School Visit Resources

The Evidence: Why Fear-Based Approaches Often Backfire

Before building your talk, understand the research. Multiple studies — including the Youth Violence Commission Final Report (2020) and a Home Office systematic review of intervention programmes — have found that shock-based approaches can increase rather than reduce risk behaviour in young people.

The mechanism: showing graphic images of stab wounds, dwelling on fatality statistics, or bringing in props (crime scene photos, real or replica knives) triggers a threat-response in some young people that either numbs them or elevates the perceived status of violence. Young people who already feel unsafe may interpret a graphic knife crime talk as confirmation that carrying is rational.

What the evidence consistently supports instead:

• Narrative and consequence — real stories about real people and what happened to the people around them
• Peer influence framing — most young people don't carry; most young people who are asked to hold something feel pressured but want a way out
• Concrete, practised responses — giving young people specific language they can use in the moment
• Alternative identity — offering a reason not to carry that isn't just fear of being caught

Age-by-Age Guidance

The Framework: Four Stages

1. The Opening — Hook, Not Stats

Do not open with: "Today I'm going to talk to you about knife crime." Do not open with a fatality figure.

Do open with a question or a brief scenario that puts them in the moment:

• "Has anyone here ever felt unsafe walking home? Keep that feeling in mind."
• "If your best friend asked you to hold their bag and you found something in it you weren't expecting — what would you do?"
• "I want to tell you about a call I attended. I'm not going to use names — but this happened two miles from here." (brief, anonymised scenario)

The opening buys you two minutes of focused attention. Use it to get them asking a question in their heads, not checking out.

2. Core Message — One Thing, Clearly

Pick one core message and return to it. Not five things — one.

Effective core messages for knife crime:

• "Carrying a knife doesn't protect you. It makes you a target." (backed by research — people who carry are more likely to be stabbed, not less)
• "If you're holding it, the law doesn't care whose it is." (the "it's not mine" defence doesn't exist)
• "The people asking you to carry are the people who don't care what happens to you."

3. Difficult Questions — Handled in Advance

Prepare for these. They will come up.

4. The Close — One Concrete Action

End with one thing they can do right now. Not a list. One.

Options:

• "If you know someone who carries, text Crimestoppers on 60300. It's anonymous. You could be the reason they don't end up in a hospital bed."
• "If someone asks you to hold something this week and you don't know what to do — remember: 'I can't. My mum checks my bag.' It sounds simple. It works."
• "Talk to your DSL [name them] — they're not going to get anyone in trouble for asking a question."

What Not to Do

• Do not bring props — replica knives, forensic photos, or crime scene images
• Do not dwell on how much money can be made in crime — you are at risk of making it sound appealing
• Do not name local cases without explicit permission from the family — even if the case was widely reported
• Do not single out young people by race, postcode, or school year
• Do not respond to a challenging question with a lecture — engage, or park and move on
• Do not finish without giving the DSL a brief written note of anything you observed

The Glamorisation Problem

Young people — particularly those who are economically disadvantaged or socially isolated — may have encountered narratives about county lines that emphasise the lifestyle it appears to offer: cash, designer clothing, older associates who seem to care about them, a sense of belonging and status.

If your talk leads with money ("criminal networks make millions"), movement ("running drugs across the country"), or peer structure ("they recruit young people like you"), you risk making it sound like an opportunity rather than an exploitation mechanism. Recruiters do exactly this. Your job is to cut through it, not inadvertently reinforce it.

Language Guide

What to Cover — and in What Order

1. What county lines actually is — in plain terms. A phone number, a city network, runners who are mostly young people, and a market town where the drugs are sold. Strip the glamour by making the mechanics concrete and transactional.
2. Who benefits and who doesn't. The person at the top of the line has distance, plausible deniability, and legal protection. The runner at the bottom has none of these. When police arrive, it is the runner who is found with drugs.
3. The debt model. Explain how debt bondage works: you're told you owe money for the drugs you were given, the phone, the clothing. The debt is designed so it can never be paid off. You can't leave.
4. The grooming process. It starts with friendship, attention, money, gifts. It doesn't look like crime at first. By the time it does, it's usually too late to walk away safely.
5. What they can do. The Modern Slavery Act 2015 means that children exploited in county lines have legal protection. If they're in this situation, they are a victim — and there are people who can help without prosecuting them.

What Not to Say

• Do not describe amounts of money being made at any level of the network
• Do not describe the operational structure in enough detail to be instructional
• Do not use slang terms you are not fully comfortable with — it reads as performing, and young people will notice and disengage
• Do not imply that county lines only affects certain postcodes, ethnicities, or school types — networks recruit widely
• Do not suggest that the route out is simply "call the police" — for a young person already in a line, that's not a safe or realistic option. Refer to the NSPCC and specialist services instead

If a Young Person's Reaction Suggests Involvement

During a session, you may notice a young person who goes very quiet, becomes visibly distressed, or whose questions suggest personal knowledge rather than general curiosity. Do not call this out in front of the group.

DSL Follow-Up After Every Session

After every county lines session, provide the DSL with a brief written note containing:

• Date, location, year group, number of pupils
• Topic covered and approximate duration
• Any observations of individual pupils that may be relevant to safeguarding
• Any questions asked that suggested personal knowledge of exploitation
• Your contact details for follow-up

This note becomes part of the school's safeguarding record and may be relevant to a future MASH referral or investigation. It also protects you if questions arise later about what was said during the session.

What You Can and Cannot Say

How to Explain Channel to a Sceptical Year 10

Year 10 pupils are 14–15 years old. They are alert to authority, sensitive to being patronised, and likely to have formed opinions about PREVENT from social media, older siblings, or community discussion. Do not assume a blank slate.

A framing that works:

"Channel is not about arresting people for what they think. It's more like a referral to a counsellor — someone who talks to you about what's going on in your life. Most people who go through Channel never have any contact with the criminal justice system. It's designed to help people who are being drawn into something dangerous — in the same way that a social worker might help a young person being drawn into county lines."

Key points to land:

• Channel is voluntary — the person referred can engage or decline
• A referral is not a criminal record, not a prosecution, not a police file
• Channel operates through a multi-agency panel — not just police
• The goal is support, not punishment

The "Why Are You Only Talking About Muslims?" Challenge

This question will come up. It is a legitimate challenge and deserves a direct, honest answer.

Do not get defensive. Do not move on before the room has had a chance to absorb the answer. If a second challenge comes, invite it: "What else do you want to know about this?"

Three Common Misconceptions — and How to Correct Them

Misconception 1: "PREVENT means the police are spying on us."

The misconception: PREVENT involves covert monitoring of Muslim communities in particular — mosques, schools, social media.

The correction: "Prevent doesn't authorise surveillance. Channel is a voluntary programme — the person referred knows about it and can choose not to participate. Nobody is put on a covert list because a teacher is worried about them. The school refers to a panel, the panel decides whether to offer support, and the person can say no."

Misconception 2: "You can be reported for having the wrong political views."

The misconception: expressing unpopular political opinions — criticising foreign policy, supporting Palestinian rights, holding socially conservative views — can trigger a Prevent referral.

The correction: "The threshold for a Prevent referral is specific: vulnerability to being drawn into terrorism. Not political opinion, not religious belief, not saying something controversial. The guidance is clear that holding a view — even an extreme one — is not the same as being at risk of committing violence. If a teacher refers someone simply for having a political opinion, that referral should not proceed."

Misconception 3: "Channel means you'll be arrested."

The misconception: a Channel referral leads directly to police investigation and potential prosecution.

The correction: "In 2024/25, around 1,472 individuals were adopted into Channel and received support, out of a record 8,778 referrals — not every referral proceeds to substantive support. The vast majority of those supported had no subsequent contact with the criminal justice system. Channel is a support intervention — think of it like a referral to a counsellor or a youth worker. It is not, and is not meant to be, a gateway to prosecution."

What Police Bring That Teachers Cannot

• Lived operational reality. You have attended cases. You know what happens after the report. Young people respond to "I dealt with a case last year" very differently to "research shows..."
• The criminal framework. Teachers explain risk; you explain law. The Online Safety Act 2023, the Sexual Offences Act 2003, the consequences of sharing an intimate image — these carry weight from an officer in a way they don't from a lesson plan.
• CEOP credibility. You can explain what CEOP actually does with a report — which most young people have no idea about — and why reporting is worth doing.
• The perpetrator perspective. You can describe how grooming actually starts — what the first message looks like, how the escalation works — without sensationalising it, because you've seen the case files.

Positioning Your Input Alongside ThinkUKnow

CEOP runs the ThinkUKnow educational programme (thinkuknow.co.uk), which schools can access for free. It includes age-specific resources for 4–7, 8–10, 11–13, and 14+ audiences. Many schools already use it.

Do not try to replicate ThinkUKnow — it is professionally designed and curriculum-aligned. Instead, position your input as the lived complement to it:

"Your school may have used ThinkUKnow resources, which are excellent. What I'm going to add today is what actually happens after someone clicks that CEOP report button — and some of the specific places and apps where we're seeing the most concern right now."

If the school has not used ThinkUKnow, recommend it to the DSL after your session. It is free, statutory-aligned, and significantly reduces the burden on officers to deliver sole-source online safety education.

Criminal Consequences to Emphasise

• Sharing an intimate image without consent is now a criminal offence under the Online Safety Act 2023. The threat to share (cyberflashing) is also an offence. Many young people still believe this is a civil matter — correct this clearly.
• Possessing an indecent image of a child is a criminal offence under the Protection of Children Act 1978, even if the image was sent unsolicited. Young people who receive unsolicited CSAM should report it to CEOP, not forward it.
• The "I didn't know they were under 16" defence is not a defence in law in most circumstances. Juries are told to consider whether the defendant took reasonable steps to ascertain age.

Current Platform Risks — 2025–26

Discord

Discord's server structure allows users to move easily between public and private servers, including servers with age-restricted (NSFW) content. The platform has no robust age verification. Grooming patterns police are seeing: an initial approach in a public gaming server, an invitation to a "private server" with a small trusted group, gradual escalation of conversation in direct messages. The voice chat function creates a level of intimacy that text-only platforms don't. Advise young people: you do not have to accept a server invite from someone you don't know in real life.

Roblox

Roblox has a primarily under-16 user base and has invested significantly in child safety — but risks remain. In-game voice chat is enabled for 13+ users but age verification is weak. The in-game currency (Robux) creates a financial relationship that recruiters exploit: giving a young person Robux is functionally the same as giving them money, but feels more like a game. CEOP has recorded cases where grooming began through Roblox game invitations and progressed to off-platform contact.

AI Companion Apps (Character.ai, Replika, Chai)

AI companion apps — platforms where users interact with AI-generated personas — have attracted tens of millions of users, many of them young people seeking emotional connection. The safeguarding risks are specific:

• Young people disclose highly personal information to what they perceive as a private, non-judgemental AI — this information is logged and may be accessible to humans
• Some platforms allow AI personas that are explicitly designed to form romantic or sexual relationships with users — including with under-18 users on platforms with inadequate age verification
• There is evidence of human actors operating "AI" personas on some platforms to groom users who believe they are speaking to a bot

The Online Safety Act 2023 places new duties on these platforms in relation to child safety. Ofcom's enforcement is developing, but young people should be advised: anything you tell an AI may be read by a human.

TikTok Direct Messages

TikTok's recommendation algorithm creates rapid intimacy with content — users feel the platform "understands them" within hours of signing up. DMs can be enabled for under-16 users with parental permission, but this restriction is straightforward to bypass. The concern police and CEOP are tracking: the algorithm surfaces users to potential groomers based on content interest, and DMs then allow private contact outside the content feed. Young people should be advised: an unsolicited DM from someone they don't know in real life is the same risk whether it comes via TikTok, Instagram, or any other platform.

Closing the Session

End with the CEOP reporting mechanism: ceop.police.uk. Explain briefly what happens when a report is made — it goes to the NCA, it is reviewed by trained investigators, and it contributes to wider intelligence about offenders. A report is not wasted even if it doesn't result in an immediate investigation.

Leave the DSL with the age-appropriate ThinkUKnow resource links for each year group in the session.

Understanding the Room

Parents at a school safeguarding event are typically in one of three states:

• Already worried — they're there because something has happened or they've seen something that concerns them. They want validation and practical next steps.
• Curious but not anxious — they came because the school invited them and they thought it would be useful. They don't think their child is at risk but they want to be informed.
• Sceptical — they're there under mild social pressure (the school sent three reminders), they don't think the risk applies to their family, and they'll leave if you bore or lecture them.

The police badge creates a specific dynamic with parents: some are immediately reassured by the uniform; others carry historical or cultural mistrust. Read the room in the first two minutes — if you see crossed arms and avoidance of eye contact, adjust your tone before your content.

What Parents Want From a Police Officer at a School Event

• Specific, practical information they can use tonight — not a general awareness lecture
• To feel competent — they want to leave knowing something they can do, not just something they should fear
• Warning signs that are concrete — not "look for changes in behaviour" (too vague) but "a second phone they didn't give them" or "coming home with money they can't explain"
• To know you are approachable — that if they come to you with a concern, they won't be treated as stupid or as suspects

What Parents Resent

• Being lectured. If your talk sounds like a school assembly with adult vocabulary, you'll lose the room within five minutes.
• Jargon. MASH, NRM, s.47, ABE — none of these belong in a parent evening. If you need to reference a process, describe it in plain English.
• Implications of failure. Parents are acutely sensitive to suggestions that their child is already at risk because of something they've done wrong. Frame risk as something that happens to families, not to bad parents.
• Being overwhelmed with information. If you hand out three leaflets, a QR code, and four helpline numbers, they will take none of them home. Choose a maximum of three resources and explain why each one matters.

Discussing County Lines With Parents

Do not lead with trafficking, modern slavery, or national statistics. For most parents, these feel remote from their child's reality and trigger either panic (which closes down listening) or dismissal (which isn't my child's world).

Lead with the phone:

"The most common entry point for a young person into county lines is someone giving them a second phone. Not selling drugs — just holding a phone and passing on messages. The phone is how the network controls them. If your child has a phone you didn't give them and can't explain where it came from, ask about it. You don't need to accuse them of anything — just ask."

Other concrete entry points to discuss:

• Coming home with unexplained money or expensive items
• Staying out significantly later than usual with explanations that don't add up
• New, older friends they seem evasive about
• Going missing overnight or for short periods
• Becoming withdrawn, anxious, or secretive about their phone

Discussing Knife Crime With Parents

Do not lead with fatalities or crime scene descriptions. Parents do not need to be scared — they need to be equipped.

Lead with the carrying myth:

"Most young people who carry a knife carry it because they're frightened, not because they want to hurt anyone. The problem is that carrying makes them significantly more likely to be stabbed — not less. So if you think your child might be carrying because they're scared, the conversation to have is: what are you scared of, and how can we make that safer. Not: are you carrying a knife."

If a parent asks: "What do I do if I find a knife in my child's room?"

"Take it somewhere safe — don't hand it to your child. Then call 101 for advice on how to hand it in. And have a conversation with your child about why it was there — not a confrontation, a conversation. They're more likely to tell you the truth if they don't think they're going to be in trouble."

Signposting — Three Resources Maximum

End with no more than three resources. More than three and parents take none of them.

After the Event

As with any school session, give the DSL a brief written note: date, topic, approximate number of parents, and anything raised in the Q&A that might be relevant to safeguarding. A parent's question at an evening event sometimes contains information about a child that the school needs to know.