Tell us what's happening. We'll show you where your case falls outside CAFCASS's own rules.
Describe your situation and we'll point out, free, where it appears to breach the standards CAFCASS officers are required to follow. No jargon. No cost. Just clarity, from the first question to after the final hearing.
No spam, nothing to sell. We answer you first, then show you where the report doesn't add up.
Stories get dismissed. Data does not.
76%
of court orders follow the CAFCASS recommendation
1 in 90
complaints about CAFCASS fully upheld
0
sanctions in five years for getting a report wrong
Not recorded
whether a wrong report is ever corrected for the court
Figures from CAFCASS's own FOI responses, refs CAF 26-45850 and CAF 26-46376, 2026.See the full evidence →
We're with you the whole way
Wherever you are in this, there's a next step.
Most parents find us in the middle of the storm. It doesn't matter which stage you're at. The help starts from exactly where you're standing.
One
Things are okay
Know your rights early, before anything escalates.
Two
Contact restricted
A safeguarding letter has limited your time. Understand what it really means.
Three
Proceedings begin
Know what's coming and how to prepare for it.
Core · Four
The Section 7 report
We check it against CAFCASS's own framework and show every failure, in plain English.
Five
Hearing prep
Walk in composed, with your points tied to the standards they breach.
Six
After the decision
Whatever the outcome. What it found, what's still open, what to do next.
How it works
Three steps. No cost. No catch.
You don't upload a document into a void. You have a conversation, and it answers you.
1
Tell us what's happening
In your own words. We answer your worry first, before anything else.
2
We check it against the rules
JUNO measures your report against the standards CAFCASS officers must follow.
3
You get it in plain English
Every point where the report appears to fall short, and what you can do next.
Meet JUNO
The engine that reads your report.
JUNO is the intelligence behind The King Project. It knows every standard a CAFCASS officer is required to follow, checks your report against them, and explains what it finds in plain English. Here's how a first conversation feels.
The King Project
I got a safeguarding letter and now I only see my daughter two hours a week. I don't understand why.
That's frightening, and you're not alone in it. A safeguarding letter is an early step, not the final word, and it can be challenged. Can I ask: has a Section 7 report been ordered yet?
Yes, last week.
Good, that's exactly what we can help with. When you share it, I'll show you where it appears to fall outside CAFCASS's own standards, point by point.
Free legal help most parents never claim
Were you controlled? Manipulated? Made to feel like nothing?
That's abuse. It doesn't have to be a raised hand. Being controlled, belittled, cut off from your kids, your money or your friends, made to feel worthless or like everything was your fault. The law recognises all of it as domestic abuse, and it can entitle you to free legal aid. Most victims never claim it. Men almost never do, because nobody ever told them it counted. Whoever you are, it counts, and we'll help you prove it.
1
We help you see it
Name what's happened to you against what the law recognises as abuse, including coercive and emotional control.
2
We point you to assessment
Connect you to the right route to have it formally assessed, the step that can unlock funding.
3
You apply for legal aid
With that in hand, we show you how to apply for the free legal help you may be entitled to.
Everything on this site is backed by their own letters.
We asked CAFCASS the questions they don't publish answers to. The replies, in writing, are laid out side by side in the Evidence Room.
Every figure on this page came from CAFCASS, in writing, under the Freedom of Information Act. Nothing here is our opinion. It's their own letters, laid side by side.
CAFCASS FOI response, ref CAF 26‑45850, 18 June 2026 · ref CAF 26‑46376, 14 July 2026
What they told us, in their own words
Six figures. Six admissions. Every one from a dated, referenced letter.
Exhibit A
1–3%
Complaints fully upheld, every year, five years running.
"We have therefore provided data on the number of complaints recorded in each of the years requested."
CAF 26‑45850 · 18 Jun 2026
Exhibit B
91
Complaints fully upheld across five years, out of roughly 9,800 received.
Sum of CAFCASS's own year-by-year "fully upheld" figures, 2021–2026.
CAF 26‑45850 · 18 Jun 2026
Exhibit C
0
Formal sanctions issued as a result of those 91 upheld complaints.
"The number of those disciplinary processes that ended in a formal sanction... Nil."
CAF 26‑46376 · 14 Jul 2026
Exhibit D
0
Staff dismissed following an upheld complaint, in five years.
"The number of staff dismissed following an upheld complaint... Nil."
CAF 26‑46376 · 14 Jul 2026
Exhibit E
Not held
Whether a wrongly written report was ever corrected for the court.
"We are unable to provide the requested information as it is not recorded by Cafcass."
CAF 26‑46376 · 14 Jul 2026
Exhibit F
<5
The threshold so low across five years that CAFCASS had to merge the figures to avoid identifying individual staff.
"Because of the low number of responses which meet your criteria... we have aggregated the information."
CAF 26‑46376 · 14 Jul 2026
The same job, two different professions
A registered nurse and a CAFCASS officer both hold a public trust. Only one of them faces a consequence for breaking it.
CAFCASS
Front-line staff~2,258
Upheld complaints, 5 yrs91
Reached a conduct process4
Formal sanctions0
Dismissals0
Nursing & Midwifery Council
On the register~850,000
Concerns raised, 1 yr6,539
Reached a panel, 1 yr647
Ended in a sanction526 (81%)
Struck off, 1 yr alone289
What our own measuring is finding
JUNO checks every report against CAFCASS's own published standards. These are the patterns in the reports we have measured so far.
Finding 01
85%
Of every failure found, 85% pointed against the same parent. The one the report recommended against.
Failures that fall one way are not sloppiness. Sloppiness falls both ways.
JUNO cross-case analysis · reports measured to date
Finding 02
46%
Nearly half of all failures scored Critical, the most serious grade on the scale.
Critical means the failure is capable of changing the outcome of the case.
JUNO cross-case analysis · reports measured to date
Finding 03
100%
Every report so far dropped a parent's protective factors between the body of the report and the recommendation.
The good things about a parent are recorded, then quietly vanish before the conclusion.
JUNO cross-case analysis · reports measured to date
Finding 04
100%
Every report so far tested one parent's claims while taking the other parent's on trust.
One family, two evidential standards, inside a single document.
JUNO cross-case analysis · reports measured to date
Finding 05
3 in 4
Reports that stated untested allegations as established fact.
An allegation written down as fact reads as fact to a court that never sees the method.
JUNO cross-case analysis · reports measured to date
Finding 06
3 in 4
Reports that left questions the court had specifically directed to be answered, unanswered.
The court asked. The report did not answer. The court relied on it anyway.
JUNO cross-case analysis · reports measured to date
The evidence room is still growing
Every request below is real, dated, and sent under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. This tracker updates as replies land.
12
Requests sent
2
Answered in full
10
Awaiting reply
9
Independent bodies asked
CAFCASS — complaints received & upheld rateAnswered
CAFCASS — consequences for staffAnswered
CAFCASS — the public's own questionsSent
CAFCASS — payouts & performance measuresDrafted
Ministry of Justice — court outcomesSent
Social Work England — officer referralsSent
Ofsted — inspection findingsSent
Children's Commissioner for EnglandSent
Information Commissioner's OfficeSent
Parliamentary & Health Service OmbudsmanSent
National Audit OfficeSent
HM Inspectorate of ProbationSent
Family Justice CouncilSent
Been let down by a report?
The data is one side of this. Your case is the other. Tell us what happened, free, and we'll show you where it appears to fall outside CAFCASS's own standards.