Children’s services are there to protect and care for vulnerable children in our communities. Profit-making companies shouldn't be involved.

In October 2026 we published new polling on the public’s views about profiteering in children’s social care.

Our polling, commissioned from Survation, was conducted at the end of September among 1,066 people in Great Britain. It shows that:

• Nearly 80% of those with a view say government should cap or end profits in children’s social care

• Of those who expressed a view, 50% supported the statement that “England should go further and work towards ending profit-making provision in children's social care altogether”.

Key facts

• The latest Ofsted figures show that 85% (4,090) of children’s homes in England are privately owned. By comparison, in France just 5 per cent of the market is run for profit.
• The average charge to the state by a private provider for a child in “care” is now £404,000 a year. That’s six times the annual fee to attend Eton.
• Actual spend on independent providers of children’s residential care increased by more than 10% in real terms in every year from 2019/20 to 2024/5.
• 11 of the 20 largest providers of children’s social care are owned or backed by private equity funds.
• Profits among the top 20 providers of care home and fostering places amount to 20% of their income. The largest providers have average profit margins of 17%.
• Local authorities in England have reported that spending on residential care and fostering with the independent sector has grown to £3,826 million in 2024/25 - an increase of 153% since 2015/16.
• More children are being placed further from their communities. 17,000 out-of-area placements from 2011-2022 in England are attributed to outsourcing care to for-profit providers.

The history

There are just over 100,000 looked-after children in England, Scotland and Wales. Most are in foster care, with a smaller proportion in residential care settings including children’s homes, secure children’s homes, independent or semi-independent living facilities and residential schools.

Historically, children’s social care was largely provided either directly by local authorities using their own in-house provision, or by third-sector organisations working in partnership with the local authority. Over the past few decades, many local authorities and charities have reduced or ended provision of their own children’s homes; today, at least one in three fostering agency placements and one in five children’s homes placements are run by firms backed by institutional finance — private equity, hedge funds, venture capital and sovereign wealth funds.

"Both Conservative and Labour governments have encouraged councils to outsource services, and the care of vulnerable children has been treated in much the same way as road maintenance and waste disposal, ostensibly cheaper and more efficient in private hands...In my opinion, local authorities should never have been allowed to abrogate their responsibility to the children and young people in their care by passing them on to private companies." Martin Barrow, journalist and local authority foster carer

Who owns children's services?

85% of children’s homes are privately-owned and mostly run for profit. 11 of the 20 largest providers of children’s social care, which includes fostering, children’s homes and other services such as residential school places, now have some kind of private equity involvement.

“I see what is happening to children like me now and it’s not good, it’s not necessary, and it shouldn’t be happening – that’s what really fires me up still.” Ray Jones, Professor of Social Work at Kingston University

Why children's services must be run for people not profit

The Competition and Markets Authority says the market in children's social care is not working, and that the "UK has 'sleepwalked' into a system in which children are failing to get suitable placements in foster care and children’s homes". They highlight three issues in particular - high profits, high levels of debt and the risk of companies collapsing.

But private sector provision of children's social care is not only bad value for money. It also delivers a worse service for the most vulnerable kids in society. This affects their futures. Private companies - often private equity - are incentivised to cut corners rather than provide the care these children need.

Research by Oxford University published in the Lancet found that “All for-profit homes [are] disproportionately located in areas of low need and investment-owned homes located more in areas with low house prices". It concluded that "The commercialisation of children's social care provision has corresponded with less accessible services, contributing to sufficiency issues.”

A recent article in the Financial Times made clear the stark consequence of this strategy: "Half of children are now sent to institutions more than 200 miles away from their families, according to government data. One in seven move home three times a year or more."

"Gaps in provision mean children are placed in homes far away from their families. They lose touch with their friends and might have to change schools. It might be harder for their social worker to stay in touch or for their family to visit. On average, this is a bad thing for a child…The profit motive – which we think is strongest in the investment-owned children's homes – has a role in creating a market which doesn't respond to the needs of children."
Dr Benjamin Goodair, British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion (CASE)

Wales is phasing out profits in children’s social care, while Scotland is capping profits on homes and removing profits from foster care. We Own It is calling for the Children's Minister, Josh McCallister, to copy these examples and ban profit from the sector in England. We also encourage the government to set up a publicly owned provider in the sector as a backstop and to increase resilience.

Sign our Children's Care petition