Safeguarding after Oxfam: has the sector's reckoning gone far enough?

The debate in brief

In February 2018, The Times reported that Oxfam staff had used prostitutes — including potentially underage girls — in Haiti following the 2010 earthquake. The revelations exposed not just individual misconduct but systemic failures: Oxfam had investigated internally, allowed staff to resign rather than face disciplinary action, and failed to disclose the full details to the Charity Commission or donors. The fallout was seismic. Public trust in charities fell sharply. The Charity Commission opened a statutory inquiry. Parliament demanded answers. The entire sector was forced to confront how safeguarding failures had been tolerated, minimised, and covered up — and whether the regulatory framework was adequate to prevent them.

Quick takeaways

The arguments

The reforms worked — the sector is safer now

The post-Oxfam reforms were substantial and measurable. The Charity Commission published updated safeguarding guidance in 2018, clarifying that all charities working with children or adults at risk must have safeguarding policies in place. Serious incident reporting was strengthened: the number of serious incident reports submitted to the Commission rose from approximately 2,800 in 2017-18 to nearly 3,000 in 2022-23, suggesting that charities are now more willing to report concerns rather than handle them quietly.

Large international NGOs, coordinated through Bond (the UK network for international development), developed enhanced safeguarding standards. The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), whose cross-agency taskforce on preventing sexual exploitation and abuse has existed since 2012, significantly stepped up this work after 2018. DBS checking processes were extended, and major funders — including DFID (now FCDO) — made safeguarding compliance a condition of grant funding.

The Charity Commission's enforcement posture changed too. Before Oxfam, safeguarding was one concern among many. After Oxfam, the Commission explicitly identified it as a strategic priority. The regulator introduced a dedicated safeguarding team and published an annual safeguarding report from 2019 onwards.

The reforms were designed for large organisations — small charities are struggling

The legal obligations on safeguarding apply equally to a multinational with 10,000 staff and a community group with three part-time workers. The Charity Commission does not grade its expectations by size. But the practical capacity to meet those expectations varies enormously.

Research in the years following the Oxfam scandal consistently found that small charities (income under 100,000 pounds) were significantly less likely than large organisations to have written safeguarding policies in place. The gap is not necessarily one of intent — small charity leaders often care deeply about the people they serve — but of capacity. Developing safeguarding policies, conducting DBS checks, providing staff training, creating reporting mechanisms, and managing allegations all require time, expertise, and money that many small organisations do not have.

The Charity Commission's own guidance acknowledges this implicitly. Its safeguarding guidance uses a risk-based approach, stating that the level of safeguarding measures should be "proportionate to the level of risk." But in practice, the line between proportionate and inadequate is unclear, and a small charity that faces a safeguarding allegation with no HR department, no legal advice, and no experience of managing such situations is in a fundamentally different position from one that does.

The deeper problem — power, not policy

Some critics argue that the post-Oxfam reforms addressed symptoms rather than causes. The Oxfam Haiti case was not primarily a failure of policy — Oxfam had safeguarding policies. It was a failure of culture and power. Staff in a disaster zone operated with minimal oversight, in a context where the power imbalance between aid workers and the local population was extreme, and where institutional incentives favoured covering up misconduct over reporting it.

The International Development Committee (IDC), in its 2018 inquiry into sexual exploitation and abuse in the aid sector, heard evidence that the problem was structural. Witnesses described a culture of impunity in parts of the sector, where safeguarding was treated as a compliance exercise rather than a core value. The committee's report described the sector's response as an "abject failure" driven by "complacency verging on complicity", and concluded that organisations had been more concerned with protecting their reputations than with protecting victims — findings that pointed to deep-seated power imbalances between aid workers and the communities they serve.

This critique applies domestically too. Safeguarding failures in UK charities are not always about missing policies. They are often about cultures where concerns are not raised, where whistleblowers are marginalised, and where the reputational risk of disclosure is perceived as greater than the harm of inaction.

The evidence

The Charity Commission's statutory inquiry into Oxfam, published in June 2019, found that the charity repeatedly fell below the standards expected of it, had "a culture of tolerating poor behaviour", and had failed to meet the promises it made on safeguarding. The Commission noted that Oxfam had allowed Roland van Hauwermeiren, the country director in Haiti, to resign rather than face a full disciplinary process, and that positive references from former Oxfam colleagues later helped him secure a role at another aid organisation, which was not warned of the concerns raised against him.

The Commission's annual safeguarding reports provide the clearest quantitative picture. In 2022-23, the Commission received approximately 2,969 serious incident reports in total, up from 2,819 in 2017-18. The Commission cautioned that the increase reflected improved reporting rather than a rise in incidents.

The IDC's 2018 report, "Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in the Aid Sector," drew on testimony from survivors, aid workers, and sector leaders. It documented cases across multiple organisations and countries, concluding that sexual exploitation and abuse was "endemic" in the aid sector and that the sector's response amounted to an "abject failure" to tackle it. The committee made wide-ranging recommendations, including a global register of aid workers, stronger referencing and staff-screening practices, and greater transparency from organisations about the number of allegations they receive.

DFID (now FCDO) conducted a review of safeguarding standards across its funding portfolio following the scandal, writing to its 393 non-UK charity partners and all its suppliers to set out enhanced due diligence requirements, and assessing partner organisations against the new standards through 2019 and 2020.

Current context

Eight years after the scandal became public, safeguarding is embedded in the regulatory and funding landscape in ways it was not before 2018. The Charity Commission continues to treat safeguarding as a strategic priority and publishes annual data on serious incident reports. Major funders, including FCDO and the National Lottery Community Fund, require evidence of safeguarding policies and procedures as a condition of funding.

Bond's safeguarding standards for international development organisations are now widely adopted, and a cross-sector Safeguarding Resource and Support Hub (RSH) provides guidance to organisations working internationally. The Disclosure and Barring Service issued over 7.5 million DBS checks in 2022-23, with the voluntary sector accounting for a significant proportion.

However, enforcement remains uneven. The Charity Commission has limited proactive inspection capacity and relies heavily on self-reporting. There is no systematic audit of safeguarding practice across the sector, and the quality of safeguarding implementation — as opposed to the existence of policies — is difficult to assess at scale. The regulatory infrastructure assumes that charities will report problems honestly. The Oxfam case demonstrated what happens when they do not.

Last updated: July 2026

What this means for charities

Every charity that works with children, young people, or adults at risk needs a safeguarding policy. This is not optional and it is not just for large organisations. The Charity Commission is explicit: trustees are responsible for safeguarding regardless of their charity's size.

In practice, this means having a written safeguarding policy, a named safeguarding lead, clear procedures for reporting concerns, appropriate DBS checks for staff and volunteers in relevant roles, and a commitment to reporting serious incidents to the Charity Commission promptly. For charities working internationally, the obligations extend to ensuring that partners and in-country staff are held to the same standards.

Small charities that lack internal expertise should use freely available resources from the NCVO, Bond (for international work), and the Charity Commission's own safeguarding guidance. The cost of inaction is not just regulatory — it is the real harm that results when organisations are not prepared to identify, report, and respond to abuse.

Common questions

What was the Oxfam Haiti scandal?

In 2010, following the earthquake in Haiti, Oxfam staff including the country director used prostitutes, some of whom may have been underage. Oxfam conducted an internal investigation in 2011, which resulted in four staff being dismissed and three — including the country director — being allowed to resign. Oxfam reported the matter to the Charity Commission but did not disclose that the misconduct involved the use of prostitutes or potential offences against minors. The full details became public in February 2018 when The Times published an investigation.

What did the Charity Commission do?

The Commission opened a statutory inquiry into Oxfam in February 2018 and published its report in June 2019. It found that Oxfam had "a culture of tolerating poor behaviour", had failed to meet the promises it made on safeguarding, and had not reported the concerns fully or promptly. The Commission issued an official warning and placed regulatory conditions on Oxfam, requiring it to demonstrate improved safeguarding practice — one of the most significant uses of its official-warning power, introduced only in 2016, against a major international charity.

What is a serious incident report?

A serious incident report (SIR) is the mechanism through which charities report significant events to the Charity Commission. Safeguarding concerns — including allegations of abuse, neglect, or exploitation involving beneficiaries, staff, or volunteers — are among the most common categories. Since 2018, the Commission has actively encouraged charities to report safeguarding incidents and has published guidance clarifying the types of events that should be reported. Failure to report a serious incident can itself constitute a governance failure.

Do all charities need DBS checks?

Not all roles require DBS checks. The legal framework is based on the nature of the activity, not the nature of the organisation. Roles involving regulated activity with children or vulnerable adults require enhanced DBS checks. Trustees of charities that work with these groups are also eligible for enhanced checks. The Charity Commission recommends that charities assess which roles require DBS checks based on the activities undertaken, and that they do not rely on DBS checks alone as a safeguarding measure — checks only reveal known offences.

Has the international development sector changed?

Significantly, though unevenly. Major UK-based international NGOs have invested heavily in safeguarding infrastructure, dedicated teams, and reporting mechanisms. Bond's safeguarding standards and the Safeguarding Resource and Support Hub provide sector-wide resources. FCDO made safeguarding a non-negotiable condition of funding. But the IDC's 2018 finding — that power imbalances between aid workers and local populations create structural conditions for abuse — has not been resolved by better policies alone. The decolonising development agenda argues that meaningful safeguarding reform requires shifting power to locally-led organisations, not just improving the compliance frameworks of Northern NGOs.

What should trustees do now?

Ensure your charity has a written safeguarding policy that is reviewed annually. Appoint a named safeguarding lead. Confirm that DBS checks are in place for all roles involving regulated activity. Establish clear procedures for reporting concerns internally and to the Charity Commission. Provide safeguarding training to staff and volunteers. And treat safeguarding as a standing board agenda item, not an annual tick-box exercise. The Charity Commission's guidance, "Safeguarding and protecting people for charities and trustees" (most recently updated in 2022), sets out the minimum expectations in detail.

Key sources and further reading

• Charity Commission statutory inquiry: Oxfam — Charity Commission, June 2019. The formal regulatory findings, concluding that Oxfam had "a culture of tolerating poor behaviour", failed to meet the promises it made on safeguarding, and did not report concerns fully or promptly.

• Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in the Aid Sector — International Development Committee, House of Commons, July 2018. The parliamentary inquiry that examined the systemic nature of abuse in international development and made wide-ranging recommendations for reform.

• Safeguarding and protecting people for charities and trustees — Charity Commission, most recently updated 2022. The Commission's standing guidance on safeguarding obligations for all registered charities.

• Charity Commission annual safeguarding report — Charity Commission, published annually from 2019. Includes data on serious incident reports, safeguarding inquiries, and enforcement activity.

• Trust in charities — Charity Commission, 2023. Public attitudes survey tracking trust in charities over time, showing the decline following the 2018 scandals and subsequent partial recovery.

• Bond safeguarding standards — Bond (the UK network for organisations working in international development). Sector-wide standards for safeguarding in international programmes.

• Safeguarding Resource and Support Hub (RSH) — Cross-sector initiative providing practical guidance, tools, and support for organisations working internationally on safeguarding.

• The regulatory effectiveness of the Charity Commission — National Audit Office, 2013. Earlier analysis of the Charity Commission's capacity and enforcement approach, predating the Oxfam scandal but relevant background to the regulator's long-standing resourcing constraints.

• NCVO safeguarding guidance — NCVO. Practical guidance for charities of all sizes on developing and implementing safeguarding policies, with specific resources for small organisations.