Families (DCSF).

Publisher: DCLG Floor Targets Interactive

Geographies: County/Unitary Authority, Government Office Region (GOR), National

Geographic coverage: England

Time coverage: 2006/07 to 2008/09

Type of data: Administrative data

Notes: This is a count of each occasion in the year, and may count the same child more than once.

Storymap featuring details of Children in Need, showing how Southend compares to statistical neighbours. Focuses on a range of Children in Need related measures including referrals to Social Care and source, factors at assessment, the rate of CIN, rate of Child in Need starters and leavers as well as categories of need. CIN encompasses all those children receiving statutory support from local authority social care. This includes children on a Children in Need Plan, on a Child Protection Plan and Looked After Children.

1. Scope and Object of Statistics: Cases categorized as Class 1 events under the Regulations Governing the Reporting, Grading, Classification, Handling, and Investigation of Child and Youth Protection Reports within this city will be included in the statistics, regardless of whether they are new or old cases.2. Statistical Standard Time: The first quarter refers to January to March, the second quarter refers to April to June, the third quarter refers to July to September, and the fourth quarter refers to October to December.3. Classification Standards: (1) Investigation and Number of Cases Opened: Classification based on the number of individuals involved in the investigation, the number of cases opened, the number of individuals currently under investigation, etc. (2) Number and Reasons for Death in Cases: Classification based on deaths due to abuse by parents (guardians, caregivers), deaths due to severe neglect by parents (guardians, caregivers), suicides by parents (guardians, caregivers) after killing their children, deaths due to illness or accident during placement under social workers, and other categories. (3) Protection and Placement: Classification based on cases where the individual still resides at home, 72-hour emergency placements, continued placements, and other placement situations, etc.4. For detailed information and descriptions, please refer to the "Taichung City Government Official Statistics Information Network - Query of Official Statistics Plans for Various Agencies".

Storymap featuring details of Child Protection, showing how Southend compares to statistical neighbours. Focuses on a range of Child Protection related measures including the rate of section 47 enquiries, initial child protection conferences, children on or starting or ceasing a child protection plan, initial and latest categories of abuse and also the length of time subject to a CPP

Children living within Bristol that are known to social care by the local authority. This is broken down by children in need, children with a child protection plan and children in care. Children have been attributed to a ward based on their home postcode. Those wards with five or less cases have been suppressed to protect identity.

Child Protective Investigations (CPI) is authorized to investigate abuse and neglect allegedly committed by a person responsible for a child's care, custody or welfare and to protect abused and neglected children from further harm. This authorization is derived from the U.S. Social Securities Act, Texas Family Code, Human Resources Code, Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, Indian Child Welfare Act and the Adam Walsh Act. CPI conducts either a traditional investigation or Alternative Response (AR). Both require CPI to assess safety and take needed actions to protect a child and assess the risk of future abuse or neglect in the foreseeable future. AR, however, allows for a more flexible, family engaging approach on lower priority cases involving alleged victims who are age 6 or older. AR differs from traditional investigations in that there is no substantiation of allegations, no entry of perpetrators into the Central Registry (a repository for reports of child abuse and neglect), and there a heightened focus on guiding the family to plan for safety in a way that works for them and therefore sustains the safety. Completed investigations only include those cases conducted as a traditional investigation that were not administratively closed or merged into another stage. An investigation can only be administratively closed if all allegations have a disposition of administrative closure. A completed investigation can include more than one alleged victim. Completed investigations do not include any Alternative Response cases. A description of Alternative Response and how it differs from a traditional investigation is in the glossary. FOOTNOTES An investigation represents a report of abuse or neglect and can involve multiple children. The data on completed investigations does not include investigative stages that were administratively closed or merged into another investigation. All completed investigations have a case disposition and a risk finding. Visit dfps.state.tx.us for information on Abuse/Neglect Investigations and all DFPS programs.

The data is part of a survey conducted by the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, which aimed to provide information on the activities, scope and content of round-the-clock child protection units. The survey was part of the Lasteri project. This dataset surveys the activities of residential units, their target groups, areas of special expertise, the number of units and staff, services related to children's healthcare and care, cooperation between different actors, staff education levels, as well as the guidance and supervision of the units. In the survey, a residential unit refers to an independent functional entity within a child protection institution, with its own staffing ratio and premises separate from other residential units. The dataset contains several open-ended questions. First, the type, size, location, facilities, and daily rates of the housing unit were surveyed. Questions were also asked about the age range and placement criteria of the children and young people in the unit. Furthermore, the survey charted the unit's basic services and areas of special expertise and assessed their adequacy. The respondents were asked how much children participate in planning the content and schedules of daily life. Next, questions focused on the schooling and education of the children and young people in the unit, as well as their access to primary healthcare and specialist medical services. The respondents were asked about the special situations within the unit, special care arrangements, and the use of restrictive measures such as limiting contact, confiscating items, and conducting various checks. They were also asked to evaluate cooperation with municipal authorities and the social workers responsible for the children. The number, education level, and work experience of the unit's staff were surveyed. The study also charted how work supervision for care and educational staff is organised. Finally, the unit's operational plan, guidance, and supervision were addressed, including questions about monitoring and inspection visits. The background variable is the number of places in the housing unit.

Child Education Insurance Plan Market Outlook

The global child education insurance plan market size was valued at USD 70 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 120 billion by 2032, growing at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 6.5% during the forecast period. This growth is driven by increasing awareness among parents regarding the importance of securing their child's future education through financial planning.

One of the primary growth factors for this market is the rising cost of education worldwide. With tuition fees and other educational expenses escalating, more parents are turning to child education insurance plans to ensure that they can afford quality education for their children. Additionally, the growing middle-class population in emerging economies is contributing significantly to market growth. As disposable incomes rise, more families are in a position to invest in long-term financial products such as education insurance plans.

Another crucial factor propelling the market is the increasing penetration of insurance products in developing regions. Governments and insurance companies are actively promoting the benefits of child education insurance plans through various campaigns and awareness programs. This has led to higher adoption rates, especially in countries where traditional savings methods are losing popularity due to inflation and economic instability. Furthermore, technological advancements are making it easier for consumers to compare and purchase these plans online, thereby boosting market growth.

The flexibility offered by modern child education insurance plans is also a significant growth driver. These plans are increasingly tailored to meet the diverse needs of different families, offering various premium payment modes and policy terms. This adaptability makes it easier for parents to choose a plan that fits their financial situation and educational goals for their children. The introduction of unit-linked insurance plans (ULIPs), which offer both insurance and investment benefits, is another factor that is attracting more consumers to this market.

From a regional perspective, the Asia-Pacific region is expected to witness the highest growth during the forecast period. This can be attributed to the rapidly growing economies in countries like India and China, where there is a strong emphasis on education. Additionally, North America and Europe are also significant markets, driven by high awareness levels and well-established insurance sectors. In contrast, regions such as Latin America and the Middle East & Africa are gradually catching up, thanks to increasing disposable incomes and improved access to financial products.

Plan Type Analysis

The child education insurance plan market by plan type can be divided into Endowment Plans, Unit-Linked Insurance Plans (ULIPs), Whole Life Insurance Plans, and others. Endowment plans are traditional insurance policies where a lump sum amount is paid at the end of the policy term or on the death of the policyholder. These plans are popular among risk-averse individuals who prefer guaranteed returns. Given their simplicity and assured benefits, endowment plans have a substantial market share.

Unit-Linked Insurance Plans (ULIPs) combine insurance with investment. A portion of the premium paid is allocated towards life insurance, while the remaining amount is invested in various market-linked instruments like equities and bonds. These plans offer the potential for higher returns but come with market risks. The flexibility to choose different fund options based on risk appetite makes ULIPs attractive, especially among financially savvy parents who are keen on leveraging market growth to fund their children’s education.

Whole life insurance plans provide coverage for the entire lifetime of the policyholder, offering both investment benefits and life protection. These plans are designed to cater to long-term financial objectives, including educational expenses. The premiums are usually higher compared to other plans, but the lifelong coverage and cash value accumulation make them a preferred choice for many parents seeking a comprehensive financial tool for their child’s future.

Other plans in this segment include term insurance plans that are specifically aimed at covering educational costs in the event of the policyholder's untimely demise. These plans are generally more affordable and offer high coverage amounts, making them popular among middle-income families. Additionally, some insurance co

The Public Law Outline (PLO), introduced in April 2008 changed what was required of local authorities seeking to protect children through court proceedings. It imposed a pre-proceedings process to be used in all cases where the threshold for legal intervention (Children Act 1989, s.31) was met but proceedings to protect children were not immediately required. The process involves the local authority sending the parents a letter setting out their concerns and inviting them to a formal meeting with the social worker. The letter entitles the parents to legal aid for advice and representation at a pre-proceedings meeting at which plans for the children will be discussed. The process is intended to avoid the unnecessary use of care proceedings by encouraging the parents to work co-operatively with children’s social care services to improve their parenting or, if this is not possible, to narrow the issues in dispute and ensure proceedings are better prepared. The aim of the research is to examine the operation of the pre-proceedings process to see whether and how it is achieving what was intended. Specifically, the research establishes: 1) The extent to which local authorities use processes before starting care proceedings; 2) The similarities and differences between cases where process is and is not used. 3) The practices social workers, local authority lawyers, parents and parents representatives adopt in pre-proceedings meetings; 4) The impact of the process on child protection cases; and 5) parents' perceptions of the pre-proceedings process and its impact on their relationship with the Children's Social Care Department. Data sources included: Cases schedules completed by researchers from 207 Local authority legal department case files and court bundles; 69 in-depth interviews with professionals (lawyers, social workers and social work managers); fieldworker notes of 36 observations of pre-proceedings meetings; and 25 in-depth interviews with parents.

This data collection comprises two components of the Community Tracking Study (CTS), the Household Survey and the Followback Survey. The CTS, sponsored by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, is a national study designed to track changes in the health care system and their effects on care delivery and individuals. Central to the design of the CTS is its community focus. Sixty sites (51 metropolitan areas and 9 nonmetropolitan areas) were randomly selected to form the core of the CTS and to be representative of the nation as a whole. The Household Survey was administered to households in the 60 CTS sites and to a supplemental national sample of households. At the beginning of each interview, a household informant was identified and queried about the composition of the household. With this information, individuals in the household were grouped into family insurance units (FIU). An FIU reflects family groupings typically used by insurance carriers. It includes an adult household member, his or her spouse, if any, and any dependent children 0-17 years of age (or 18-22 years of age if a full-time student). Family informants, selected from each FIU in the household, provided information on health insurance coverage, health care use, usual source of care, and the general health of all persons in the FIU. These informants also provided information on family income and out-of-pocket expenses for health care, as well as employment, race, and Hispanic origin for all adult FIU members. Each adult in the household, including the FIU informants, responded through a self-response module to questions regarding unmet health care needs, patient trust, satisfaction with physician choice, limitations in daily activities, smoking behaviors, and last doctor visit. In FIUs with more than one child under 18, only one child was randomly selected for inclusion in the survey. The family informant responded on behalf of the child regarding unmet needs and satisfaction with physician choice. The adult family member who took this child to his or her last doctor visit responded to questions about the visit. The Followback Survey was designed to obtain detailed information on private health insurance coverage reported in the Household Survey. It was administered to health plans and other organizations that offered or administered the comprehensive private health insurance policies covering Household Survey respondents in the 60 CTS sites. Information on private health insurance policies collected by the Followback Survey includes product type, gatekeeping, consumer cost sharing, provider payment methods, and coverage of mental health and/or substance abuse services.

The number of children enrolled in Medicaid was projected to reach 31 million by 2027, which would account for nearly 40 percent of total enrollment. Historically, children have been the largest group of Medicaid enrollees.

CHIP builds on Medicaid’s coverage The Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) provides insurance coverage to children in families with incomes too high to qualify for Medicaid but too low to pay for private health insurance – there were approximately 9.6 million CHIP enrollees in 2018. CHIP is jointly financed by states and the federal government, but each state can decide how to design its program: they can implement it by expanding Medicaid, creating a separate plan, or a combination of both approaches.

Income eligibility levels for children The introduction of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) strengthened children’s health coverage by expanding eligibility levels in all states. For children of all ages, the ACA established a minimum Medicaid eligibility level of 138 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL), but many states have set higher income limits. In 2020, the median upper income eligibility level for children for Medicaid/CHIP was 255 percent of the FPL.