Six months of oversight, judged in one document. That's what Regulation 45 really is. Every registered children's home in England produces this review twice a year, and it's the single clearest signal Ofsted has of whether leadership genuinely understands what's happening inside the home, or is simply managing paperwork.

Regulation 45 requires the registered person to conduct, or commission, a review of the quality of care provided in the home at least every six months. The written report goes to Ofsted and to every placing authority with a child currently in the home, within 28 days of the review being completed. Get this document right and it becomes evidence of genuine leadership insight. Get it wrong, and it becomes the first thing an inspector reads with suspicion.

Treat Regulation 45 as more than a submission requirement and it earns its place. Done properly, it forces a genuine six-monthly stocktake of the home: what's working, what isn't, and what leadership is actually going to do about it. Homes that only produce the review because it's due tend to produce reviews that read exactly that way, and inspectors notice the difference immediately.

The legal basis

Regulation 45 sits within the Children's Homes (England) Regulations 2015, in force since 1 April 2015. It must be read alongside the nine Quality Standards set out in Regulations 5 to 14 of the same legislation, since the review's job is to assess performance against all nine.

The standard most directly tied to Regulation 45 is Standard 8: Leadership and Management (Regulation 13), which requires the registered person to maintain effective oversight of the home's quality of care. The Regulation 45 review is the primary mechanism through which that oversight gets formally evidenced, and the SCCIF treats it as central to the leadership and management judgement area.

Who must complete the Regulation 45 review

The legal obligation sits with the registered person, which in most homes means the responsible individual (RI). The RI can conduct the review personally or commission a suitably qualified person to do it on their behalf. Either way, the registered person stays accountable for the content and submission, and must sign it.

Where an RI oversees more than one registered home, each home needs its own separate Regulation 45 report. A combined or templated report covering multiple homes doesn't satisfy the requirement, and inspectors can spot recycled language across a group's reports immediately.

The self-assessment problem. In smaller organisations where the registered manager is also the registered person, that same person ends up reviewing their own leadership. Ofsted is aware this creates an inherent conflict, and factors it into how critically they read the report. If you're in this position, the honest move is to over-invest in external input: written feedback from placing authorities, independent perspectives from the Regulation 44 visitor, and a genuinely self-critical tone that acknowledges the limits of reviewing your own work. A Regulation 45 that reads as unquestioningly positive from a self-assessing RI draws more scrutiny, not less.

Commissioning someone else to write it. Some RIs commission an external consultant or a senior colleague from elsewhere in the organisation to carry out the review itself, distinct from the Regulation 44 visitor role. This is permitted, and can genuinely strengthen independence, but it doesn't transfer accountability. The registered person still has to read, understand, and sign the final report as their own, not simply countersign someone else's work without engaging with it. Inspectors can tell when an RI can't speak confidently to the content of a report they've signed.

What the review must cover

The review must assess performance against all nine Quality Standards: Quality and Purpose of Care, Children's Views, Education, Enjoyment and Achievement, Health and Well-being, Positive Relationships, Protection of Children, Leadership and Management, and Care Planning. Our guide to the 9 Quality Standards breaks down what each one requires in detail.

The regulations don't require equal depth on every standard at every six-monthly cycle. The registered person is expected to use professional judgement about where to focus, particularly where concerns have arisen, where Regulation 44 findings point to a specific area, or where outcomes for individual children have been mixed.

The review must also consider:

  • Feedback from children, their parents or guardians, placing authorities, and staff
  • Recommendations from the most recent Regulation 44 independent visitor reports

The requirement to gather meaningful feedback from multiple parties is the part most homes under-deliver. Children need to be genuinely consulted, not handed a form to tick. Placing authorities should be asked for their views in writing, with enough lead time to actually respond before the review is finalised.

A worked example of weak versus strong coverage. A weak Regulation 45 might state: "Children's views were sought during this period and no concerns were raised." A strong one names the consultation method (a keyworker session, a young people's meeting, an anonymous suggestion box), summarises what was actually said in the children's own words or close to it, and shows a specific instance where that feedback changed something: a house rule adjusted, an activity added, a complaint resolved. The difference isn't length. It's whether an inspector reading it could picture the actual conversation that happened.

How often it's due, and the 28-day deadline

The review must happen at least every six months. Many providers run a January to June and July to December cycle, though the timing is the provider's choice as long as no gap between reviews exceeds six months.

The written report is due to Ofsted and to all relevant placing authorities within 28 days of the review being completed. This is a hard deadline, not a target. Ofsted tracks submission dates as part of its ongoing monitoring, separate from the inspection cycle.

What form the report takes

There's no prescribed template. The regulations require a written report but leave the structure open. In practice, most providers organise the report around the nine Quality Standards, with a narrative section for each and an action plan at the end. Our Regulation 45 Report Template walks through a complete section-by-section structure, including a pre-submission checklist.

Whatever structure you use, the report must be:

  • In writing. A verbal review doesn't satisfy the requirement.
  • Signed by the registered person.
  • Submitted to Ofsted within 28 days of the review completion date.
  • Shared with placing authorities of every child in placement at the time of submission.

The quality of the writing matters as much as the structure. Inspectors read Regulation 45 reports as a standard part of every inspection, and a vague, generic, or poorly written report sets a negative tone before the inspector has even walked through the door.

Resist the temptation to treat structure as a substitute for substance. A report can follow the nine-standard format perfectly and still be weak if every section reads the same: a claim, a general reassurance, no specific evidence. The structure is scaffolding. What fills it is what an inspector actually judges.

What Ofsted looks for in a Regulation 45 report

Inspectors read the most recent Regulation 45 report to assess whether the registered person genuinely understands what's happening in the home, whether the home has identified its own real strengths and weaknesses, and whether Regulation 44 recommendations have actually been closed out. Our in-depth breakdown of what inspectors look for covers the six specific quality dimensions inspectors assess and what strong evidence looks like against each one.

The short version: a Regulation 45 that identifies no weaknesses, makes no reference to Regulation 44 findings, and offers no specific evidence raises immediate concern. Inspectors read enough of these reports to tell the difference between one written to satisfy a process and one written by someone genuinely engaged with the home.

Common mistakes when self-assessing

Beyond the well-known pitfalls (generic language, no reference to Reg 44, no identified weaknesses), a few subtler mistakes show up repeatedly:

Treating the six-month gap as a reset. Some reviews read as if the previous six months didn't happen: no reference to what was flagged last time, no tracking of whether last cycle's action plan was completed. Ofsted expects continuity between consecutive Regulation 45 reports, not a blank slate each time.

Confusing activity with outcome. Listing what the home did (staff training delivered, audits completed, meetings held) isn't the same as showing what changed for children as a result. Inspectors want the "so what," not just the "what."

Under-using the Regulation 44 relationship. A Regulation 45 that references Reg 44 findings only in passing misses the point. The relationship should be structural: each open Reg 44 recommendation gets named, addressed, and either closed or given a credible revised timeline.

Writing for Ofsted instead of for the home. The strongest Regulation 45 reports read as genuine leadership tools the RI would want regardless of the submission requirement, not documents written purely to satisfy a regulator. That authenticity comes through, and its absence does too.

Inconsistent depth across standards. Homes often write two pages on Health and Well-being, where the evidence is easy to gather from appointment records, and two paragraphs on Positive Relationships, where the evidence requires actually sitting with staff and children to understand the texture of daily life. Inspectors notice when the depth of a section tracks how easy the evidence was to collect rather than how important the standard is.

Missing the placing authority's perspective entirely. Some reviews summarise feedback from children and staff but never actually document what placing authorities said, or whether they were asked with enough notice to respond. This is a specific, named requirement of the review, not an optional extra.

Building the evidence base year-round

A strong Regulation 45 isn't written in the week before it's due. It's assembled from six months of material that should already exist if oversight has been happening properly:

  • Monthly management oversight notes or audit records
  • All Regulation 44 reports from the period, with the registered manager's written responses
  • Minutes from young people's meetings and any consultation activity
  • Written feedback requested from placing authorities partway through the period, not just at the deadline
  • A running log of significant events: incidents, missing episodes, Regulation 40 notifications, complaints
  • Supervision records showing the pattern of staff development across the period

Providers that maintain this material continuously produce stronger Regulation 45 reports in a fraction of the time, because the review becomes an act of synthesis rather than reconstruction under deadline pressure.

Writing a Regulation 45 that covers a difficult period

Some six-month periods include a serious incident, a safeguarding referral, a placement breakdown, or an Ofsted follow-up visit. The instinct in these cases is often to soften the language or minimise the section addressing it. That instinct works against you.

A Regulation 45 that covers a difficult period well does three things. It names what happened factually, without excessive detail that risks identifying a child, but without euphemism either. It sets out specifically what changed in the home's practice as a direct result, not generic reassurance that lessons were learned. And it's honest about whether the response was fully effective or whether work is still ongoing.

Inspectors already know about serious incidents from Regulation 40 notifications and safeguarding records before they ever read the Regulation 45. What they're assessing at that point is whether the registered person's own account matches reality, and whether leadership responded with genuine insight or defensive minimisation. A Regulation 45 that glosses over a period placing authorities and Ofsted already know was difficult damages credibility far more than an honest account of what went wrong and what's being done about it.

Regulation 45 for group providers running multiple homes

Where an RI oversees several homes, the temptation to build one report and adapt it lightly for each home is real, and it's exactly what inspectors are trained to spot. Each home's Regulation 45 needs to stand entirely on its own, reflecting that specific home's children, staffing, incidents, and Regulation 44 findings.

A few practices help group providers avoid this trap:

Separate evidence folders per home. Keep each home's monthly oversight material, Regulation 44 reports, and consultation records entirely separate, even where the same RI oversees all of them. Building the report from a shared pool of group-wide material is how cross-contamination between homes creeps in.

Vary the writing, not just the data. Even where two homes genuinely have similar strengths (say, both have strong education outcomes this period), the language describing it should come from what actually happened at each home, not a shared paragraph edited for names.

Benchmark internally, but report individually. It's reasonable for an RI to compare performance across their homes as a management exercise. That comparison should never surface as boilerplate text lifted from one report into another.

A group provider with five near-identical Regulation 45 reports submitted in the same week is a pattern Ofsted's data teams can and do notice across a group's inspection history.

How much time to budget for the review

Providers consistently underestimate how long a genuine Regulation 45 review takes when it's done properly rather than assembled from memory in a rush. As a rough guide:

  • Gathering source material: two to three days, less if the year-round evidence base described above is already being maintained
  • Drafting the narrative against all nine standards: three to five days, depending on the complexity of the children currently placed
  • Consultation follow-up: allow at least a week of lead time for placing authorities and families to respond in writing before the review is finalised
  • Review and sign-off: a further one to two days for the registered person to properly read, question, and sign the final report rather than rubber-stamping it

Total elapsed time, start to submission, realistically runs three to four weeks when consultation lead time is included. Starting the process only when the 28-day submission clock is already running from a review "completion" date chosen retrospectively is how homes end up submitting late, or submitting something thin.

Put the next Regulation 45 date in the diary the moment the current one is submitted, working backwards from the submission deadline to a realistic start date for gathering material. Homes that treat the six-monthly cycle as a fixed calendar event, rather than something that gets scheduled reactively each time, consistently produce stronger reports with far less last-minute pressure on the RI.

Aligning Regulation 45 with your Regulation 44 cycle

The six-monthly Regulation 45 review should sit deliberately on top of six months of monthly Regulation 44 visits, not run as a separate, disconnected process. A few habits make that alignment real rather than nominal:

Log Regulation 44 responses as they happen. Don't wait until the Regulation 45 drafting process to work out whether each Regulation 44 recommendation was actioned. If the recommendation tracker described in our Regulation 44 guide is kept live throughout the period, the Regulation 45's response to Reg 44 findings becomes a five-minute summary instead of a research exercise.

Time the final Regulation 44 visit deliberately. Where possible, schedule the last Regulation 44 visit of the review period a week or two before you start drafting the Regulation 45, so its findings can genuinely inform the review rather than arriving too late to be reflected properly.

Close the loop visibly. The Regulation 45 report should make it obvious, standard by standard, which findings came from which Regulation 44 visit and what happened next. Reports that discuss Regulation 44 only in a single generic paragraph miss the structural link Ofsted is looking for.

Regulation 45 readiness checklist

Children's experience and progress

  • Does the report name specific children (anonymised) and their individual progress, not generic statements about "the children"?
  • Is there documented evidence that children's consultation actually happened, and what was said?
  • Does the report show where children's feedback changed something in the home?

How well children are helped and protected

  • Are all Regulation 40 notifications from the period accounted for in the review?
  • Does the report honestly address any safeguarding concerns raised in the period, rather than omitting them?
  • Have environmental and individual risk assessments been reviewed and referenced as current?

Leadership and management

  • Does the report address every Regulation 44 recommendation from the period by name?
  • Are areas for development genuinely self-identified, not just areas Ofsted or a previous inspection already flagged?
  • Is the action plan specific, with named owners and dates, rather than aspirational language?

What happens after submission

Ofsted logging. Once submitted, Ofsted logs the report and the submission date as part of its ongoing monitoring of the home. There's no formal acknowledgement or approval process, but late or missing submissions get tracked and can trigger contact from your inspector.

Building an audit trail. Keep proof of submission (the email, the portal confirmation, whatever the submission method generates) alongside the report itself. Where a dispute later arises over whether a report was submitted on time, this record is what settles it.

Placing authority scrutiny. Placing authorities receiving the report may follow up directly, particularly where the review touches on a specific child they have placed. A well-written report can pre-empt these queries; a vague one invites them.

Feeding the next cycle. The action plan from this Regulation 45 becomes the starting reference point for the next one. Ofsted and placing authorities alike will notice if the same actions reappear unresolved six months later.

Internal follow-through. The submission deadline isn't the end of the process. The registered manager and RI should schedule a check-in partway through the next six-month cycle, not just at the point the following review is due, to confirm the action plan is actually on track rather than discovering at the next deadline that nothing progressed.

At inspection. The most recent Regulation 45, and often the one before it, gets read closely during any inspection. Inspectors compare what the report claimed against what they find on the ground. A mismatch between a self-congratulatory Regulation 45 and a home that's clearly struggling is one of the fastest ways to damage the leadership and management judgement.

The most common Regulation 45 failures

  • No reference to Regulation 44 findings. Treated as a leadership failure, not an administrative oversight, because it suggests the RI isn't actually engaging with the independent oversight already in place.
  • No identified weaknesses. A report claiming everything is working well, with no development areas, reads as either dishonest or unaware. Neither is a good look at inspection.
  • Generic, recycled language. Reports that read almost identically to the previous cycle, or across multiple homes in the same group, signal the review is a compliance exercise rather than genuine reflection.
  • Late or missing submission. A regulatory breach in its own right, and a pattern of lateness signals weak administrative oversight even before the content is assessed.
  • Thin consultation. Feedback sections that list who was "asked" without capturing what they actually said fail to meet the substance of the requirement.

Frequently asked questions

What is Regulation 45 in children's homes? Regulation 45 of the Children's Homes (England) Regulations 2015 requires the registered person to review the quality of care in the home at least every six months and submit a written report to Ofsted and all relevant placing authorities within 28 days.

Who must complete the Regulation 45 review? The registered person, usually the responsible individual. They can conduct it personally or commission someone suitably qualified, but they remain accountable for the content and must sign it.

How often is Regulation 45 due? At least every six months, with the report submitted within 28 days of the review being completed. Many providers use a January to June and July to December cycle.

What must a Regulation 45 report cover? Performance against all nine Quality Standards, feedback from children, families, placing authorities and staff, and a direct response to recommendations from every Regulation 44 report in the period.

What happens if Regulation 45 is submitted late? It's treated as a regulatory breach. A single late submission is more likely to prompt an Ofsted follow-up than immediate enforcement, but a pattern of lateness signals weak leadership oversight and factors directly into inspection judgements.

Is there a required Regulation 45 template? No. The regulations require a written report but don't specify a structure. Most providers organise it around the nine Quality Standards with an action plan at the end.

How does Regulation 45 differ from Regulation 44? Regulation 44 is a monthly, externally conducted independent visit report. Regulation 45 is a six-monthly internal review carried out by the registered person, which must directly address every Regulation 44 finding from that period.

Who receives the Regulation 45 report? Ofsted and every placing authority with a child currently placed in the home at the time of submission, within 28 days of the review's completion.

Can the registered manager write the Regulation 45 if they're not the registered person? They can be commissioned to conduct it, but the registered person remains legally accountable for its content and must sign it. A registered manager who is also the registered person completes it themselves, with the self-assessment limitations that arrangement carries.

Does a new children's home need to complete a Regulation 45 in its first six months? Yes. The six-month clock starts from registration, not from a settling-in period. A newly registered home's first Regulation 45 will necessarily have less Regulation 44 history to draw on, but the requirement to review against all nine Quality Standards still applies in full.

What's the difference between Regulation 45 and the SCCIF? Regulation 45 is the legal requirement to conduct a six-monthly quality of care review. The SCCIF is the framework Ofsted uses to inspect and grade the home, and it treats the Regulation 45 report as key evidence for the leadership and management judgement area.

Can a Regulation 45 review identify no areas for development? In practice, no. A review that finds nothing to improve is read as evidence of insufficient self-awareness rather than a genuinely high-performing home. Every home, including strong ones, has practice it's actively working to develop.

How long should a Regulation 45 report be? There's no mandated length. What matters is that each of the nine Quality Standards is addressed with specific, evidenced detail rather than generic reassurance. A report padded with filler to look thorough is as weak as one that's too short to cover the requirement properly.

Related reading

How CareClarity supports Regulation 45

CareClarity's Reg 45 Review tool gives registered managers and responsible individuals structured feedback on a draft Regulation 45 report before it reaches Ofsted. Upload your draft alongside the most recent Regulation 44 reports, and the tool identifies where the evidence base is thin, whether Regulation 44 findings have been addressed, and where the language of the report may undermine its credibility.

Start your free 7-day trial and run your next Reg 45 through CareClarity before submission.