Part 6 — Using the Restitute Model Toolkit

How the published Toolkit components hold and protect the model, with notes, quotation sources and bibliography.

Part 6July 2026

How the rest of the toolkit holds the model

The Restitute Model introduces the approach: the gap it addresses, the people it supports, how support works and the evidence behind it. It provides the foundation for the rest of the Toolkit by setting out the model’s purpose, principles and intended impact for families and loved ones.

Appendix A — Evidence Base, Outcomes and Detailed Findings holds the detailed service evidence, outcome findings, methodology and limitations that underpin the model.

Appendix B — Policy, Commissioning and Wider-System Alignment holds the system-change and commissioning case and shows how the model relates to wider policy, commissioning and multi-agency arrangements.

The Core Standards set the boundaries. They name the things that have to stay in place wherever the model is delivered. They stop the model becoming dependent on memory, personality or informal understanding, and they make clear what cannot be removed without changing the work.

Delivery Readiness and Assurance sets out the conditions for safe delivery. It deals with site readiness, governance, workforce, safeguarding, supervision, recording, practical support routes, therapeutic referral routes, quality, research and client-contribution arrangements. A service cannot safely deliver the Restitute Model just by liking the idea of it. The right conditions have to be in place.

The readiness checklists in 2A–2G turn those requirements into practical confirmations and evidence checks.

Client Pathway Standards and Practice sets out the client pathway. It explains how people enter support, move from the waiting list into active work, receive the Six-Week Foundation Pathway, move into ongoing structured support, end support, return if needed and take part in long-term follow-up where they choose to. It protects the model from becoming vague, reactive or dependent on whatever one worker happens to do.

The Client Pathway Audit and Spot-Check Pack provides the tools used to test pathway fidelity, recording and safe practice.

Appendix C — Communication Templates provides controlled templates and example wording for consistent communication.

Appendix D — Functional Roles and Safe Function Combinations defines the functions the model requires, provides full role profiles and explains the few safeguards needed when functions are combined.

Client Rights and Service Standards sets out what clients should be able to expect from Restitute support, wherever the model is delivered.

Feedback, corrections and controlled updates

Toolkit users are encouraged to report errors, unclear wording, broken links and suggested improvements through the Restitute Core Team contact route specified in the delivery agreement or implementation arrangements. Feedback is welcomed throughout the pilot and will inform evaluation and future editions.

Do not wait for this process where a matter is serious. A safety, safeguarding, serious-incident or significant delivery concern must be reported promptly through the routes in 2E and the Delivery Site’s formal duties.
The Restitute Core Team will record and triage feedback as an error, clarification, evidence update, policy or guidance update, or proposed change affecting the model.
The Restitute CEO approves changes to controlled Toolkit content. Relevant practice, safeguarding, information-governance, research or evaluation expertise will be involved where needed.
Feedback will be considered throughout the pilot. The controlled Toolkit will be reviewed before the October 2026 interim evaluation review and annually thereafter, with earlier updates where safety, accuracy or model integrity requires them.
Where a controlled change alters a requirement, form or expected evidence, affected Delivery Sites will be told what has changed and whether action is required. The publication register will be updated and the superseded version retained in the restricted archive.
Permitted local flexibility should be described through monitoring and evaluation; it is not a variation request. Feedback does not authorise local changes to the model’s defining features or mandatory Delivery Site requirements.

Bibliography

Allnock, D., Miller, P. and Baker, H. (2019), Key messages from research on identifying and responding to disclosures of child sexual abuse. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source.
Dalgarno, E., Bramwell, D., Verma, A. and Ayeb-Karlsson, S. (2024), “Let’s excuse abusive men from abusing and enable sexual abuse”: Child sexual abuse investigations in England’s private family courts, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 46(3), pp. 345–365. View source.
Family Justice Council (2024), Guidance on responding to a child’s unexplained reluctance, resistance or refusal to spend time with a parent and allegations of alienating behaviour. View source (Accessed: 19 July 2026).
Finch, J. and McCulloch, K. (2025), An evaluation of the services offered by Restitute: well-being, confident parenting & caring and physical health. Project report. Restitute. View source (Accessed: 1 July 2026).
Glinski, A. and Sabin, N. (2025), Developing your strategic response to child sexual abuse: A guide for safeguarding children partnerships. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source.
Home Office (2021), Child House: Local Partnerships Guidance. View source.
Radakin, F., Scholes, A., Soloman, K., Thomas-Lacroix, C. and Davies, A. (2021), The economic and social cost of contact child sexual abuse. Home Office. View source.
Howells, A. (2026), “The messy stories are the real ones”: Exploring narratives of mothers whose children are impacted by child sexual abuse and social workers’ perspectives. Doctoral thesis. University of Essex. View source (Accessed: 1 May 2026).
Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (2021a), Child House in a Box Toolkit. View source.
Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (2021b), The Lighthouse: London’s Child House — Final Evaluation Report. View source.
McNeish, D., Kelly, L. and Scott, S. (2019), Effectiveness of services for sexually abused children and young people, Report 1: A knowledge review. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source.
Ministry of Justice (2020), Assessing risk of harm to children and parents in private law children cases. Final report of the Expert Panel. View source (Accessed: 19 July 2026).
Home Office (2025), Crime outcomes in England and Wales 2024 to 2025. View source.
Karsna, K. and Kelly, L. (2021), The scale and nature of child sexual abuse: Review of evidence. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source.
Parkinson, D. (2022), Supporting parents and carers: A guide for those working with families affected by child sexual abuse. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source.
Parkinson, D. and Smeaton, E. (2026), Specialist support for parents and carers of sexually abused children: A guide for funders and commissioners of support services. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source.
Restitute (2026), Three Years of Restitute: Growth, Need and Impact, 2023–2026. Internal service report.
Restitute (2026), long-term follow-up findings for former clients. Internal evaluation dataset.
Restitute, annual monitoring data, client outcome records, anonymised case records, client feedback and service evaluation material, 2021–2026.
Sabin, N. and Sheath, M. (2023), Managing risk and trauma after online sexual offending: A whole-family safeguarding guide. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse; corrected December 2024. View source.
Scott, S. (2023), Key messages from research on intra-familial child sexual abuse (second edition). Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source.
Scott, S. and McNeish, D. (2017), Supporting parents of sexually exploited young people: An evidence review. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source.
SHERA Research Group (2026), Written evidence submitted to the Public Bill Committee on the Courts and Tribunals Bill (CTB0054), 9 March 2026. UK Parliament. View source (Accessed: 19 July 2026).
Steel, M. and Parkinson, D. (2026), Support matters for parents: An overview of services supporting parents and carers of sexually abused children in England and Wales. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse. View source (Accessed: 1 July 2026).
Waxman, C. (2023), Response to the Family Justice Council consultation on alienating behaviours. Office of the Independent Victims’ Commissioner for London. View source (Accessed: 19 July 2026).
Whitehouse, C., McKenzie, P. and Hobbs, C. (2025), “The First 72 Hours After Child Sexual Assault: Reporting Children, Young People, and Mothers’ Experiences of Police, Hospital, and Psychosocial Care in Victoria”, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, first published online 17 March 2025. View source.
Yates, P. and Allardyce, S. (2021), Sibling sexual abuse: A knowledge and practice overview. Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse; corrected July 2025. View source.
Zagrodney, J. L. and Cummings, J. A. (2020), “Qualitatively Understanding Mother Fault After Childhood Sexual Abuse”, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(23–24), pp. 5589–5606. View source.