What is known about group-based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in the UK? - A scoping review protocol

Abstract

A series of governmental and non-governmental reports have been commissioned to examine group-based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA) in the UK. These reports have primarily focused on specific geographical areas, such as Rotherham, Telford, and Oxford. One national audit, published by Louise Casey in 2025, suggests that group-based CSEA remains an ongoing issue, but significant knowledge gaps persist, particularly regarding perpetrator characteristics and the evolution of grooming techniques in an increasingly digital world.

This scoping review aims to investigate group-based CSEA in the UK from a multidisciplinary perspective, focusing on peer-reviewed articles from academic journals. The objectives are to explore the national prevalence of group-based CSEA, characteristics of perpetrators and survivors, connections and affiliations between perpetrators and state institutions, and grooming tactics. Scoping reviews are a valuable method for addressing broad, exploratory questions and synthesizing knowledge by systematically mapping and analysing data. A team-based approach will be used for data extraction, with findings recorded in standardized data extraction tables. The results of this scoping review are intended to inform practice and policymaking across a wide range of disciplines and professions that engage with children and young people affected by group-based CSEA.

Keywords: child sexual exploitation and abuse (CSEA); child sexual exploitation (CSE); group-based; networked; grooming

Authors

Dr Rowena Slope and Clare Perry

Dr Rowena Slope Faculty of Health, Environment and Medical Sciences, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, UK; bFaculty of Health, Environment and Medical Sciences, Bournemouth. rslope@bournemouth.ac.uk

Orchid ID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0539-1368

Dr Rowena Slope is a Senior Lecturer in Nursing (Adult) at Bournemouth University and was previously a Senior Lecturer at the University of Bedfordshire. She has a doctorate in handover communication from the University of Southampton which explored handover communication between pre-hospital and hospital receiving teams. The doctorate found that paramedics encountered difficulties transitioning between different emergency healthcare settings in the military and the NHS. Dr Rowena Slope completed her nurse training at the University of Southampton and once qualified worked as an Emergency Nurse. She has held various clinical roles specialising in medical and nursing assessment, and pre-hospital care. In the academic environment she has taught nursing curriculum on pre-registration and post-registration programmes, and undertaken programme leadership roles on masters and apprenticeship courses. She has published articles, chapters, and books on a range of nursing issues including handover communication, management of pressure injuries, and medical sociology. She is currently editing a book on delegation in healthcare which will be published in 2026 by Taylor and Francis.

Claire Parry Faculty of Health, Environment and Medical Sciences, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, UK

Orchid ID - 0009-0007-4910-3659

Claire Parry is an Academic Lecturer in Children and Young People’s Nursing at Bournemouth University. She trained in paediatric nursing at the University of Surrey and has subsequently held a range of clinical posts at Band 5, 6 and 7 across Surrey, Dorset, and Wiltshire. Her professional expertise centres on the care of children with complex health needs and in children’s palliative care. Prior to taking up her academic role, Claire was a senior nurse at a children’s hospice where she provided respite, palliative and end-of-life care to children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. She continues to maintain her clinical practice across local children’s services, ensuring her role in education remains aligned with contemporary practice.

Within her academic role, Claire contributes to both pre-registration and post-registration nursing programmes. She is Unit Leader for the BSc and MSc Improving Safety and Quality of Care modules, where her teaching focuses on risk management, patient safety, and quality improvement in healthcare. Her research interests align with her clinical expertise in children’s palliative and complex care, and she is actively preparing to undertake doctoral studies (PhD) to further advance scholarship in these fields.

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare

Introduction

It is evident from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA, 2022) and the national audit conducted by Casey (2025) that group-based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA) continues to cause considerable harm to children, families, and communities in the UK but there are significant gaps in knowledge and understanding of this type of abuse. This scoping review protocol outlines how the authors intend to describe what is known about group-based CSEA in the UK by consulting peer-reviewed research from different disciplines including literature from nursing, sociology, criminology, social work, policing, law, and psychology.

Scoping reviews are an appropriate methodological approach for searching the literature and synthesizing evidence, especially when addressing broader, descriptive questions. Developing and publishing a scoping review protocol before commencing the review is good practice, as it provides a ‘recipe’ for identifying evidence and encourages feedback from the research community (Peters et al., 2022).

Background and rationale

Public concern about group-based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA) carried out by predominantly Pakistani-heritage men came to national attention in the UK following a 2011 article in The Times by Andrew Norfolk. Multiple reports and inquiries have since highlighted commonalities in offending patterns, public sector failures, and poor data collection.

The first significant report, commissioned by the Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council and published in 2014, was chaired by Alexis Jay. This independent report outlined how social workers, police officers, and council workers were aware of the issue but consistently failed to address group-based CSEA in the borough. It estimated that approximately 1,400 children and young people, primarily from the White British community, had been sexually exploited by groups of predominantly Pakistani-heritage men between 1997 and 2013. The report found that victims were trafficked and sold for sex across northern towns and cities (Jay, 2014, p.35).

A joint investigation into CSEA in Oxford, conducted by Thames Valley Police and Oxfordshire County Council Social Services, known as Operation Bullfinch, led to convictions for a range of serious sexual offences against children and a case review by the Oxford Safeguarding Children Board in 2013. The report, A Serious Case Review into Child Sexual Exploitation in Oxfordshire: From the Experiences of Children A, B, C, D, E, and F (2015), found that a lack of professional curiosity and understanding of CSEA contributed to failures in identifying and disrupting criminal networks. Although focused on individual cases, the authors estimated that 373 children had been victims of this type of crime in the local area, comprising 330 girls and 43 boys (Oxford Safeguarding Children Board, 2015, p.10). The review noted that victims were trafficked across the country to cities including London, Slough, Manchester, Coventry, Torbay, High Wycombe, Leeds, and Bradford, highlighting the issue as one of national concern (Oxford Safeguarding Children Board, 2015, p.10). A Home Affairs Select Committee report, Child Sexual Exploitation and the Response to Localised Grooming (2013), which examined group-based CSEA in Rotherham and Rochdale, identified multiple victims and perpetrators and criticized systemic institutional failures, particularly in children’s services, policing, and taxi licensing.

An independent inquiry into group-based CSEA in Telford, was commissioned by Telford and Wrekin Council in 2018, and conducted by Tom Crowther KC. This followed the conviction of seven Pakistani-heritage men for sexual offences against children in the area and the publication of a newspaper article that claimed there were over 1,000 victims. The report, published in 2022, stated that CSEA carried out by predominantly Pakistani-heritage men had occurred in Telford since the 1970s and described the estimate of 1,000 victims as "conservative." It documented how children and young people had been trafficked between major conurbations, including Telford, Wolverhampton, and Birmingham (Crowther, 2022, p.66). The review provided insights into group-based CSEA consistent with reports concerning abuse in Rotherham, Oxford, Rochdale, and other towns and cities across England.

Since the publication of the Jay (2014) report and others, concerns about group-based CSEA, often referred to as ‘grooming gangs’ in public and media discourses, have prompted calls for a national inquiry. In response, the UK government established the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, chaired by Alexis Jay, which published the Child Sexual Exploitation by Organised Networks Investigation Report (2022). This report found that family members committed the most sexual offences against children and young people, with online abuse emerging as a significant challenge for law enforcement and communities. However, it could not provide an accurate picture of the prevalence of group-based CSEA due to inadequate data collection by the criminal justice system and children’s social care (IICSA, 2022).

A national audit conducted by Baroness Louise Casey, published in 2025, revealed that group-based CSEA persists due to public sector failures, particularly in relation to children in care, failure to recognize risk and harm, inadequate prosecution of offenders, poor record-keeping of offender and victim ethnicity, and underuse of disruption techniques, such as those contained in the Home Office Child Sexual Exploitation Disruption Toolkit. The audit found that perpetrators continued to target highly vulnerable children, including those in care and those with disabilities. It noted gaps in police data and could not definitively confirm whether Pakistani-heritage men, or any other ethnic group, were overrepresented in group-based CSEA (Casey, 2025).

The College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council established the Vulnerability Knowledge and Practice Programme (VKPP), which includes workstreams connecting various projects. The VKPP produced the National Analysis of Police-Recorded Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse Crimes Report 2023, based on datasets from 43 police forces across England and Wales and the British Transport Police. A total of 115,489 CSEA offences were recorded in 2023, but this is believed to represent approximately one-fifth of actual offences, with most going unreported (VKPP, 2023, p.8).

According to the VKPP (2023), only 4.6% of CSEA offences recorded in 2023 were group-based (n = 5,348), consistent with the previous year, of which 3.7% were group-based contact offences (n = 4,228). These offences ranged from unorganized peer group sharing of sexual imagery to organized, harmful contact offences involving trafficking and sexual exploitation of children and young people (VKPP, 2023, p.8). The VKPP reported that 88% of CSEA offenders across England and Wales were White British, broadly aligning with population demographics. However, ethnicity was recorded in 31% of cases, meaning that for 69% of cases, the offender’s ethnicity was unrecorded (VKPP, 2023, p.30). This aligns with findings from IICSA (2022) and Casey (2025) regarding the lack of reliable data on offender characteristics.

Definitions

The terminology used to define sexual offences has evolved due to legislative changes and a more nuanced understanding of perpetrator strategies, victim experiences, and community impacts, aiming to shift blame from victims to perpetrators. For example, "revenge porn" has been renamed Non-Consensual Intimate Image (NCII) abuse, and "child porn" has been renamed Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM).

Key terms are defined according to their latest accepted definitions. The term Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA) refers to sexual abuse of children as defined by the Home Office Offences Codes, encompassing contact offences and non-contact offences, such as taking indecent images and sexual grooming. Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) is defined as:

Child sexual exploitation is a form of child sexual abuse. It occurs where an individual or group takes advantage of an imbalance of power to coerce, manipulate, or deceive a child or young person under the age of 18 into sexual activity (a) in exchange for something the victim needs or wants, and/or (b) for the financial advantage or increased status of the perpetrator or facilitator. The victim may have been sexually exploited even if the sexual activity appears consensual. Child sexual exploitation does not always involve physical contact; it can also occur through the use of technology. (Department for Education, 2017)

This definition acknowledges the power differential, the transactional nature (not dependent on an actual transaction), the illusion of consent, and includes both contact and non-contact offences, as well as individual or group perpetrators.

Group-based or networked CSEA is defined as involving two or more individuals who are:

• Known to or associated with one another;

• Involved in or facilitating the sexual abuse and exploitation of children and young people, including:

• Introducing children to others for exploitation;

• Trafficking a child for sexual exploitation;

• Taking payment for sexual activities with a child or young person;

• Allowing their property to be used for sexual activities with a child or young person (VKPP, 2023, p.10).

These definitions (CSEA, CSE, group-based CSEA) will be used throughout this scoping review protocol, but earlier definitions will be accommodated in search terms and inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Methods

Scoping reviews synthesize knowledge by systematically mapping, identifying, collecting, and analyzing data (Tricco et al., 2018). This approach is transparent and reproducible, aiming to identify gaps in the literature. Scoping reviews resemble systematic reviews in their rigorous steps but can address broader, exploratory questions (Pollock et al., 2023). This scoping review has been registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF) to encourage assessment and feedback from the research community (Peters et al., 2022). Ethical approval has been granted by Bournemouth University (Reference: 66464), as required by the Research Ethics Code of Practice (2025). Feedback is being sought from ‘knowledge users,’ defined as stakeholders with a vested interest in the research outcomes, throughout the project timeline (Pollock et al., 2023). An anonymised knowledge user has been consulted already on the scoping review protocol and the feedback led to the expansion of the research questions.

Review objectives and questions

This scoping review aims to investigate group-based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA) in the UK from a multidisciplinary perspective. It will describe what is known about group-based CSEA by extracting, charting, collating, and summarizing primary sources of evidence. The specific review questions are:

1. What is known about the prevalence of group-based CSEA in the UK and to what extent is it nationally organized?

2. What are the characteristics of perpetrators, including physical characteristics (age, sex, ethnicity), social status (employment, family, class, immigration status), and identity (religion, class, caste, clan), and to what extent are these shared across groups?

3. What are the characteristics of victims, including physical characteristics (age, sex, ethnicity), disabilities, social status (employment, family, class, immigration status), and identity (religion, class, caste, clan)?

4. What is the relationship between perpetrators and victims?

5. What connections do individual perpetrators have to the state or institutions associated with and/or providing state services (policing, judiciary, prisons, social services, education, health, politics, and care services) and how might they have leveraged this to exploit children and young people?

6. What are the grooming tactics (e.g., alcohol, drugs, online, street-based) used in group-based CSEA?

Inclusion/Exclusion criteria

Data extraction will align with the PCC Framework (Population, Concept, Context) for clarity and eligibility (Pollock et al., 2023), as follows:

• Population: Perpetrators, offenders, and victims.

• Concept: Mapping evidence.

• Context: Group-based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse.

This scoping review will focus on children and young people up to the age of 18 and exclude those above this age. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 stipulates that the age of consent for sexual activity is 16 in England and Wales, with equivalent legislation in Scotland and Northern Ireland. However, trafficking a person under 18 for sexual purposes, including causing, inciting, or controlling prostitution or sexual exploitation, is an offence. Thus, this scoping review will include children and young people 17 years old and younger.

The review will focus on offenders who have been arrested or convicted of sexual offences listed in the Home Office Offences Codes related to CSEA, or suspected of such offences, as part of a group, to explore this type of offending from a multidisciplinary perspective. It will also include perpetrators who may have caused harm but may not have had contact with the criminal justice system. The scoping review will exclude papers from outside of the UK and papers focused on international trafficking by groups and individuals.

Search strategy

This scoping review will prioritize peer-reviewed primary sources and grey literature, defined as literature not formally published or peer-reviewed (UNISA, 2025). Experts in the field will be consulted to identify additional literature. Hand searches of reference lists and broader internet searches using meta-search engines, such as Google Scholar, will be conducted. A librarian has been consulted to advise on search terms, including spellings, truncation, database searching, and advanced Google Scholar techniques. The following databases will be searched:

• Academic Search Ultimate

• CINAHL Ultimate

• EBSCOhost Databases

• JSTOR

• Lexis+

• MEDLINE Complete

• PILOTS

• PsycINFO

• PubMed

• ScienceDirect

• Scopus

• Social Care Online

• Social Theory

• SocINDEX

• Web of Science

• Westlaw UK

Data extraction

A team approach will be used for data extraction, with regular meetings involving two scoping review authors to ensure accuracy and completeness (Pollock et al., 2023). The authors will assess sources for screening, eligibility, and inclusion (Peters et al., 2022). Feedback will be sought from knowledge users, as stated earlier, throughout the project timeline (Pollock et al., 2023). Data will be extracted and recorded on standardized data extraction tables, agreed upon and pilot-tested by the two authors and at least one knowledge user. As scoping reviews are iterative, this protocol may be refined later (UNISA, 2025).

Data analysis and presentation

The reference management software EndNote will be used to collate references, and Rayyan will streamline the review process (Mak & Thomas, 2022). The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists will aid critical analysis of papers. This scoping review aims to describe an existing phenomenon where information is limited (Casey, 2025; IICSA, 2022). An inductive approach will be used, coding items to build categories and themes. Data will be presented using the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews), which includes 20 essential and two optional reporting items (PRISMA, 2020).

Reporting of results

The results of this scoping review are intended to inform practice and policy making across a wide range of disciplines and professions who encounter children and young people who have been impacted by group-based CSEA or at risk of it. The results will be disseminated through peer reviewed journals and conferences, and will inform future research.

References

Bournemouth University. (2025). Research ethics code of practice. Bournemouth University. https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/research-environment/research-governance-research-ethics-integrity

Phillips, N. (2013, June 27). Bullfinch child sex exploitation gang get 95-year sentences. Bucks Free Press. https://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/10513676.bullfinch-child-sex-exploitation-gang-get-95-year-sentences/

Casey, L. (2025). National audit on group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse. UK Government. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-audit-on-group-based-child-sexual-exploitation-and-abuse

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). (2025). CASP checklists. https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/

Department for Education. (2017). Child sexual exploitation: Definition and guide for practitioners. UK Government. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7f8e3640f0b62305b87dbc/CSE_Guidance_Core_Document_13.02.2017.pdf

Home Affairs Committee. (2013). Child sexual exploitation and the response to localised grooming (Second report of session 2013–14, HC 68-I). UK Parliament. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmhaff/68/68.pdf

Home Office. (2022). Child exploitation disruption toolkit. UK Government. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/63106669e90e076ebfb7f419/Child_Exploitation_Disruption_Toolkit_082022.pdf

Home Office. (2025). Home Office offence codes in scope of analysis of police-recorded child sexual abuse and exploitation crimes, 2023. Vulnerability Knowledge and Practice Programme. https://www.vkpp.org.uk/assets/Files/Publications/Home-Office-offences-codes-in-scope-of-analysis-of-police-recorded-CSAE-crimes-2023.pdf

Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. (2022). Child sexual exploitation by organised networks: Investigation report. https://www.iicsa.org.uk/reports-recommendations/publications/investigation/cs-organised-networks

Independent Inquiry into Telford Child Sexual Exploitation (IITCSE). (2022). Report of the Independent Inquiry into Telford Child Sexual Exploitation. https://www.telford.gov.uk/children-and-young-people/safeguarding-children/child-sexual-exploitation-cse/independent-inquiry-into-telford-child-sexual-exploitation-iitcse/

Jay, A. (2014). Independent inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham (1997–2013). Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council. https://www.rotherham.gov.uk/downloads/file/279/independent-inquiry-cse-in-rotherham

Mak, S., & Thomas, A. (2022). Steps for conducting a scoping review. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 14(5), 565–567. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-22-00621.1

Open Science Framework. (2025). What is known about group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse (CSEA) [Pre-registration]. https://osf.io/8nqzd/

Oxfordshire Safeguarding Children’s Board (OSCB). (2015). A Serious Case Review into Child Sexual Exploitation in Oxfordshire: from the experiences of Children A, B, C, D, E and F. https://www.oscb.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Serious-Case-Review-into-Child-Sexual-Exploitation-in-Oxfordshire-FINAL-Updated-14.3.15.pdf

Peters, M. D. J., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Khalil, H., Larsen, P., Marnie, C., Pollock, D., Tricco, A. C., & Munn, Z. (2022). Best practice guidance and reporting items for the development of scoping review protocols. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 20(4), 953–968. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-21-00242

Pollock, D., Peters, M. D. J., Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Alexander, L., Tricco, A. C., Evans, C., de Moraes, É. B., Godfrey, C. M., Pieper, D., Saran, A., Stern, C., & Munn, Z. (2023). Recommendations for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results in scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 21(3), 520–532. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-22-00123

PRISMA. (2025). PRISMA for scoping reviews. http://www.prisma-statement.org/scoping

Sommerlad, N., & McKelvie, G. (2018, March 10). Britain’s ‘worst ever’ grooming gang exposed: Hundreds of young girls raped, beaten, sold for sex and some even killed. Sunday Mirror. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/britains-worst-ever-child-grooming-12165527

Norfolk, A. (2011, January 5). Revealed: Conspiracy of silence on UK sex gangs. The Times. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/revealed-conspiracy-of-silence-on-uk-sex-gangs-gs9s3jv2v7f

University of South Australia. (2025). Grey literature and other sources. https://guides.library.unisa.edu.au/GreyLiterature/Overview

University of South Australia. (2025). Scoping Reviews Protocol. https://guides.library.unisa.edu.au/ScopingReviews/Protocol

Vulnerability Knowledge and Practice Programme. (2025). National analysis of police-recorded child sexual abuse and exploitation crimes: Report 2023. https://www.vkpp.org.uk/vkpp-work/analytical-capability/national-analysis-of-police-recorded-child-sexual-abuse-and-exploitation-crimes-report-2023/

Vulnerability Knowledge and Practice Programme (VKPP). (2025). National Vulnerability and Public Protection Strategy. https://www.vkpp.org.uk