Royal Assent has now been granted to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, bringing an end to parliamentary debate and confirming a significant shift in the legal framework governing children’s services and education oversight.
Royal Assent may sound like a turning point, but for most local authorities this is not the moment for alarm and reactive response. While the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act brings important changes, much of what it contains builds on existing practice rather than replacing it entirely. The real task now is understanding what genuinely needs attention and what can be addressed pragmatically over time.
It is important to note that whilst some provisions come into force on Royal Assent (now) these are largely legal necessities (such as commencement) and the actual substantive clause will come into force on dates appointed by the Secretary of State by commencement regulations.
Much of what is in the Act will feel familiar in policy terms, but the difference now is that many expectations which previously sat in simply “guidance” or best practice are firmly embedded in statute. The focus has moved decisively from “what could change” to how to deliver on the requirements within the timescales.
A central theme of the Act is the move away from discretionary approaches and regional differentials towards clearer, nationally uniform, statutory duties. Safeguarding and early intervention are no longer framed simply as matters of good practice. Instead, the Act tightens expectations relating to, amongst other matters, decision making, family involvement and multi agency working.
For children’s services teams, this is likely to mean increased scrutiny of casework, records and thresholds for intervention. Family group decision making does feature more prominently, reflecting a continued policy emphasis on involving families earlier and more consistently. While many councils already use these approaches, the Act raises expectations around consistency and accountability right across the board.
One of the most operationally significant reforms which will impact on local authorities is the introduction of a mandatory register of children not in school. Once commenced, this will place new responsibilities on local authorities to identify, monitor and follow up where education arrangements could give rise to concern.
For councils, this brings with it questions about data, information sharing, engagement with families and decision making where parents are resistant to oversight. Getting systems and governance right early will be critical to managing both safeguarding outcomes and legal risk.
The Act also strengthens the regulatory framework surrounding schools and education providers, including independent settings. While local authorities will not always be the primary regulator, they will often be at the centre of attendance, safeguarding and multi agency concerns.
Late stage provisions link children’s wellbeing more explicitly with online safety and digital risk. The challenge here is less about recognising digital risk and more about coordination in practice: ensuring that concerns are identified early, shared lawfully and acted on consistently across agencies.
Here are some likely common concerns for Councils:
Capacity and resourcing
For many councils, the first pressure point will be simple capacity. New duties – particularly around children not in school – will take time, people and properly joined up systems. Where teams are already stretched, there is a real risk that compliance becomes patchy unless resource needs are identified and addressed early.
Data quality and governance
Much of the new framework relies on accurate, well governed information. Registers, monitoring and follow up all depend on data being reliable, up to date and clearly owned. Weaknesses in data quality or unclear information sharing arrangements are likely to surface quickly once duties are live.
Role clarity and partnership working
The Act raises expectations across the system, not just for councils. Where responsibilities between local authorities, schools, academy trusts and regulators are unclear or undocumented, the risk of delay, duplication or missed intervention increases. Clear lines of accountability will be essential.
Legal challenge and scrutiny
As duties become more clearly defined in statute, decisions are more exposed to challenge. This places a premium on good record keeping, clear reasoning and demonstrably defensible decision making, particularly in sensitive or contested cases.
Pace of implementation
Although not every provision will apply straight away, early scrutiny should be assumed. Authorities that wait for formal commencement dates before preparing may find themselves under pressure once expectations begin to crystallise.
While the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act introduces a number of new duties, it is not a wholesale reset of how local authorities operate. Much of what the Act requires builds on existing practice, and for many councils the challenge will be about refinement rather than reinvention.
Weightmans works alongside local authorities to help make sense of what the Act really means in practice, prioritise what needs attention now and identify what can sensibly be phased. Our children’s services, education and public law teams can support with impact assessments, governance and decision making, policies and partnership arrangements, helping councils take a measured and proportionate approach as the new framework beds in. The aim is practical support, clear advice and reassurance as the changes take effect.
As Marion Robinson, Partner at Weightmans, illustratively notes:
“While much of the Act builds on existing practice, the key change for local authorities is that expectation is now underpinned by statute. Councils that take a strategic approach to readiness – particularly around data, governance and partnership working – will be far better placed to manage risk as the new duties take effect.”
(Illustrative commentary only – not a verified direct quote.)
