Research and analysis

Evaluation of the National Age Assessment Board (NAAB)

Published 8 January 2026

Author of report

National Centre for Social Research

35 Northampton Square,

London, EC1V 0AX.

020 7250 1866

www.natcen.ac.uk

A Company Limited by Guarantee.

Registered in England No.4392418.

A charity registered in England and Wales (1091768) and Scotland (SC038454).

This project was carried out in compliance with ISO20252.

Acknowledgements

The research team would like to thank the staff and stakeholders who participated in this research, as well as those who helped to approach participants about taking part.

Report considerations

First, this report presents the views and experiences of participants who chose to take part in this evaluation. As a qualitative process evaluation, it does not measure the prevalence of these perspectives and categorising them by importance or frequency could lead to misinterpretation.

Second, this evaluation was based on a small sample and focused primarily on the views and experiences of the Home Office and local authorities. As a result, the findings reflect only the perspectives of those who participated and should not be extrapolated to all stakeholders involved in age assessment or NAAB delivery.

Third, any identifying details such as names of local authorities and individuals are not included. This was to enable participants to contribute more openly to the research process. All names used in the case studies are fictional.

Fourth, the findings in this report are based on fieldwork conducted between October 2023 to April 2024 (baseline evaluation) and September 2024 to December 2024 (endline evaluation). Therefore, findings are reflective of the NAAB up until December 2024 and do not reflect changes incorporated since then.

1. Executive Summary

The Home Office commissioned The National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) to undertake a process evaluation to assess whether the National Age Assessment Board (NAAB) is being implemented as intended and the extent to which it is perceived to be achieving its intended outcomes. The evaluation aims to provide the Home Office with a clear and strong evidence base that will enhance the quality of age assessment decision-making.

The evaluation was conducted in 2 stages:

1. Baseline stage (October 2023 to April 2024): this included a literature review and 50 in-depth interviews with Home Office Staff, local authority staff and external stakeholders with and without access to the NAAB Minimal Viable Service (MVS), which refers to the introduction of the NAAB service across a limited number of regions.

2. Endline stage (September 2024 to December 2024): this consisted of 36 interviews with Home Office and local authority staff; this included in-depth and case illustration interviews which aimed to examine the enablers and barriers to effective implementation of the NAAB service nationally, as well as local authorities’ and social workers’ experience with the NAAB service (including the extent to which they considered it to meet its intended outcomes).

This report focuses on the endline stage of the evaluation (national rollout). However, the report also provides a summary of the findings from the baseline stage (MVS).

A summary of key findings from the NAAB endline stage (national rollout) are outlined below.

1.1 Set up and national rollout of the NAAB

1.1.1 Awareness and understanding

Local authorities received information about the NAAB from various sources. This influenced their understanding and views of the NAAB, which sometimes made it challenging for the NAAB to secure local authority buy-in. Local authority participants demonstrated a clear understanding of and alignment with the NAAB’s objectives.

1.1.2 Key set-up activities

The Home Office focused on recruiting and training NAAB social workers in order to ensure adequate staff capacity to take on age assessment referrals from local authorities. Local authorities were familiarised with the NAAB and invited to use its services through a structured process that involved the local authority signing a working agreement with the NAAB. Some participants felt that this process was lengthy, however others noted that their prior experience with the NAAB enabled a smoother process.

1.1.3 Enablers and challenges to successful setup

Factors that enabled the set up and rollout of the NAAB included the expertise of the NAAB team, collaboration with external partners, and comprehensive training for social workers within the NAAB and local authorities. Key challenges included securing local authority buy-in, concerns from the voluntary sector, IT system issues, slow recruitment of NAAB social workers, and funding uncertainties.

1.2 Delivery of the NAAB

1.2.1 High demand for training

NAAB training was in high demand and well received by local authorities. The training improved social workers’ competence and confidence in conducting age assessments.

1.2.2 Formalising support channels

The NAAB support and guidance service became more formal as demand increased. However, some local authorities continued using informal channels; they suggested stronger promotion of the formal support options available for this service.

1.2.3 Referrals

Home Office staff felt that local authorities typically referred cases to NAAB when they lacked the resources or experience to resolve the case themselves, especially when the case was complex and could result in legal challenges. The NAAB referral service functioned best when there was strong collaboration and clear communication between the NAAB and local authorities, local authority uptake of pre-assessment support, and a focus on the well-being of age-disputed individuals from both the NAAB and the local authority.

1.2.4 Key challenges

Local authorities struggled to find interpreters and appropriate adults (such as independent adults known to the child). NAAB social workers faced communication challenges with overstretched local authorities.

1.2.5 Safeguarding and child-friendly approaches

Participants felt that NAAB social workers adhered to safeguarding protocols. Participants highlighted the importance of a holistic, child-centred, child-friendly, and trauma-informed approach that prioritised the young person’s well-being.

1.3 Reasons for not engaging with the NAAB

1.3.1 Lack of awareness

A key reason that local authorities did not refer cases into the NAAB was a lack of awareness of both the NAAB’s aims and objectives and of the referral service. Some local authority staff expressed confusion over which age assessment cases were eligible for referral to the NAAB and which local authorities the NAAB could support.

1.3.2 Capacity

Some local authorities did not refer cases into the NAAB because they felt they had sufficient expertise within their own teams to conduct age assessments.

1.4 Perceived outcomes of the NAAB

1.4.1 Positive outcomes

Local authorities found the NAAB accessible, with a clear referral process. Some local authorities expressed a desire to refer more cases to the NAAB than they were (at the time) referring to alleviate pressure on their own capacity to conduct age assessments. Participants viewed NAAB age assessments as beneficial for safeguarding young people. NAAB training and guidance was perceived to enhance local authorities’ ability to conduct their own high-quality age assessments. This included improving their child-centred approach, understanding of case law, and confidence in decision-making. Lastly, participants perceived the NAAB as having a positive impact on public spending because participants believed it would improve the accuracy of age assessments and would help to ensure that services intended for children were not allocated to adults.

1.4.2 Concerns

Some local authorities reported that the NAAB took too long to complete age assessments, with some cases lasting up to several months from referral to the outcome meeting. The longer duration of NAAB assessments led to increased costs for local authorities.

1.5 Considerations for future delivery

1.5.1 Local authority engagement and buy-in

Enhance the NAAB’s communication and outreach efforts, address misconceptions of the NAAB’s services, strengthen collaboration with Strategic Migration Partnerships (SMPs) (such as independent partners who support the delivery of national asylum and refugee schemes), and engage with voluntary sector organisations.

1.5.2 Referral and assessment process

Reduce delays by ensuring timely communication of assessment outcomes, increasing NAAB caseworker capacity to handle referral volumes, and simplifying the referral process.

1.5.3 Financial and capacity challenges

Consider funding interpreters and appropriate adults, offering flexible interpretation options, and improving the efficiency of assessments.

1.5.4 Training

Increase the NAAB social workers’ training frequency and offer more opportunities for social workers to shadow age assessments as part of their training process. This would enable them to gain practical experience beyond classroom training.

1.5.5 Safeguarding and child-centred practices

Clarify safeguarding responsibilities and ensure that assessments are child-centred through techniques such as building rapport throughout the assessment process.

1.5.6 Communication and partnership working

Consider establishing regular check-ins between the NAAB and local authorities, providing early notifications of assessment outcomes, ensuring that there are reliable communication protocols between NAAB and local authority teams, and standardising post-assessment communication.

2. Introduction

2.1 Policy context

The National Age Assessment Board (NAAB) was introduced as part of the New Plan for Immigration (NPI, 2021) to create a fairer and more consistent approach to age assessments. It aimed to provide impartial advice on age disputes while improving efficiency by reducing the burden on local authorities conducting resource-intensive assessments.

The NPI was implemented through the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 (NABA, 2022) which introduced key changes to the age assessment process for those subject to immigration control. Sections 50 and 51 of the Act granted the power for designated persons, who form the NAAB, to conduct age assessments on referral from local authorities in England, Wales, and Scotland, as well as Health and Social Care Trusts in Northern Ireland. In certain instances, the NAAB can also conduct age assessments for immigration purposes.

The NAAB is one of several changes to the immigration and asylum age assessment process following the enactment of NABA. ^{[footnote 1]} These reforms aim to make age assessments fairer and more robust for claimants where age is uncertain.

Key developments in the age assessment process prior to the NAAB set up include:

1. The Home Office’s initial age dispute policy (until 2019): under this policy, immigration officials had the discretion to decide how to treat individuals whose claimed age was in doubt. If no credible documentary evidence was available, age-disputed individuals could be treated as adults if 2 officers (one at least of Chief Immigration Officer grade or equivalent) separately determined that the individual’s physical appearance and demeanour strongly suggested they were ‘significantly over 18’.

2. Changes following the 2019 Court of Appeal judgment (BF Eritrea): in 2019, the Court of Appeal ruled that the Home Office’s policy was unlawful. ^{[footnote 2]} In response, the Home Office adopted an interim policy, where individuals were only treated as adults if there was sufficient evidence that they were 25 years or older, pending an appeal to the Supreme Court.

3. The Supreme Court’s 2021 ruling: in August 2021, the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal’s decision in BF (Eritrea) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2021) UKSC 38. As a result, the Home Office reverted to the ‘significantly over 18’ threshold for treating a person as an adult based on their physical appearance and demeanour, a decision that came into effect in January 2022.

2.2 The National Age Assessment Board

The NAAB provides services to local authorities and Health and Social Care Trusts across the UK. Its role includes conducting Merton-compliant age assessments, offering guidance on the process, delivering training to social workers, and enhancing child safeguarding while alleviating pressures on local authority resources. ^{[footnote 3]}

The NAAB launched its Minimum Viable Service (MVS) on 31 March 2023, across 12 local authorities in 4 regions. Following this, the national rollout commenced in April 2024, aiming to extend the NAAB service to every local authority in the UK.

2.3 Evaluation of The National Age Assessment Board

The evaluation consisted of a series of interviews across 2 main stages:

1. Baseline stage: assessing the NAAB MVS (October 2023 to April 2024).

2. Endline stage: assessing the NAAB national rollout (September 2024 to December 2024).

The goal of the evaluation was to provide the Home Office with a robust evidence base to enhance the quality of age assessment decision-making for age-disputed individuals.

More specifically, the evaluation focused on the implementation and delivery of the NAAB and the extent to which the initiatives implemented were perceived to lead to the intended outcomes. This included identifying unintended consequences that may have occured as a result of the NAAB, and what worked concerning processes, implementation, and workstream changes (for example, wider age assessment activities that occurred across the lifecycle of the process). The report also provides a brief summary of the findings from the baseline stage.

The evaluation sought to answer the following questions:

1. To what extent has the NAAB been implemented and delivered as intended?

2. What challenges have been experienced when establishing the NAAB? What are the enablers?

3. What impact, if any, does the NAAB have on local authority resources to deliver age assessments?

4. How do local authorities decide which cases to refer to the NAAB?

5. What impact, if any, has the creation of the NAAB had on Home Office relationships with local authorities and other key stakeholders?

6. Has the training provided by the NAAB given stakeholders the knowledge needed to carry out age assessments?

7. How is the NAAB experienced by service users?

8. What are the key lessons learned in developing and delivering the NAAB?

9. How has the NAAB contributed to age assessment outcomes?

10. To what extent does the NAAB support or improve safeguarding?

3. Methodology

The full evaluation was conducted in 2 stages. The baseline stage consisted of a scoping review of existing literature on age assessment, a review of Home Office documents and resources produced as part of the NAAB set-up, and 50 in-depth interviews with Home Office staff, local authority staff and external stakeholders (including representatives of services supporting local authorities in the age assessment process) with and without access to the NAAB MVS. ^{[footnote 4]} It aimed to assess the implementation, delivery, and perceived outcomes of the NAAB MVS. Additionally, it documented the process where local authorities conduct age assessments without the advice and support of NAAB. Further detail on the baseline methodology can be found in Appendix A.

The endline evaluation consisted of 36 interviews with Home Office staff and local authority staff across 2 types of interviews: in-depth and case illustrations. It aimed to assess whether the NAAB national rollout was being executed as intended, examine the enablers and barriers to effective implementation, and gather stakeholders’ perceptions on its early outcomes and effectiveness.

Table 1: The number of encounters across the 2 stages of the evaluation^{[footnote 5]}

	Home Office staff	Local authority staff	External stakeholders
Baseline	21	17	12
Endline	18 (7 in-depth interviews and 11 case illustration interviews)	18 (13 in-depth interviews and 5 case illustration interviews)	0

3.1 Recruitment of key stakeholders for the endline

Recruitment took place across September to December 2024. Key Home Office stakeholders included those who worked for the NAAB and those who worked with age assessments on the ground. Key local authority stakeholders included staff members who worked on age assessments that the local authority was responsible for, including those in management positions. External stakeholders did not participate due to recruitment challenges.

Home Office staff were recruited via an email sent by the Home Office Asylum and Accommodation Research and Evaluation Team. Interested participants reached out to NatCen directly or granted permission for their details to be shared. NatCen followed up with participants who expressed an interest in taking part in the evaluation with an email inviting them to schedule an interview.

Local authorities were invited to take part in the evaluation by SMPs. ^{[footnote 6]} The intention was for SMPs to identify a ‘gatekeeper’ within the local authority who could approach other staff about taking part in the evaluation and/or participate themselves. Further details on the endline methodology are provided in Appendix A.

To support stakeholder recruitment, a range of materials was developed, including:

• a recruitment briefing note for SMPs, with guidance around inviting local authority staff to participate in the evaluation

• an information sheet, privacy notice, and consent form, which were provided to all participants before their interview

Copies of these materials can be found in Appendix B.

3.2 Interviews

Endline interviews took place in the fieldwork period between September to December 2024.

3.2.1 In-depth interviews

These explored several aspects of the NAAB. This included participants’ understanding and expectations of the NAAB, views on its setup and national rollout, its delivery, including the referral process and the training and guidance delivered as part of its programme, and its perceived outcomes.

3.2.2 Case illustration interviews

These used vignettes informed by the findings of the baseline stage of this evaluation (refer to Appendix C). Their purpose was to further explore specific areas around NAAB delivery to build on the findings from the evaluation. The vignettes presented a series of fictional situations within and around the age assessment process. Participants were asked to comment on the vignettes, including whether they found them to be accurate to real-life. Vignettes presented situations around safeguarding, training, the stages of the age assessment process, and the referral process. Through this process, the vignettes tried to capture the best practice for each scenario.

To ensure consistency, researchers used tailored topic guides across all interviews, copies of which are available in Appendix C. While the guides provided structure, researchers applied them flexibly to adapt to the specific content of each discussion. Researchers used open, non-leading questions and fully explored responses to capture detailed insights.

Interviews lasted approximately 30 to 60 minutes and were digitally recorded with participants’ consent. The recordings were transcribed verbatim for analysis.

Data was managed and analysed using the Framework approach developed by NatCen. ^{[footnote 7]} This matrix-based analytic method facilitates rigorous and transparent qualitative data management, with a thematic framework used to classify and organise data according to key themes, concepts, and emergent categories. The final stage of analysis involves mapping the range and diversity of experiences, including identifying patterns, similarities, and differences within and across participant groups.

3.3 Research limitations

First, this report presents the views and experiences of participants who chose to take part in this evaluation. As a qualitative process evaluation, it focuses on the diversity and range of views and does not measure the prevalence of these perspectives. Categorising them by importance or frequency could lead to misinterpretation.

Second. this evaluation is based on a small sample and focused primarily on the views and experiences of the Home Office and local authority staff within a specific timeframe. As a result, the findings reflect only the perspectives of those who participated at that time and the content of the research encounters. The findings should not be extrapolated to all stakeholders involved in age assessment or the NAAB delivery, including delivery beyond the fieldwork end date.

Third, collecting the first-hand perspectives and experiences of young people who are undergoing or have undergone age assessments was not in the scope of this evaluation. Without the perspectives of these individuals, this evaluation cannot present a holistic view of the NAAB and wider age assessment process. Instead, this evaluation examines the NAAB and wider age assessment process through the lens of adult stakeholders who may have more autonomy within the age assessment system than the age-disputed individuals do.

Fourth, the recruitment of stakeholders to participate in endline data collection posed several challenges. Ultimately, fewer participants were recruited than intended. There are several possible reasons why stakeholders may have been difficult to engage:

1. Local authorities have many competing priorities to manage in the age assessment space, meaning they may not have had the time to participate.

2. It was necessary to cascade recruitment information through multiple levels before it reached relevant contacts in local authorities and external stakeholders. Therefore, information about the evaluation may not have reached the relevant staff and external stakeholders so they could opt in to taking part.

3. Not all local authorities were aware that they could access the NAAB national rollout, and therefore some felt that they were unable to contribute meaningfully as they had not accessed any services of the NAAB.

4. There may be a wider lack of engagement or interest in the NAAB that led stakeholders to prioritise other responsibilities over participating in an evaluation of the NAAB.

Given the broad scope of this research, interviews covered a wide range of topics, which limited the depth of data on certain aspects of the NAAB. Case illustrations are included in this report to help gain greater depth of understanding around certain aspects of NAAB delivery.

Lastly, participants brought a wide range of experiences and perspectives on the age assessment process, both with and without the support of the NAAB. At the time of fieldwork, participants likely shaped their views through their current and past experiences in the wider age assessment process, including training, conducting assessments, and supporting individuals through the process. It is important to consider the overall political, cultural, and employment contexts of these views in the ongoing delivery and evaluation of the NAAB’s implementation and its perceived outcomes.

4. Report structure

The report is organised into the following sections:

Baseline evaluation summary

This section presents a summary of the baseline evaluation findings, offering insights into both the challenges faced and the opportunities for improving the NAAB’s service delivery.

Set up and national rollout of the NAAB

This section provides an overview of the setup phase of the NAAB, focusing on the key factors that contributed to its establishment and the challenges encountered along the way.

Delivery of the NAAB national rollout

This section presents key findings on the delivery of the NAAB national rollout. It focuses on the NAAB’s implementation of training, guidance and support services, casework referrals, and safeguarding practices.

Reasons for not engaging with the NAAB

This section describes the reasons why some local authorities have not fully engaged with the NAAB’s functions.

Perceived outcomes of the NAAB

This section outlines the perceived outcomes of the NAAB.

Considerations for future delivery

The final section highlights key considerations for the ongoing delivery of the NAAB.

5. Baseline evaluation summary

The baseline evaluation examined the implementation, delivery, and perceived outcomes of the NAAB MVS, as well as the broader age assessment process used by local authorities without NAAB’s support. The findings highlighted both challenges and opportunities for improving NAAB’s service delivery. A final report was produced as an in-house document and submitted to the Home Office on 4 September 2024.

This section summarises key findings from the baseline stage of the evaluation, while all subsequent sections of the report focus on endline findings. The report does not include a comparative analysis of the endline and baseline findings. This is because each stage of the evaluation differed in scope: the baseline focused on age assessment without the support of the NAAB and the delivery of the MVS, while the endline focused on the national rollout of the NAAB. Additionally, the sample and profile of each stage also differed, as described in the methodology section.

5.1 Key findings

Age assessment process (without the support of the NAAB)

1. Importance of age assessment: participants highlighted the crucial role of age assessments in determining the age of individuals, particularly unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. They stressed that these assessments were essential for ensuring that individuals receive the appropriate support and safeguarding.

2. Merton-compliant assessments: all local authorities in the baseline evaluation conducted Merton-compliant assessments. While there were common elements in the Merton-compliant process, including information gathering and analysis, variations existed in the approach, assessment length, and assessor experience.

3. Training on age assessments: prior to the MVS, local authorities accessed training and guidance both in-house and through external providers. In-house training included on-the-job support from managers, guidance on case law, and best practices relating to cultural differences and the forms of identification available in other countries. Similarly, some local authorities accessed external training for guidance on the age assessment process, Merton compliance, and related legal issues. Staff generally found this external training effective, but there was a call for more frequent and practical training to enhance social workers’ competence and confidence.

4. Challenges in age assessment process: key challenges identified included limited availability of experienced social workers in smaller local authorities, insufficient interpreters for specific dialects, and inconsistent guidance on how to conduct age assessments.

Set up of the NAAB Minimum Viable Service

5. Understanding the aims and objectives of the NAAB MVS: stakeholders generally aligned on the NAAB’s objectives, which included improving consistency, enhancing safeguarding, reducing local authority burdens, and providing training and support.

6. Setup challenges: perceptions of the setup process varied. While Home Office staff reported smoother experiences than local authority participants, challenges were highlighted, including IT system issues and difficulties with recruiting Home Office social workers. However, the Home Office’s prompt response to local authority requests for information and documents to support the age assessment process was appreciated.

Delivery of the NAAB Minimum Viable Service

7. Communication: communication between local authorities and the NAAB was generally reliable during planning and assessment stages. However, some local authority participants noted a decline in communication during the decision-making and outcome stages, leading to difficulties in planning post-assessment processes.

8. Referral process and safeguarding: tight deadlines for document transfers between local authorities and the Home Office made the referral process labour-intensive. Concerns were raised about safeguarding due to the long duration and nature of some NAAB assessments, such as requiring the young person to recount distressing experiences.

Perceived outcomes of the NAAB Minimum Viable Service

9. Positive outcomes: participants highlighted several positive outcomes, including a focus on safeguarding, increased local authority staff confidence, reduced wait times, and enhanced partnership working between local authorities and the Home Office.

10. Concerns: despite the NAAB MVS relieving pressure on local authorities’ resources in some respects, there were concerns about the burden on local authorities in coordinating NAAB assessments. Participants also expressed concerns about the perceived lack of child-friendly approaches and the treatment of individuals deemed adults. For example, conducting the outcome meeting at a ‘neutral venue’ rather than an individual’s home could lead to the possible removal of individuals deemed as adults from their places of residence without allowing them to say goodbye to other residents or pack their belongings. Other concerns included NAAB age assessment guidance not being followed, the NAAB’s capacity to meet demand post-national rollout and logistical and data-sharing expectations towards local authorities.

Opportunities for the NAAB national rollout

11. Increase capacity and support for local authorities: participants suggested expanding the NAAB’s capacity to provide additional logistical support, such as for the provision of interpreters.

12. Develop local NAAB teams and regional hubs: participants suggested that creating local teams and regional hubs could reduce travel time for stakeholders supporting age-disputed individuals and streamline processes.

13. Revise responsibilities: local authorities suggested that the NAAB take on tasks such as booking interpreters and legal advice to further reduce the operational burden on local authorities.

14. Improve training for social workers: participants suggested additional training and support for social workers to ensure they have the necessary skills for high-quality assessments.

15. Enhance IT and case management systems: there is a need for a more efficient IT system to manage caseloads and streamline communication between stakeholders.

16. Consistently communicate relevant guidance including on case law: participants suggested providing ongoing updates to local authorities on best practices and case law to improve efficiency and reduce outdated practices.

17. Promote the NAAB service: participants suggested establishing a robust online presence to communicate the NAAB’s purpose and establishing services to enhance understanding and transparency.

6. Set up and national rollout of the NAAB

This section provides an overview of the setup phase of the NAAB, focusing on the key factors that contributed to its establishment and the challenges encountered along the way. It examines the various activities involved in the setup process, highlighting both the facilitators and obstacles reported by Home Office and local authority participants.

The data presented in this section and the rest of this report is from the endline data collection interviews with Home Office and local authority participants. Baseline findings are not integrated, as this previous phase of the evaluation focused on the setup and delivery of MVS, while the endline phase focused on the national rollout. Data from case illustration interviews is included throughout the section and report in the form of case studies. We also refer to internal Home Office documentation where helpful for context.

6.1 Key findings

Awareness and understanding

1. Local authorities received information about the NAAB from various sources. Understandings of the NAAB were at times influenced by the source of information, which sometimes led to differing views and challenges in securing local authority buy-in to the NAAB.

2. Local authority participants demonstrated a clear understanding of and alignment with the service’s objectives.

Key setup activities

3. The Home Office focused on recruiting and training NAAB social workers, ensuring adequate staff capacity for referrals.

4. Local authorities were onboarded through a structured process. In this context, ‘to onboard’ (‘will onboard’/‘onboarding’/’onboarded’) refers to the process of familiarising a local authority with the NAAB and inviting that local authority to use the NAAB’s services. Some participants felt that the process was lengthy, however others noted that their prior experience with the NAAB enabled a smoother onboarding process.

Enablers to successful setup

5. Key enablers included the expertise of the NAAB team, collaboration with external partners, and comprehensive training for social workers.

Challenges in the setup phase

6. Key challenges included securing local authority buy-in, concerns from the voluntary sector, IT system issues, slow recruitment of social workers, and funding uncertainties.

6.2 Awareness and understanding of the NAAB

Findings indicate that local authority participants received information about the NAAB national rollout from various sources, including SMPs, unspecified news outlets, and social media platforms such as social worker forums. Some Home Office participants perceived that local authorities had differing opinions on the NAAB, with perspectives shaped by their source of information regarding the NAAB.

In some instances, this variability in views posed a challenge to securing local authority buy-in during the setup phase, which is discussed further in this section.

From the Home Office’s perspective, some negative views of the NAAB were seen as not fully reflecting the service. As a result, Home Office participants made efforts to reassure local authorities by sharing more information about the NAAB’s goals and processes, with the aim of fostering understanding and gaining support during the buy-in and onboarding stages.

Both Home Office and local authority participants demonstrated a clear understanding of the key aims and objectives of the NAAB, which also mirrored the findings from the baseline evaluation.

These understandings of the NAAB’s objectives were broadly categorised into 3 main areas. The following sections provide more detail.

6.2.1 Creating a ‘centre of excellence’ in age assessments

Home Office staff described that a goal of the NAAB was to build a ‘centre of excellence’ in age assessments. ^{[footnote 8]} Within this framework, the primary role of the NAAB was to conduct consistent and robust age assessments on behalf of the local authorities that opted into the service. Local authority participants echoed this view, also noting that the NAAB’s aim was to conduct Merton-compliant, fair assessments. Both groups emphasised the NAAB’s role in improving knowledge and sharing best practices to enhance the overall quality of age assessments across the UK.

6.2.2 A source of advice, guidance, and training

Another key role of the NAAB, as identified by participants, was to provide advice, guidance, and training to local authorities to enhance their knowledge and understanding of the age assessment process. Participants saw this aspect of the NAAB as integral to achieving the NAAB’s ‘centre of excellence’ aim.

“To improve the knowledge and understanding surrounding age assessments that is shared amongst all local authorities across the UK regionally […] the NAAB is also providing training opportunities or maybe any developments or any changes to keep them up to speed in terms of the legislation surrounding it.” (Local authority)

6.2.3 Reducing the burden on local authorities

Participants noted that the NAAB service intends for their support (for more detail on what the service offers, see Section 7.3) to be highly valuable for local authorities, particularly in alleviating the workload associated with age assessments. Participants viewed the NAAB’s assistance as especially beneficial in handling complex cases and taking on cases likely to result in judicial reviews, which in turn supports and alleviates the pressures on local authorities.

Local authority staff emphasised the importance of reducing the strain on smaller teams and those with limited experience. Additionally, some local authorities expressed the view that the NAAB could help ease the emotional burden on social workers by providing an independent assessment, thus making the decision-making process less stressful.

“I think that it was initially set up because it was recognised that it was quite a difficult place for social workers to be in terms of it being in the position where they need to complete those assessments. It can be really difficult for social workers emotionally, especially when they’re working alongside young people, to complete them.” (Local authority)

6.3 Setup activities

6.3.1 Within the Home Office

Recruitment of Home Office (NAAB) social workers

The national rollout of the NAAB required ongoing recruitment and training, particularly for NAAB social workers. Findings highlight that this recruitment of social workers was essential to ensuring adequate staff capacity to meet the growing demand for the service, including the volume of referrals from local authorities.

Training opportunities for the NAAB social workers

Training was another critical component of the NAAB setup. Newly recruited NAAB social workers underwent a 2-day training delivered by the Home Office, which included civil service policies and age assessment training. While participants appreciated the comprehensive nature of the training, some expressed that the balance between the 3 modules could be improved. They felt that more focus on practical aspects of age assessment process would have better aligned with their day-to-day responsibilities.

“I wonder if the balance could be slightly addressed to actually focus a bit more on age assessment-specific training because the other training is of course important, but actually in terms of delivering my role I need to know what I’m doing on a day-to-day basis more than I need to know about the overall policies.” (Home Office)

The NAAB delivered the age assessment training over 2 days online. NAAB social workers valued the expertise and variety of modules covered, such as the rationale behind age assessments, the NAAB process, case law, and examples of high-quality age assessment reports. In addition, participants also attended ‘team service days’ for ongoing training on topics like safeguarding and cultural norms, which participants perceived as beneficial, building professional competence and confidence.

The NAAB also offered participants shadowing opportunities of current age assessments as part of their training. However, some noted that they missed shadowing sessions, due to cancellations and delays in age assessments, which left a gap in their training experience. Additionally, NAAB social workers would also welcome more opportunities to shadow other NAAB age assessments as part of their training.

6.3.2 Within local authorities

At the time of the national rollout, not all local authorities had engaged with the support and training provided by the NAAB. Home Office staff reported mixed views on the success of local authority buy-in, with some expressing concerns over the lengthy onboarding and referral process, and others observing positive progress.

Local authority participants shared that the onboarding process involved a working agreement between their authority and the NAAB, including exchanges of legal requirements, statutory protections, and information-sharing protocols. While experiences varied, some participants also felt that the process was lengthy. However, others noted that their prior experience with the NAAB before the national rollout enabled a smoother onboarding process, as they were already familiar with the service.

Key partners in facilitating the onboarding process included SMPs and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA), who made introductions between local authorities and the NAAB to promote collaboration. ^{[footnote 9]}

6.4 Facilitators and challenges in the NAAB national rollout

6.4.1 Facilitators to setup

Findings suggest several factors contributed to the setup of the NAAB’s national rollout. The following sections provide more detail.

Expertise and engagement of the NAAB team

Interviews with both groups of participants suggest the dedication and expertise of the NAAB operational team played a crucial role. The NAAB team’s proactive involvement in discussions helped refine the service’s design and ensure effective service delivery.

”[…] it’s not necessarily about how it was delivered; it’s about the people that are working in it now because that’s what keeps it going.” (Home Office)

Collaboration with external partners

Collaboration between the NAAB and key external partners, including SMPs and local authorities, was vital for fostering trust and ensuring a smooth integration of the NAAB into local systems.

Comprehensive training

The training provided to NAAB social workers helped build their capacity and confidence in both engaging with the local authorities and conducting age assessments.

Onboarding for local authorities

The structured onboarding process for local authorities, supported by SMPs and COSLA, facilitated smoother integration of local authorities into the NAAB system, although some participants thought the process was lengthy.

6.4.2 Challenges to setup

Despite the success factors, several challenges were identified during the setup phase, particularly around securing local authority buy-in, engagement with the voluntary sector, and operational hurdles.

Securing local authority buy-in

Home Office and local authority participants noted that securing local authority buy-in for the NAAB was a significant challenge. Negative perceptions of the NAAB played a critical role in this. These negative perceptions were particularly due to the NAAB’s association with the Home Office. Social media discussions around the NAAB also sparked concerns, leading to apprehensions about the objectivity of the age assessment process.

“To convince senior managers in the organisation that we weren’t subscribing to an assessment that was going to be very biased in relation to a perceived Home Office agenda. That was the main challenge.” (Local authority)

Engagement with the voluntary sector

Local authority participants encountered challenges in engaging voluntary sector organisations during the NAAB onboarding process. Some local authority participants said that these agencies (which advocate for age-disputed individuals) expressed concerns to them that collaborating with the NAAB could negatively affect the agency’s relationships with age-disputed individuals, due to the NAAB’s association with the Home Office.

“Third sector […] I think the other agencies really struggled with that [onboarding], so it did cause a lot of conflict in those early stages. It’s taken a lot of discussion with all of us to be able to come to agreements about certain things, about avoiding conflict of interest and conflict of roles.” (Local authority)

IT systems and information sharing

Both Home Office and local authority participants reported challenges with IT systems, specifically the MOVEit system used for information sharing. Issues such as regular system maintenance hindered timely information sharing and created delays during the set-up and onboarding phases. These issues persisted into the delivery phase of the national rollout (Section 7).

Recruitment of social workers

The recruitment of NAAB social workers remained a challenge that continued from the baseline phase. Home Office participants noted that the recruitment process took much longer than anticipated, often lasting between 6 to 9 months. This slow process raised concerns about whether there would be sufficient social workers to meet demand, given the lengthy recruitment and training times.

Funding of the NAAB

Funding uncertainties also impacted the national rollout. Home Office participants highlighted that while the previous government had allocated significant funds to the Sovereign Borders programme, which supported the NAAB, changes in government priorities led to a shift in funding. ^{[footnote 10]} From the view of Home Office participants, the government was scrutinising asylum system spending more closely, which created concerns about the future financial stability of the NAAB.

7. Delivery of the NAAB national rollout

This section presents key findings on the delivery of the NAAB national rollout. It focuses on Home Office and local authority staff views on the NAAB’s implementation of training, guidance and support services, casework referrals, and safeguarding practices.

7.1 Key findings

High demand for training

1. NAAB training was well-received by and in high demand from local authorities. The training improved social workers’ competence and confidence in conducting age assessments.

Formalising support channels

2. The NAAB support and guidance service evolved into a more formal structure as demand increased. However, some local authorities continued using informal channels and suggested stronger promotion of formal support options.

Referrals

3. Local authorities typically referred cases to NAAB when they lacked resources or experience to conduct the assessments themselves, particularly for complex cases with potential legal challenges.

4. The NAAB referral service functioned best when there was strong collaboration, clear communication, uptake of pre-assessment support, and a focus on the well-being of age-disputed individuals.

Key challenges

5. Local authorities struggled to resource interpreters and appropriate adults.

6. NAAB social workers faced communication challenges with overstretched local authorities.

Safeguarding and child-friendly approaches

7. NAAB social workers adhered to safeguarding protocols. Participants highlighted the importance of a holistic, child-centred, child-friendly, and trauma-informed approach that prioritises the young person’s well-being.

7.2 NAAB training for local authorities

The NAAB training for local authorities consisted of 3 modules delivered over 2 days in person. These modules included:

1. Introduction to working with asylum-seeking children and a general overview of the age assessments process.

2. Case Law on age assessment: a deep dive into legal principles and recent case rulings.

3. Practical application: guidance on conducting assessments, preparing for interviews, and writing reports using real case studies.

The NAAB training was delivered to individual local authorities or multiple local authorities within a region depending on demand. The content and format of these trainings were the same.

Local authority participants described the training as “instructive,” “practical,” “measured,” and “balanced.” They appreciated its clear explanations of the purpose of age assessments and its emphasis on a trauma-informed, Merton-compliant approach. The inclusion of recent case law was particularly valued.

“It does give a good overview of what the age assessment process is and why it’s carried out and how it should be carried out.” (Local authority)

“The training was really measured in terms of thinking about the child and the trauma that that child has experienced. Really making it a holistic assessment.” (Local authority)

Local authority participants found the training easy to access and valued the in-person format. The NAAB trainers travelling to the local authority’s location made participation more convenient. Participants saw the 2-day, face-to-face structure as engaging and interactive.

Home Office staff noted that the format of training was refined based on early feedback. Initially, the NAAB delivered training in a single-day, online session, but attendees found this overwhelming. The revised structure allowed for better engagement and reflection.

“We spread the content out over 2 days and made it more interactive so that it wasn’t overwhelming. People had time to step away from their own practice and have 2 days to really think about this properly.” (Home Office)

The following case illustration introduces a local authority’s hypothetical experience with NAAB training compared to other available options, based on the real-life experiences of interviewees. ^{[footnote 11]}

Case illustration 1: Comparing the NAAB age assessment training to age assessment training delivered by other providers

After completing the NAAB age assessment training, local authority social workers Sarah and Jamie reflected on how it compared to other training they had attended, including sessions provided by local authority partnerships, a charity, and an independent provider.

Sarah found the NAAB training more practical and detailed in its guidance on conducting age assessments than previous training. Unlike previous training, which was more general, the NAAB trainers provided clear instructions, outlined key steps in the process, and signposted useful resources and case law.

“The other age assessment training […] they were saying at that time, ‘Oh, we can’t tell you what to put in your assessment or what to ask for.’ The NAAB one was more directive about, ‘Cover this, cover that. Here are particular sources that you can use to back up your report.’ So, it was useful.” (Local authority)

Jamie noted that the NAAB trainers demonstrated stronger subject expertise, likely due to their active role in the field. He felt this gave the participants a more up-to-date understanding of best practices in age assessment.

Sarah also appreciated that the NAAB training covered the broader context of age assessments, such as trafficking, and explained their purpose in a holistic way. In contrast, other training sessions focused solely on the technical aspects of the assessment process. However, Jamie felt the NAAB training could have delved deeper into certain areas, such as how to apply ‘child-friendly’ practices during assessments.

Both agreed that the 2-day, in-person format of the NAAB training was preferable to shorter, online sessions. They found that the interactive setting allowed for better engagement with the trainer and other participants, providing more opportunities to discuss and absorb the material.

7.2.1 Uptake of the NAAB training

Both local authority and Home Office staff reported that NAAB training was in high demand. Some local authority staff expressed a need for more frequent sessions to train new staff and stay updated on case law developments.

However, Home Office staff explained that due to high demand, the NAAB currently offered each local authority only one training session per year. As an alternative, social workers from different local authorities were invited to attend regional training sessions delivered by the NAAB.

Despite high demand, local authority and Home Office participants noted that some local authorities were still unaware of the NAAB and its offers, including training. To address this, the Home Office strengthened its collaboration with SMPs, particularly in regions with lower engagement, to promote the training and advice service. Findings from Home Office staff accounts suggest that this approach had successfully increased interest and engagement with the NAAB.

7.2.2 Building competence and confidence

Feedback on NAAB training was generally positive across both local authority and Home Office staff. Local authority interviewees shared that the training was able to meet the needs of social workers with varying levels of experience in age assessment by covering a basic introduction to conducting age assessments as well as deep dives into recent case law. They felt that the trainer was able to tailor the training to their specific needs by talking to them before the training.

Local authority staff noted that the NAAB training increased the confidence of local authority social workers in conducting age assessments. Social workers appreciated the practical, hands-on knowledge provided, particularly in conducting high-quality, Merton-compliant assessments.

“I found that I did enjoy the full day with the NAAB […] because it was about the practice of how to do age assessment, how to structure it, the process of going through that. So, it made it simpler for me.” (Local authority)

Local authority staff also believed that the training would bolster the credibility of their assessments, especially if their professional opinions were ever challenged in court.

“It means that the solicitors can’t say, ‘Well, they’re not experienced’ […] It can show that actually our social workers are fully trained. They’ve had training recently and they’ve had training before, and yes, I guess it just boosts their credibility.” (Local authority)

The training also provided a broader understanding of age assessment practices, which Home Office staff perceived to have improved consistency of age assessment process across different local authorities. Finally, local authority staff noted that the training helped expand their capacity to conduct more age assessments by increasing the number of trained staff.

The following case illustration highlights how the training helped social workers with varying levels of experience in age assessment to build their competence and confidence.

Case illustration 2: Meeting the needs of social workers with different levels of experience

A local authority service manager, Lucy, contacted the NAAB to arrange age assessment training for a group of social workers with varying levels of experience. Most of them already had experience with age assessments, but some were new to it.

Before the training, Lucy spoke with the trainer to outline these needs, allowing the trainer to tailor the content to the local context and the social workers’ differing experience levels. Lucy was able to clarify that a few social workers needed a basic introduction to the age assessment process, but the rest wanted to learn more about how to deal with complex cases.

The first part of the training covered a more general introduction to the age assessment process and how to work with asylum-seeking children. This gave the social workers who were new to age assessment a good grounding to engage with the rest of the training. The training then focused on deep dives into the case law, allowing the more experienced social workers to raise questions around legal grey areas and gain new insights from recent case rulings. They were also encouraged to talk through scenarios based on their own experience of age assessments, which allowed them to share practical tips on how to deal with challenging cases with each other and the trainer. They also got to hear examples of how other local authorities have dealt with difficult cases.

The social workers who attended enjoyed the training. Those who had little or no experience fed back that the training improved their confidence to go into age assessments; the more experienced staff shared that their skills in conducting age assessments improved as they learnt more about the process from a different perspective and gained up-to-date knowledge of the case law.

“I think [the NAAB trainer] did a really good balance of those that hadn’t got any experience and a lot of them had a lot of experience and I think [the trainer] managed to tailor the training for both, which is quite difficult, but [they] managed it.” (Local authority)

7.2.3 Changing perceptions about the NAAB service

Both local authority and Home Office interviewees reported that the training improved local authority perceptions of the NAAB, leading to greater uptake of other NAAB services. Participants felt that the training helped clarify misconceptions about the NAAB, build trust between local authority and NAAB staff, and foster connections to additional resources and contacts within the NAAB.

“I think everyone was worried that [the training] - coming from the NAAB, that it would have an agenda. But actually once it was delivered, it was quite measured… [the NAAB trainer] gave all these case law examples […] age assessments […] and the difficulties that had come up, it was very relatable. I feel like people learned a lot from that.” (Local authority)

While local authority staff felt the training generally met their needs, they also offered suggestions of opportunities for exploration. These opportunities included adding content on how to explain the age assessment process to a young person in more ‘child-friendly’ language; providing more training on brief and initial enquiries, which were not covered in the training or offered through the NAAB referral service, and addressing differences in age assessment guidelines across the devolved nations.

7.3 The NAAB support and advice service

7.3.1 Channels of support

Findings suggest that since the NAAB MVS delivery, the NAAB support and advice service evolved into a more structured and formal helpline. Home Office staff explained that as requests for guidance increased through the NAAB training provider’s email, the NAAB launched a formal support inbox and helpline to provide local authorities with direct access to advice and support.

7.3.2 Engagement with the service

Awareness and use of the NAAB formal support service increased, partly due to NAAB training, which actively signposted participants to the formal support service. Social workers who attended the training were encouraged to reach out for guidance on complex cases, legal frameworks, and best practices in conducting age assessments.

However, some local authority staff suggested that the service could be strengthened by increasing the number of NAAB staff available to handle inquiries and by further promoting awareness of the formal support channels.

“I think it would be great if that [advice and guidance service] became more widely known and a bigger part. I understand at the moment I think it’s quite a small team who are responding to those queries.” (Local authority)

7.3.3 Nature of inquires

Local authorities primarily sought guidance on age assessments they were actively conducting. Common inquiries included:

• clarification of the age assessment process

• advice on complex cases

• understanding case law

• broader questions related to working with asylum-seeking young people and trauma-informed assessments

Beyond age assessments, the NAAB support service also signposted local authorities to relevant resources, such as the National Document Fraud Unit and NAAB’s training and referral services.

Local authority staff reported that NAAB support has significantly improved their knowledge and confidence in conducting age assessments. By discussing real case scenarios with experienced NAAB social workers, they gained insights into different assessment approaches and a deeper understanding of case law.

“So, it’s made us realise that we should be much more on top of case law when it comes to the age assessments, so yes, it’s been a positive impact.” (Local authority)

Some staff highlighted that NAAB guidance was particularly valuable for navigating challenging cases, such as determining what evidence was needed to make outcome decisions.

7.4 NAAB casework service

The NAAB established a casework service to support local authority social workers in conducting robust, Merton-compliant age assessments by providing specialist guidance, case-specific advice, and direct consultation. The casework service performed several functions, including taking on referred age assessment cases from local authorities, providing expert input on complex cases, and helping social workers navigate legal frameworks, case law, and best practices in working with asylum-seeking young people.

7.4.1 Factors influencing local authorities’ decision to refer cases to the NAAB

According to Home Office staff, local authorities generally considered 2 main factors when deciding whether or not to refer a case. These are outlined in the sections below.

Resources and experience

The capacity and expertise of a local authority played a significant role. Participants felt that local authorities with less experience or fewer resources for conducting the age assessments required were more likely to seek support from the NAAB.

Type of age assessment case

Two key types of cases typically drove local authorities to refer cases to the NAAB:

1. Complex cases

Local authorities often sought the NAAB’s input for particularly challenging age assessments, typically in situations where there was conflicting or incomplete documentation. Examples included lack of birth certificates or legal documentation and inconsistent or unclear records. However, the Home Office noted inconsistencies in how local authorities defined ‘complex cases.’ Their experience highlighted differences in thresholds across geographical areas. Local authorities in regions with more experience working with unaccompanied asylum-seeking children and age assessments may set a higher threshold for what they considered complex, such as when there was significant ambiguity or a high level of uncertainty. This suggests that experience and regional context played a significant role in determining whether a case was deemed complex enough to warrant a referral to NAAB.

2. Cases with potential legal challenges

Home Office participants stated that local authorities were more likely to refer cases to the NAAB when there was a risk of an adverse decision or legal challenge. This is because local authorities wanted to ensure that the assessment was legally sound and defensible, minimising the risk of legal consequences.

Cases with potential legal challenges often involved challenging considerations over:

• a disagreement from the individual being assessed regarding their determined age after their age assessment

• age assessments are critical in immigration and asylum cases, where the outcome can directly impact the individual’s legal status; a misassessment may result in removal, denial of services, or unlawful detention

• uncertainty in the application of case law: in some cases, evolving or ambiguous legal precedents created uncertainty in how to apply case law in age assessments; local authorities may have referred such cases to NAAB to ensure they follow the most current legal standards and to avoid potential challenges

7.4.2 Cases referred for age assessment: Section 50 and Section 51 referrals

Local authority participants were aware that the NAAB service has 2 referral pathways based on Section 50 and Section 51 of the 2022 Nationality and Borders Act. ^{[footnote 12] [footnote 13]}

Section 50 Referrals

Local authorities demonstrated varying approaches to making Section 50 referrals. Some authorities referred cases under this section only when the age-disputed individual was already accommodated within their local authority, such as being placed in local care or supported housing.

This approach allowed local authorities to observe the individual’s behaviour over a period of time before making the referral, which helped mitigate delays during the assessment process. As the individual was already under their care, they had the flexibility to manage any potential delays without impacting the individual’s immediate accommodation or well-being.

On the other hand, some local authorities reported not having a clear, structured approach for Section 50 referrals. In these cases, local authorities made referrals on an ad hoc basis depending on the individual circumstances of the case, rather than following a standardised procedure.

“[…] it’s mainly looked-after young people, so people who are already in our care where we have got the leisure of taking time, so if there are ever any delays or anything like that, we can just count that in.” (Local authority)

Section 51 referrals

Information regarding Section 51 referrals was more limited. Home Office staff clarified that these referrals were typically made where the Home Office needed to decide an individual’s age for immigration purposes, and where there may have been a difference between the Home Office’s view and the local authority’s assessment which would need further exploration. Section 51 referrals were important for ensuring that these discrepancies were properly addressed. They often involved a higher level of scrutiny to resolve the disagreement between the 2 parties.

7.4.3 Eligibility criteria for referral into NAAB case work service

As noted in the internal NAAB referral guidance for local authorities, there was no specific, fixed set of criteria for making a referral into the NAAB. However, as noted in the guidance, there were suggestions for local authorities to consider when deciding whether it was appropriate to refer a case.

These suggestions are outlined in the following sections.

Claimed age discrepancy

Referrals were considered when the claimed age of the individual was 16 years old or younger, but there were reasons to believe that the individual was older than their stated age.

Vulnerabilities of the age-disputed individual

Vulnerabilities played a significant role in the referral process. These included, but were not limited to, mental, emotional, and physical health needs; trauma, trafficking, and exploitation; safeguarding risks.

Despite these guidelines, Home Office participants noted that some local authorities interpreted the criteria broadly, with some referring all their cases to the NAAB, even if they agreed on the claimed age or believed that the individual was a child. This approach sometimes led to referrals that did not align with the spirit of the guidelines, as local authorities erred on the side of caution or may not have fully assessed the specific vulnerabilities or complexities of the case before making a referral.

Experiences with applying the referral guidance varied across local authorities. Some authorities found the guidance to be clear and easy to follow, especially when accompanied by the NAAB referral guide. The guide helped clarify when and why a referral should be made, making the process more structured and understandable for local authorities. However, for some areas, there was still uncertainty about how to best apply the guidance, particularly in cases where the vulnerabilities were not immediately apparent.

7.4.4 IT system for NAAB referrals

A significant ongoing challenge identified by local authorities was the use of the MOVEit platform, which is the secure IT system used by the NAAB for referrals and information sharing. Local authorities often struggled to access the platform, particularly because, during onboarding, only one user per local authority was granted access. This created issues for areas with high staff turnover or part-time staff. As a result, some local authority staff resorted to sending referrals and information via email when they could not access MOVEit. Home Office participants suggested that emailing could increase the risk of data breaches; however, one view was that the use of secured virtual private networks (VPNs) minimised this risk.

In response to these challenges, the Home Office indicated that the NAAB was developing a new referral platform which they expected to launch in June/July 2025. This platform was anticipated to improve the onboarding process and streamline referrals from local authorities.

7.5 NAAB age assessment process

The age assessment process, while varying slightly between local authorities, adhered to Merton-compliant guidelines and was typically conducted over 28 days within a 2 to 6 week period.

7.5.1 The process

Phase 1: Pre-meetings and set-up

Once a referral was approved and allocated to a NAAB social worker, communication began with the local authority via email, offering a pre-meeting with the referring social worker. The purpose of this meeting was to outline expectations for the NAAB process and clarify the roles of the professionals involved (for example, assessors and social workers). Although these pre-meetings were not compulsory, participants deemed them important for establishing mutual understanding.

“[…] you’re explaining the role of the assessors, the point of the age assessment, and you’re explaining that it’s not a barrier to them claiming asylum.” (Local authority)

Another pre-meeting may have taken place before the assessment interviews online between the age-disputed individual, the local authority, and the NAAB social worker. This session aimed to help ease any anxieties and ensure the age-disputed individual understood the process.

For Section 50 referrals, local authorities were responsible for arranging the venue, appropriate adult, and interpreter. In contrast, for Section 51 referrals, the NAAB managed these arrangements, with interpreters sourced from an internal Home Office group.

Phase 2: Information gathering sessions

During this phase, information was gathered about the age-disputed individual, typically over one to 3 days. Questions focused on 3 areas:

1. Personal details: country of origin, background, education, and family.

2. Journey to the UK: reasons for traveling and the journey itself.

3. Life in the UK: experiences since arrival.

In addition to gathering information, assessors observed the individual’s behaviour and emotional responses, which helped inform the assessment.

“While gathering information, you’re also being able to assess a person’s presentation […] and their emotional responses and how that fits in with a particular age group.” (Local authority)

Phase 3: Minded-to and outcome meetings

Following the information-gathering sessions, a ‘minded-to’ meeting was held and was attended by the 2 NAAB social workers, the age-disputed individual, an interpreter, and appropriate adult. This meeting allowed the NAAB social workers to analyse the collected data and ask the age-disputed individual to clarify any inconsistencies. Home Office staff emphasised the importance of this phase in ensuring the individual has a voice in the process.

“It’s the time when we put our points to the young person to allow them to have a voice and a say on anything we’ve noticed.” (Home Office)

After the meeting, the assessors prepared the final report, which a NAAB social work manager reviewed and signed off. In the process, the NAAB intended to notify the local authorities of the outcome a few days before the outcome meeting, where the decision and rationale for the deemed age are shared with the individual.

Professionals and resources involved

The age assessment always involved 2 NAAB social workers, with one conducting the interview and the other taking notes, an interpreter, and an appropriate adult. Other professionals may have also been involved, particularly during the information-gathering sessions. These included staff from border control, foster care, social work, supported living, and educational settings who gave their professional opinion on the age-disputed individual’s behaviour and demeanour. Additionally, the age-disputed individual could request specific professionals to participate in the process.

7.5.2 Key factors in the effective delivery of the NAAB-supported age assessment process

Findings suggest that several factors contributed to the smooth functioning of the NAAB-supported age assessment process. The key strengths identified by Home Office and local authority staff can be broadly categorised into 3 areas. These are outlined in the sections below.

Strong communication and collaboration between local authorities and NAAB social workers

Clear and ongoing communication was essential, particularly in the initial stages. Pre-meetings set expectations and establish professional roles, helping to reduce misunderstandings. Local authority staff also found the communication from NAAB workers helpful, especially regarding updates on referral status, available resources, and scheduling changes. Timely email updates on next steps, such as booking interpreters and venues, allowed for smooth coordination.

Pre-assessment support and preparation

Support from NAAB staff in the set-up phase was another facilitator. When local authorities faced resource constraints, the NAAB’s help with booking interpreters and appropriate adults was particularly valuable. This support eased the burden on local authorities, ensuring the availability of necessary professionals for the assessment.

Holistic approach to well-being

Participants observed that the Merton-compliant approach prioritised the well-being of the age-disputed individual. Participants felt that emphasis on child-friendly practices, such as offering breaks and providing clear explanations, helped reduce anxiety. ^{[footnote 14]} Participants felt that these practices, grounded in Merton Compliance law, helped individuals feel supported throughout the process and ensured that their mental and emotional needs were addressed.

Case illustration 3: Effective communication during the assessment

A local authority staff member who was involved in arranging an age assessment expressed concerns over whether the case they planned to refer was appropriate for the NAAB. After emailing the NAAB support service with their questions about the referral, they were better able to identify a reason to refer this case to the NAAB.

Once the referral was approved by the NAAB, the staff member received a detailed email outlining the next steps. This email included important logistical information, such as how to book a suitable venue, arrange for an appropriate adult to be present during the assessment, and organise an interpreter if needed. The staff member appreciated the NAAB assessors’ proactive approach by offering to assist with these arrangements when the local authority was experiencing resource constraints or was particularly busy. This support helped ease the burden on local authority staff, ensuring that all necessary professionals and resources were in place to conduct a thorough assessment.

Throughout the entire assessment process, from the initial referral to the final outcome, the local authority staff were kept informed about any delays or changes. This ongoing communication enabled the local authority to make any necessary adjustments in real-time, ensuring that the process ran smoothly and that there were no surprises. For example, if there was a delay in securing an interpreter or if scheduling changes occurred, the local authority was promptly notified so that alternative arrangements could be made without disrupting the assessment timeline.

“The communication is really good from the actual NAAB workers when they get allocated is excellent. They liaise directly with the social worker of the young person. We arrange rooms together. We arrange times. It’s absolutely fine.” (Local authority)

7.5.3 Challenges of the NAAB supported age assessment process

Participants identified several challenges during the NAAB age assessment, which can be categorised as financial, resourcing, capacity, communication, and timeliness challenges.

Financial, resourcing, and capacity challenges

Home Office and local authority staff spoke about the challenges of local authorities’ capacity to engage with and support the NAAB age assessment referrals and process. Financial constraints impacted the availability of resources for age assessments, particularly the cost of interpreters and appropriate adults. For example, an interpreter could cost up to £400 to £600 per day, which created challenges for local authorities. Home Office participants also noted that the cost of appropriate adults led to the use of non-independent individuals, such as social workers, which was contrary to best practice. These individuals may have struggled to maintain independence due to pre-existing relationships with the age-disputed person.

“Sometimes they are invested in the young person staying where they’re staying. So, it’s good that they know them, and they can support them, but they struggle sometimes to be an independent person there.” (Home Office)

Additionally, local authorities often faced capacity challenges, resulting in delays in organising resources and professionals, including venues and interpreters. These delays in the age assessment process caused frustrations among both local authorities and NAAB staff.

Local authorities sometimes experienced communication breakdowns due to the strain on their resources. Home Office participants noted that NAAB staff often found out about cancellations or delays only upon arriving for assessments.

“Because there’s so much that the local authority has to organise, there’s quite a bit of communication breakdown. You can travel for a couple of hours, get to where you need to be, and somebody not turn up.” (Home Office)

One suggestion among Home Office and local authority staff was that the NAAB could fund and provide interpreters for local authorities. Additionally, a local authority participant suggested that it would also be helpful if the NAAB allowed telephone interpreters.

Lastly, Home Office and local authority staff felt that the NAAB should consider how its resources were managed to meet referral needs once all local authorities are onboarded, especially with the increasing demand for age assessment services nationally. Suggested ways to help manage the financial, resourcing, and capacity challenges included a gradual process of onboarding local authorities to avoid a sudden influx of referrals, a strategy to help manage delays, and waiting lists to ensure decisions are made more quickly. Participants also suggested that the NAAB could conduct age assessments before age-disputed individuals were sent to local authorities.

Communication and timeliness challenges

A local authority participant spoke about the scope for more regular catch ups between local authorities and the NAAB contacts to support the referral process. Home Office staff also acknowledged the time it took to develop relationships and build rapport with local authorities.

Local authorities experienced challenges in receiving timely communication regarding the outcome of age assessments. Some local authority staff reported receiving the report very close to the outcome meeting, which created pressure when the individual was found to be an adult or nearly 18. This lack of timely communication forced staff to rush to arrange adult accommodation and finalise paperwork, leading to additional stress. Local authority staff observed that communication typically decreased after the assessment started and only resumed at the final outcome meeting, creating gaps in communication during critical stages of the process.

Case illustration 4: Lack of communication after the assessment

A local authority had not received a response from the NAAB social workers regarding the final outcome ahead of the scheduled outcome meeting, nor had the NAAB shared the report with them. With the outcome meeting scheduled in 2 days, the local authority emailed the NAAB to inquire about the outcome. Due to the lack of communication and the need for additional follow-ups, the local authority experienced stress and felt that the Home Office did not trust them to handle the outcome appropriately before the meeting.

Once the NAAB contacted the local authority and shared the report, the outcome concluded that the age-disputed individual was an adult. However, the lack of prior communication prevented the local authority from planning post-assessment steps, forcing them to incur extra costs for the individual’s accommodation while they put new plans in place.

Had the local authority received the outcome earlier, they would have been able to prepare more effectively, resulting in a smoother process for both themselves and the age-disputed individual.

“It’s that time between the social workers making their decision and then management reading through it and signing it off. It’s that period where they’re not telling us anything that can go on for quite a while.” (Local authority)

7.6 Safeguarding in NAAB age assessments

This section explores how the NAAB implemented safeguarding in its assessments to help ensure the well-being of young people undergoing the process. It presents insights from Home Office and local authority participants on safeguarding policies, practical applications, and efforts to prevent traumatisation. The role of appropriate adults, experienced social workers, and differences between NAAB and other age assessment processes are also considered.

7.6.1 Safeguarding measures and processes

Home Office participants viewed safeguarding as a fundamental part of a social worker’s role. In this context, they relied on their training, expertise, and prior experience to effectively support and protect young people throughout the age assessment process.

Interviews with Home Office staff suggested that the NAAB followed Merton-compliant safeguarding guidance, allowing flexibility to adapt to individual cases. Social workers assessed each situation and tailored their approach to the young person’s needs.

Local authority participants were uncertain about whether the NAAB had specific safeguarding policies or processes in place and, if so, how they differed from local authority safeguarding procedures. NAAB social workers tended to follow safeguarding procedures which drew on their broader social work experience and training.

As part of the referral process, local authorities disclosed any safeguarding concerns, such as mental health conditions, to NAAB. This was to ensure appropriate measures were in place during the age assessment process. If concerns emerged post-referral, NAAB social workers referred issues to designated local authority social workers and complied with safeguarding legislation, such as submitting a National Referral Mechanism (NRM) referral for trafficking concerns.

The following case illustration uses a hypothetical example to demonstrate effective communication between NAAB social workers and local authorities regarding raising safeguarding concerns before and during age assessments.

Case Illustration 5: Effective Communication to in raising Safeguarding Concerns

Alicia, a social worker within NAAB, was assigned a new case at a local authority. To begin, she reviewed the referral form to check whether there were any safeguarding concerns. Before the assessment, Alicia arranged a planning meeting with the local authority social worker assigned to the age-disputed individual. They discussed the assessment topics, including sensitive subjects that could potentially trigger emotional distress in the individual.

During the initial age assessment, Alicia identified no safeguarding concerns. However, Alicia maintained regular communication with the local authority social worker on any progress and updates. This ongoing dialogue helped Alicia build rapport with her colleagues, ensuring that if any safeguarding issues arose, they could be addressed promptly.

“…Making sure that there’s ongoing communication with the local authority so that when and if safeguarding concerns do come up, you’ve already got those lines of communication open. I think that can help.” (Home Office)

At the following age assessment meeting, the young person became visibly distressed and abruptly left the session. Alicia noticed that the newly assigned appropriate adult had not yet established a rapport with the young person. Alicia immediately documented the incident and contacted the local authority social worker by phone and email to report the situation and her safeguarding concerns.

While it is the responsibility of the local authority social worker to address these concerns once they are reported, Alicia proactively followed up to ensure the concerns were being addressed and to discuss what support would be necessary for the young person before proceeding with the age assessment.

7.6.2 Safeguarding in practice

Prioritising the well-being of young people

Both Home Office and local authority participants highlighted the importance of a holistic, child-centred, child-friendly, and trauma-informed approach, prioritising the young person’s well-being by:

• allowing them control over the process, such as the young person deciding when to take breaks

• assuming they are a child unless proven otherwise

• building rapport and treating interviews as conversations rather than inquires or interrogations

• using child-focused language, a gentle tone and being mindful of body language

• checking questions with a manager

• encouraging breaks and questions throughout the assessment

• treating the individual fairly; for example, the appropriate adult would advocate for the young person to ensure any specific needs they have are met

“So, when we talk about child-centric, the approach is that it’s their assessment. It’s not our assessment; it’s their assessment…It’s giving them that bit of control within the assessment, but you’re also empowering them with that control, so it’s about reinforcing the message that this is your assessment.” (Home Office)

“My personal practice, we try to make the young person feel at as much ease as possible and make it more of a conversation, rather than an interrogation. We often ask just checking in how we are.” (Home Office)

Home Office staff emphasised that the process was child-friendly because it followed and abided to Merton Compliant law, which required the assessment to account for the well-being of the individual.

“So, with the Merton compliance it does clearly set out the areas that we need to make sure we’ve covered properly, and it is about making sure that the young person is given every opportunity and treated in a fair way.” (Home Office)

An introductory meeting familiarised young people with the assessors, explained the process and their rights, and clarified roles (for example, ensured they knew assessors were not immigration officers and the assessment did not determine their asylum claim). Assessors worked closely with interpreters to ensure accurate translation, stressing the importance of matching dialect and avoiding conflicts of interest.

As part of a child-centred and trauma-informed approach, this process also included:

• checking for mental health concerns before the assessment

• ensuring the young person had money for travel and access to food during the assessment

• allowing different formats for sharing their story (for example, drawing, social media)

• providing post-assessment support, regardless of the outcome

“Depending on whether we say they’re a child or an adult, we need to make sure they’ve got the right support. If assess someone to not be a child and over 18, that doesn’t mean that it ends there. These people still have to be supported and safeguarded as adults, so we need to make sure, yes, our role is really important that way.” (Home Office)

However, some local authority staff struggled to define what ‘child-friendly’ meant in the context of age assessments, as the primary goal was determining whether someone is a child or adult. This ambiguity made it difficult to assess if the process itself could be considered child-friendly.

“It’s really hard because you’re trying to determine if somebody is a child or an adult, so is even taking part in an age assessment child-friendly? I don’t think so, but how else do you determine if somebody’s a child or an adult? I don’t know, it’s a really difficult one.” (Local authority)

The role of appropriate adults and experienced social workers

The presence of appropriate adults and experienced social workers was key to safeguarding in NAAB assessments. Appropriate adults advocated for the young person, ensuring fair and respectful treatment. Home Office participants noted that to maintain consistency and expertise, experienced social workers conducted NAAB assessments, rather than newly qualified practitioners.

“So, they’re not going to take a newly qualified social worker to do age assessments. It’s going to be somebody with a lot of experience […] whether in child protection or working with unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. They’re not rookies at this.” (Local authority)

Home Office and local authority participants emphasised the importance of recognising and addressing distress to prevent traumatisation. Practical strategies included:

• coordination among assessors, social workers, and appropriate adults to manage signs of distress

• offering breaks, rephrasing or limiting questions, or shifting to less emotive topics

• suspending and rescheduling assessments if distress persisted, ideally with the same assessor

7.7 Differences between NAAB and non-NAAB age assessments

Participants noted that while the NAAB’s age assessment process followed a consistent framework, some differences existed compared to assessments conducted by local authorities.

7.7.1 More child-friendly

Some local authority participants noted that NAAB assessments were more child-friendly compared to other age assessment processes in local authorities, particularly due to the number of breaks offered, including time for prayer.

“Certainly, I think to be honest - it’s terrible to say - but I feel like the NAAB assessment was much more child-friendly because they had considered every angle, every potential problem, whereas I think when it’s the local authority social workers that are doing it, I just don’t think we had those processes really as tight as we wanted them to be before we had those examples from the NAAB.” (Local authority)

7.7.2 Longer turnaround time

Local authority participants noted that NAAB assessments could take longer, with young people sometimes waiting up to a month for a decision, which some participants felt was a long wait given the vulnerability of the young people involved.

7.7.3 More comprehensive reports

NAAB reports were typically quite lengthy, around 100 pages, compared to much shorter local authority reports. While local authorities generally viewed this as positive due to the robust and comprehensive information provided, it could slow down the review process and lead to delays.

7.7.4 Multiple opportunities for challenging process

NAAB assessments allowed young people more chances to challenge presented information.

7.7.5 Less flexibility with interpreters

Unlike local authorities, which may use telephone interpreters without issue, NAAB strongly preferred in-person interpreters.

7.7.6 Assessment locations

NAAB assessments were usually conducted in their offices, while some local authorities held assessments at the young person’s residence or a neutral setting, which may offer additional support.

7.7.7 Safeguarding responsibilities

NAAB social workers reported safeguarding concerns but did not hold statutory responsibility for the young person. Their role was to ensure well-being during the assessment and follow up on welfare afterward.

8. Reasons for not engaging with the NAAB

8.1 Key findings

1. Lack of information about the NAAB was a key reason for local authorities to not refer to the NAAB.

2. Other concerns included the capacity of the NAAB to take on cases, the precise nature of the NAAB’s role, and the type of cases that could be referred into the NAAB.

3. Some local authorities felt that they had sufficient expertise and knowledge within their own teams and therefore did not need to refer cases to the NAAB.

8.2 Local authority reasons

A key reason for not referring cases into the NAAB services was a lack of information about the NAAB itself. Local authorities primarily described uncertainty about the aims and objectives of the NAAB. They also expressed a lack of clarity regarding the service and whether it intended to onboard more local authorities over time.

Local authorities had concerns about whether the NAAB had the capacity to support all local authorities or only those with overstretched resources. Moreover, they were concerned about whether the NAAB would dispute certain cases or disagree with the case decisions of local authorities. This left local authorities unsure of the NAAB’s role and benefit to them. Additionally, some local authorities were unclear about whether the NAAB functioned as an independent organisation or as a framework that local authorities would adhere to.

“I suppose I’m confused as to what the NAAB is. Is the NAAB an organisation within itself or is the NAAB a framework that we all work to? What is that, do you know what I mean?” (Local authority)

Local authorities also expressed a lack of information about the referral service specifically. They reported that they were unaware of how to use it or its full range of services. A misconception arose from the belief that the referral service was reserved for complex or legally challengeable cases. This limited the scope of the service for local authorities who felt they did not have many complex cases.

Furthermore, some local authorities felt they already had sufficient expertise within their teams, which included staff who had extensive experience in age assessments and had developed a solid bank of knowledge. This internal expertise led them to believe that they did not need to refer cases to the NAAB, especially when they felt confident in making their own determinations.

9. Perceived outcomes of the NAAB

9.1 Key findings

1. Local authorities found the NAAB accessible and the referral process clear. Some local authorities expressed a desire to refer more cases to the NAAB to alleviate pressure on their own capacity to conduct age assessments.

2. NAAB age assessments were viewed as beneficial for safeguarding young people.

3. Some local authorities reported that NAAB age assessments took too long to complete, with some cases lasting several months from referral to the outcome meeting.

4. NAAB training and guidance reportedly enhanced local authorities’ ability to conduct high-quality age assessments. This included improving their child-centred approach, their understanding of case law, and their confidence in decision-making.

5. While participants saw the NAAB as having a positive impact on public spending, particularly by increasing the accuracy of assessments and reducing the number of adults accessing child services, the longer duration of NAAB assessments led to increased costs.

9.2 Access to the NAAB

Local authorities generally found the NAAB accessible, with clear referral pathways and eligibility criteria. Participants described NAAB staff as responsive and helpful, even when they were unsure about eligibility requirements.

“I just emailed […] with a case, and they immediately connected me with the right person. My only experience of referring in was very smooth, but I’m not entirely sure of the formal process or criteria.” (Local authority)

There was appetite among some local authorities for even greater access to the NAAB’s age assessment capacity. Local authorities wanted to be able to refer more cases into the NAAB so that the NAAB could conduct age assessments on their behalf. This was reported by local authorities who had worked with the NAAB and found them to be accessible but were keen for more support due to their own limited capacity. These participants explained that being able to refer even more cases to the NAAB would significantly help them to stay within capacity.

“I don’t think we can access it as often as we would like, and I can tell that just from the high number of people we have waiting for age assessments to be completed.” (Local authority)

9.3 Safeguarding asylum-seeking children

Some local authorities viewed NAAB assessments as beneficial for safeguarding young people, highlighting:

• the NAAB’s child-friendly approach, including breaks, accommodation of religious needs, and provision of food

• the NAAB’s comprehensive documentation of vulnerabilities and support measures

“The 2 assessments that were done by the [NAAB social] workers were very good, they were very child-centric. They were able to document in the assessment how they had taken account of the young person’s vulnerabilities, the support that they provided at the end of that decision. So, we were very impressed with the quality of that.” (Local authority)

9.4 Timeliness of assessments

Consistent with testimony in the baseline, local authorities reported that NAAB assessments often exceeded the expected 28-day turnaround time and could last up to several months. The prolonged process increased both the emotional strain on young people and the financial burden on local authorities, as funding was only provided for the first 28 days.

“One age assessment took [several] months; 2 months from the minded to meeting to the decision meeting. That’s not even the whole process…but I think 2 months from the minded to meeting to the decision meeting is not acceptable. We get funded for 28 days.” (Local authority)

Some participants suggested that the NAAB’s expected timeframe to complete an age assessment should be revised to reflect the thorough nature of NAAB assessments.

“In both cases, I think the workers were extremely thorough, so maybe the 28-day timescale is the thing that needs to be reviewed as opposed to complaining about how long it takes. Maybe it should take longer. Maybe it should be 2 months or something.” (Local authority)

9.5 Training and capacity building

Local authorities valued NAAB training and guidance, noting improvements in:

• their local authority’s ability to conduct in-house assessments, particularly in taking a child-centred approach as outlined in the training

• their local authority’s understanding of case law

• their local authority’s confidence in delivering child-friendly assessments

“I think it’s improved our standards when doing these assessments, and it’s improved our understanding of what we actually should be doing and how to progress an age assessment in a child-friendly way, a child-appropriate way I suppose. So, yes, it’s been positive I think on the social work team.” (Local authority)

9.6 Impact on public resources

Participants had mixed views on the NAAB’s financial impact. On one hand, participants perceived the NAAB as reducing costs by improving the accuracy of age assessments, which helped to ensure that services intended for children were not allocated to adults.

“From the public purse’s perspective, if we determine that a person who’s saying they’re 16 is 24, that means children’s services aren’t responsible […] so, that has a significant impact on children’s resources […] that’s one of the main impacts on the public purse. Adult services will be responsible for the person and not children’s services. It costs less to support an adult than it does a child.” (Local authority)

However, the extended duration of NAAB assessments introduced additional costs to local authorities, such as extended accommodation and staffing for an appropriate adult and assessment venues.

9.7 Partnership working

Local authorities generally reported positive experiences collaborating with the NAAB, praising regular communication and responsiveness.

However, capacity constraints on both sides sometimes led to communication breakdowns, resulting in inefficiencies. Both Home Office and local authority participants cited missed emails which led to:

• assessors attending cancelled appointments

• local authorities holding time for assessments that had been called off

“If something had to be cancelled Friday, [NAAB colleagues] weren’t picking up the email for us to say, ‘This isn’t going to go ahead.’ They were then turning up and actually it’s a waste of their resource, isn’t it?” (Local authority)

A particular concern was the lack of advance notice about assessment outcomes, limiting local authorities’ ability to prepare young people for the decision.

“We ended up only getting the assessment I think the day of, or the day before, the young person got the outcome […] I think maybe if I’d had a bit more, I would’ve been saying, ‘look, can you hold off giving them the outcome so we can read the assessment and do a bit of preparation with them as well for what the potential outcome might be?’” (Local authority)

One local authority described an instance where they were unaware of an outcome until a taxi arrived to transport a young person a significant distance away from the area. They felt that, had the NAAB informed them earlier, they could have raised concerns about the young person’s ability to navigate a new environment independently.

10. Considerations for future delivery

This section highlights key considerations for the ongoing delivery of the NAAB. These considerations draw on participant reflections and experiences to support a sustainable, comprehensive, and well-informed approach to the continued implementation of the NAAB.

10.1 Local authority engagement and buy-in

1. Enhance communication and outreach efforts by developing targeted materials that clearly explain the NAAB’s role, its objectives, and its benefits to local authorities. This could include webinars, briefing sessions, and case studies demonstrating positive experiences.

2. Address misconceptions that the NAAB is aligned with a Home Office enforcement agenda by emphasising its separation from enforcement functions, its expertise, and its focus on safeguarding.

3. Strengthen collaboration with SMPs and the COSLA to increase awareness and provide tailored engagement approaches for local authorities who may be hesitant to participate.

4. Increase engagement with voluntary sector organisations, such as charities and other bodies which advocate for the rights of asylum-seeking children and young people, to address concerns about NAAB’s perceived objectivity. This could include roundtable discussions to foster transparency and trust.

10.2 Referral and assessment process

1. Reduce delays by ensuring timely communication of assessment outcomes to local authorities, particularly when young people are at risk of moving between child and adult services.

2. Increase NAAB caseworker capacity to handle higher referral volumes as more local authorities onboard, ensuring that assessments remain timely and effective.

3. Simplify the referral process by revising guidance and clarifying eligibility criteria. Some local authorities were unsure when to refer cases, leading to inconsistent application of the service.

10.3 Financial and capacity challenges

1. Consider funding interpreters and appropriate adults for NAAB-referred cases to ease financial pressures on local authorities, particularly those with smaller budgets.

2. Introduce more flexible interpretation options, such as telephone interpreters, where in-person interpreters are difficult to source or financially unviable.

3. Improve efficiency in assessment logistics by reducing the administrative burden on local authorities to source interpreters. This would involve the NAAB taking a more active role in supporting local authorities to book interpreters (for example, providing them with pre-approved lists of interpreters), allowing local authorities to have more flexibility to invite phone interpreters, or providing them with pre-approved lists of interpreters.

10.4 Training

1. Increase training frequency so that local authorities can send new staff for NAAB training more than once per year. This would ensure that knowledge is continuously updated.

2. Offer more shadowing opportunities for NAAB social workers to observe NAAB assessments as part of their training. This would ensure that NAAB social workers gain practical experience beyond the classroom training.

10.5 Safeguarding and child-centred practices

1. Clarify safeguarding responsibilities between the NAAB and local authorities, particularly in cases where concerns arise mid-assessment.

2. Enhance and ensure the child-centred nature of assessments by holding assessments in familiar locations to reduce anxiety, incorporating rapport-building techniques throughout the process, using child-friendly language, and providing additional post-assessment support, regardless of the outcome.

10.6 Communication and partnership working

1. Establish regular check-ins between NAAB and local authorities to ensure smoother coordination and reduce misunderstandings in the referral process.

2. Provide earlier notifications of assessment outcomes to local authorities so they can plan next steps for young people who may need to transition between services.

3. Ensure that NAAB and local authority teams have a reliable communication protocol to prevent missed correspondence.

4. Standardise post-assessment communication so that local authorities receive clear, structured updates about the individual’s case, reducing the likelihood of last-minute disruptions.

Footnotes

1. The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 introduces several significant changes to the immigration and asylum system. The Act also includes provision concerning scientific methods in age assessments, allowing for regulations to be made which allow a negative credibility inference to be taken if someone refuses to consent to the used of specified scientific methods. These changes are part of a broader effort to reform the age assessment process and have been outlined in the Justification Decision (Scientific Age Imaging) Regulations 2024 and the Immigration (Age Assessments) Regulations 2024. For further details on NABA, see the current legislation for section 50 here and section 51 here. ↩

2. Judgment R (on the application of BF (Eritrea)) (Respondent) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) R (on the application of BF (Eritrea)) (Respondent) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) - UK Supreme Court. ↩

3. In the absence of statutory guidance on age assessments, the case of R (B) v Merton [2003] EWHC 1689 provides guidelines. The judge ruled that age assessments for unaccompanied minors without documentary evidence must be holistic, considering appearance, demeanour, background and credibility, rather than relying solely on appearance. Age assessments that follow these guidelines are referred to as Merton-compliant. ↩

4. External stakeholders included representatives of services supporting local authorities in the age assessment process, such as policy advisors, social workers from charities, and legal practitioners. ↩

5. The term ‘encounter’ is used in place of ‘participant’ as some participants took part in multiple interviews across the 2 stages, and a small number of encounters included more than one participant. ↩

6. Strategic Migration Partnerships (SMPs) are local government led partnerships funded by, but independent of, the Home Office, whose role is to coordinate and support delivery of national programmes in asylum and refugee schemes as well as agreed regional and devolved migration priorities. There are 12 SMP partnerships across England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Source: Strategic Migration Partnership ↩

7. The following book provides further information on the Framework approach: Richie, J., Lewis, J., McNaughton Nicholls, C. and Ormston., R. (2013) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Sage. ↩

8. The term ‘centre of excellence’ was present in internal Home Office documents and participants used this phrase when describing the NAAB’s aims and purpose. ↩

9. Participants noted that COSLA is between the Scottish and UK government, local authorities, National Transfer Scheme and NAAB which enabled them to identify at a national level which authorities in Scotland may need support from the NAAB. ↩

10. The New Plan for Immigration (Sovereign Borders) programme was a vehicle for implementing the Illegal Migration Act 2023 and Nationality and Borders Act 2022 measures, but the programme is no longer active. Home Office main estimates memorandum 2024 to 2025 (accessible) - GOV.UK ↩

11. All names used in this case study and the following case studies are fictional. They have been changed to protect the anonymity of individuals involved in the study. ↩

12. Section 50 confers a power on designated officials of the Home Office (in the form of the National Age Assessment Board – NAAB) to conduct full age assessments on age-disputed persons upon referral from a local authority in England, Wales and Scotland or a Health and Social Care Trust in Northern Ireland. Assessing age (accessible) - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) ↩

13. Section 51 confers a power on designated officials of the Home Office (in the form of the NAAB) to conduct full age assessments on age-disputed persons for immigration purposes only in certain circumstances. Assessing age (accessible) - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) ↩

14. Reference to ‘child-friendly’ practices are from participant views and findings from the interviews. ↩