Over-representation of Māori in the oranga tamariki system
For most and who become involved in the oranga tamariki system, it starts with a report of concern about their safety and wellbeing. Further involvement covers a broad range of actions such as a family group conference and state care.
Some tamariki and rangatahi come to the attention of Oranga Tamariki when NZ Police refers them for a family group conference related to offending. In some cases, they may require care in a youth justice community home or secure residence.
State care and custody, for either care and protection or youth justice reasons, is the most involved tamariki and rangatahi and their can become in the oranga tamariki system.
This section of the report shows how tamariki and rangatahi Māori are over-represented in the oranga tamariki system. It then considers how this over-representation, along with ongoing disparities, means that tamariki and rangatahi Māori are less likely to have some of the minimum required care standards met.
As reported in Towards a stronger safety net to prevent abuse of children,30 over-representation has a cumulative effect. Tamariki and rangatahi Māori are more likely to have contact with the oranga tamariki system and to experience different responses to non-Māori, which may reinforce the pattern of inequitable outcomes.
Over-representation and its impact on Māori is not new
Tamariki and rangatahi Māori have longstanding and continued overrepresentation in the oranga tamariki system.
There have been multiple reports, research studies and evaluations over the years about over-representation of tamariki and rangatahi Māori in state care and its impacts, including:
- the report Pūao-Te-Ata-Tū (1988)31
- the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care of Faith-based Institutions32
- research published by the longitudinal study Growing Up in New Zealand in July 2023 about structural disadvantage and rangatahi Māori mental wellbeing.33
In 2021, an independent study published by Ihi Research about Māori involvement in state care from 1950 to 1999 found “devastating, intergenerational harms that tamariki Māori and whānau have experienced through enduring, systemic and structural racism across the State Care system”.34
Over-representation has persisted over time. This is despite multiple system reforms and policy commitments aimed at reducing overrepresentation, disparities and inequities for tamariki and rangatahi Māori and their whānau in the oranga tamariki system.
In this part of the report, we build on the data shown earlier in the section About and Māori in the oranga tamariki system. This shows that, when Māori are involved in the system, they have more involvement than non-Māori and this increases the deeper in the system they go.
To show the over-representation of tamariki and rangatahi Māori at different points of the oranga tamariki system, we look at data on reports of concern, family group conferences, care or custody, police proceedings and youth justice intervention.
More than half of reports of concern with a recorded ethnicity are for tamariki and rangatahi Māori. In 2024/25, reports of concern were made about 30,600 individual tamariki and rangatahi Māori and 22,900 non-Māori.35 This means 57 percent of reports of concern were for Māori and 43 percent were for non- Māori. Ethnicity is known for 85 percent of individual tamariki and rangatahi in this data.
Almost a quarter of tamariki and rangatahi Māori who had a report of concern in 2024/25 had 10 or more previous reports made
Tamariki and rangatahi who had a report of concern made about them during 2024/25 often had prior reports of concern. These other reports of concern could have occurred recently or many years earlier. The distribution of reports of concern over a lifetime for tamariki and rangatahi Māori is different to non-Māori.
| One report of concern | 14% |
| Between two and nine reports of concern | 63% |
| 10 or more reports of concern | 23% |
Ethnicity is known for 62 percent of those who had one report of concern during their lifetime. Ethnicity is known for 94 percent of those who had had two or more reports of concern during their lifetime.
Nearly one quarter of tamariki and rangatahi Māori who had a report of concern made about them, had 10 or more previous reports of concern. In 2024/25, this was 7,180 tamariki and rangatahi Māori, compared to 2,960 non-Māori.
Tamariki and rangatahi Māori were also more likely than non-Māori to have had multiple reports of concern made about them during 2024/25.
Critical and very urgent reports of concern for tamariki and rangatahi Māori have less timely responses
Reports of concern must be responded to in a timely way to address immediate safety or wellbeing concerns or so that needs for services and supports are identified early. Responses that do not meet timeframes may leave tamariki in unsafe situations for longer or delay the identification of needs and tamariki, rangatahi and receiving supports.
In every region, reports of concern for tamariki and rangatahi Māori were less likely to be responded to within operational timeframes than reports of concern for non-Māori. Nationally, the rate at which critical or very urgent36 reports of concern are responded to has got worse.
The response rate dropped from 90 percent in 2023/24 to 84 percent in 2024/25 for Māori. For non-Māori, the proportion dropped from 95 percent to 90 percent in 2024/25.
In 2024/25, 480 critical and very urgent reports of concern about tamariki and rangatahi Māori (out of a total of 3,070) were not responded to on time.
| Māori | 16% (480) |
| Non-Māori | 10% (210) |
Māori are more likely to have reports of concern progress to care and protection family group conferences
Our 2023/24 Outcomes for Māori report included data on the proportions dating back to 2019/20. Work previously completed by Oranga Tamariki shows that tamariki and rangatahi Māori are more likely than non-Māori to have reports of concern that progress to family group conference (FGC).37 This has not changed in 2024/25.
| Māori | 69% (3,270) |
| Non-Māori | 31% (1,470) |
The pattern of more reports of concern about Māori progressing to FGCs is longstanding This may reflect greater need or complexity. FGCs can open the door to greater support for tamariki and rangatahi and whānau. However, it could also be driven by bias in decision making, meaning tamariki and rangatahi Māori become more deeply involved with the system than necessary.
Tamariki and rangatahi Māori are more likely to be in state care or youth justice custody than non-Māori
In 2024/25, 68 percent of tamariki and rangatahi in care and protection custody38 were Māori (3,440 individuals) and 32 percent were non-Māori (1,590 individuals). Of those in youth justice custody,39 80 percent were Māori (490 individuals) and 20 percent were non-Māori (120 individuals).
Although the care and custody population has reduced over recent years, the level of overrepresentation of Māori has not changed.
Tamariki and rangatahi Māori are proceeded against more by NZ Police than non-Māori
| Māori | 59% (2,960) |
| Non-Māori | 41% (2,070) |
Ethnicity is known for 68 percent of tamariki and rangatahi proceeded against by NZ Police in 2024/25.
Tamariki and rangatahi Māori who had proceedings in 2024/25 are also likely to have had more police proceedings in their lifetime than non-Māori.
Of tamariki and rangatahi Māori with police proceedings in 2024/25, 68 percent have had more than one police proceeding in their lifetime. For non-Māori, this is 55 percent.
| Māori | 68% (659) |
| Non-Māori | 32% (314) |
Ethnicity is known for 73 percent of tamariki aged 10–13 proceeded against by NZ Police in 2024/25.
Tamariki and rangatahi Māori are proceeded against at a younger age
The average age of tamariki and rangatahi Māori at their first proceeding is 14 whereas the average age for non-Māori is 15.41 This has remained consistent over the previous two years.
Tamariki and rangatahi Māori are more likely to have a youth justice intervention
When tamariki and rangatahi offend, NZ Police decides how to proceed against them. Tamariki and rangatahi have a youth justice FGC when referred by NZ Police or when NZ Police decide to prosecute.42
| Māori | 72% (1,420) |
| Non-Māori | 28% (550) |
| Māori | 71% (2,000) |
| Non-Māori | 29% (830) |
Our 2024/25 Experiences of Care in report44 found that there has been no real improvement in compliance with the National Care Standards Regulations () by Oranga Tamariki. and in care or custody were still not receiving the minimum standard of care required by the NCS Regulations.
Even by its own measures of compliance, which are lower than the NCS Regulations, Oranga Tamariki data shows that only 33 percent of tamariki and rangatahi Māori have its core lead indicators met. This is compared to 45 percent of non-Māori.45
Oranga Tamariki has care or custody of nearly 99 percent of tamariki and rangatahi in state care, including both care and protection and youth justice.46
Tamariki and rangatahi Māori make up 68 percent of those in care and protection custody47 and 80 percent of those in youth justice custody.48
Simply put, over-representation combined with low compliance means that more tamariki and rangatahi Māori than non-Māori miss out on what they have a right to while in state care.
This combination can create disadvantages – both immediate and long term. If tamariki and rangatahi Māori in state care are less likely to have the required standards met, it makes it more challenging for them to achieve their full potential. It may also impact their long-term outcomes as adults. The disadvantages are also seen to flow on intergenerationally.
Compliance with the NCS Regulations in some key areas is poorer for Māori
Oranga Tamariki data for 2024/25 shows that compliance with the NCS Regulations is similar for tamariki and rangatahi Māori and non-Māori for the most part.49
However, compliance is poorer50 for tamariki and rangatahi Māori in some key areas. As an example, there is a 10 percent disparity for tamariki and rangatahi Māori with the NCS Regulation for social worker visits. Given there are twice as many tamariki and rangatahi Māori in care, this means that almost three times as many tamariki and rangatahi Māori as non-Māori are not visited at the required frequency.51 Social worker visits are vital opportunities to ensure tamariki and rangatahi in care are safe and their individual needs are identified and met.
| NCS Regulation | Compliance rate (Oranga Tamariki data 2024/25) | |
|---|---|---|
| Social worker visits occur, on average, at the planned frequency or, on average, at least every eight weeks | 63% | 73% |
| Needs assessments identify the identity and cultural needs of tamariki and rangatahi | 68% | 88% |
| Needs assessments identify the views of the /family group of tamariki and rangatahi | 71% | 80% |
| Plans for tamariki and rangatahi identify identity and cultural needs | 57% | 79% |
| Caregiver support plans identify access to training | 84% | 94% |
In March 2025, Oranga Tamariki identified social worker visits as a priority to improve the agency’s compliance with the NCS Regulations.52 Oranga Tamariki has shared operational data indicating that, since 1 July 2025, there has been an increase in social worker visits to tamariki and rangatahi. However, the operational data uses a measure that does not align with the NCS Regulation for social worker visits at the required frequency.53
30 Aroturuki . (2025). Towards a stronger safety net to prevent abuse of children. aroturuki.govt.nz/reports/safety-net
31 See footnote 2.
32 See footnote 9.
33 Growing Up in New Zealand. (2023, July 20). Structural disadvantage and Māori mental wellbeing growingup.co.nz/growingup-report/structural-disadvantage-and-rangatahi-maori-mental-wellbeing
34 Ihi Research. (2021). Hāhā-uri, hāhā-tea: Māori involvement in state care 1950–1999. abuseincare.org.nz/our-progress/library/v/306/haha-uri-haha-tea-maori-involvement-in-state-care-1950-1999
35 Reports of concern were made about 62,600 individual tamariki and rangatahi – ethnicity was known for 53,500 of them. Some were the subject of multiple reports of concern during the year.
36 A critical or very urgent report of concern indicates a child may have been seriously harmed or be at risk of serious harm.
37 Oranga Tamariki. (2025). Section 7AA report 2024: Ngā hua mō ngā tamariki Māori | Outcomes for tamariki Māori. orangatamariki.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/About-us/Performance-and-monitoring/Section-7AA/Section-7AA-report-Improving-outcomes-for-tamariki- Maori-2024.pdf
38 Under care and protection orders.
39 Under youth justice orders.
40 In 2024/25, 17 percent of all youth police proceedings involved tamariki aged 10–13.
41 NZ Police data we received shows that ethnicity is only known for 55 percent of first proceedings in 2024/25.
42 Tamariki and rangatahi have a youth justice FGC where they have not been arrested but NZ Police is considering whether to charge the young person with committing an offence or where NZ Police considers a child aged 10–13 is in need of care or protection because of the number, nature or magnitude of their offending. Youth justice FGCs are also usually held where NZ Police chooses to prosecute tamariki and rangatahi through the Youth Court.
43 These figures only represent those known to Oranga Tamariki and do not include all tamariki and rangatahi known to NZ Police. They include tamariki and rangatahi who had an open youth justice intervention phase in CYRAS. This means there are open actions still to be completed from the time the child or rangatahi was first referred to Oranga Tamariki for youth justice matters. These could be further court appearances for example. The intervention stays open until there is a resolution such as final orders made by the Youth Court. Some tamariki and rangatahi may have an open youth justice intervention for multiple years. They may have become known to Oranga Tamariki in a previous reporting period.
44 Aroturuki Tamariki. (2026). Experiences of Care in : Agency compliance with the National Care Standards and Related Matters Regulations. 1 July 2024 – 30 June 2025. aroturuki.govt.nz/reports/eoc-24-25
45 Oranga Tamariki reports on its compliance with the ’ in its annual report. Oranga Tamariki. (2025). Annual report 2024/25 | Pūrongo ā tau 2024/25. orangatamariki.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/About-us/Corporate-reports/Annual-Report/Annual- Report-2024-2025.pdf
46 In 2024/25, four agencies had the care or custody of almost 5,640 tamariki and rangatahi in Aotearoa – Oranga Tamariki, Open Home Foundation, Barnardos and Kōkiri Marae Keriana Olsen Trust.
47 3,500 tamariki and rangatahi Māori were in care or custody under care and protection orders in 2024/25 compared to 1,600 tamariki and rangatahi who are non-Māori.
48 480 tamariki and rangatahi Māori were in custody under youth justice orders in 2024/25 compared to almost 130 tamariki and rangatahi who are non-Māori.
49 There was no NCS Regulation where (statistically significant) compliance was higher for Māori than non-Māori.
50 The NCS Regulations that were less likely to be met in 2024/25 have differences that are statistically significant, with a 95 percent confidence level.
51 This uses Oranga Tamariki NCS Regulations compliance data from case file analysis, using a sample of tamariki and rangatahi to measure compliance. The data is not for the entire care and custody population.
52 Through the Oranga Tamariki National Care Standards Action Plan.
53 The NCS Regulations stipulate that tamariki and rangatahi must be visited at the frequency set out in their individual plans. Oranga Tamariki measures frequency as set out in plans or at a frequency of every eight weeks.