Policy and practice with LGBTQ+ care-experienced young people

Key messages

• most local authorities do not have specific policies or centralised systems for recording sexual orientation and gender identity data
• information on sexual orientation and gender identity is often held only within individual case records
• gaps remain in staff knowledge and confidence when supporting LGBTQ+ care-experienced young people
• training on LGBTQ+ issues is more common for social workers than for foster carers or residential staff.

Policy implications

• local authorities may need clearer policies and consistent systems for recording sexual orientation and gender identity data
• workforce development strategies should extend beyond social workers to include foster carers and residential staff
• training should focus on building confidence as well as awareness to support inclusive and affirming care practice.

Gaps

• limited evidence on the experiences of LGBTQ+ care-experienced young people themselves
• lack of evaluation of how different recording practices affect care planning and outcomes
• minimal evidence on effective training models for non-social work roles.

Commentary

This study highlights how limitations in policy and data infrastructure can contribute to inequities in care for LGBTQ+ care-experienced young people. Without consistent approaches to recording sexual orientation and gender identity, local authorities lack a system-level understanding of need, making it harder to identify disparities or plan targeted support.

The findings also point to inequities in care experience linked to workforce capacity. Variations in staff knowledge and confidence increase the risk that LGBTQ+ young people receive inconsistent or inappropriate responses depending on who supports them and in which setting. This raises concerns about fairness and reliability across the care system.

Unequal access to training further compounds these issues. When foster carers and residential staff are less likely to receive LGBTQ+-specific training, young people in these settings may face greater risks of misunderstanding, exclusion or harm, compared with those supported by trained social workers.

Taken together, the evidence suggests that equity in care for LGBTQ+ young people depends not only on individual practice, but on system-wide policy, data and workforce approaches. Addressing these structural gaps is likely to be necessary to improve access to inclusive support and reduce inequities in care experiences and outcomes.