What has Operation Grange published about its findings and what investigative steps remain open?
Executive summary
Operation Grange publicly set out that its initial task was an investigative review of all prior inquiries into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance and that, since becoming a full investigation in 2013, it has worked with Portuguese and German authorities to pursue specific, focused lines of inquiry [1]. The Met says the vast majority of the review work has been completed and that the team has been repeatedly scaled back to a small number of officers following those focused lines of inquiry, even while funding extensions have been granted to keep particular leads open [2] [3] [4] [5].
1. What Operation Grange has published about its findings
The Metropolitan Police have published that Operation Grange consolidated and re-examined tens of thousands of documents and disparate international material, reviewed reported sightings and checked hundreds of suspects and sex offenders, and in doing so completed the bulk of the review phase of the investigation [2]. Public statements from the Met and from the McCanns acknowledge that while the force “do not know what happened to Madeleine,” the work has produced “a small number of focused lines of inquiry” that justified retaining a much smaller, ongoing team [3] [2] [6]. The force has also publicly confirmed ongoing cooperation with Portuguese and German law enforcement as part of those lines of inquiry [1] [5].
2. What the publications reveal about resources, staffing and funding
The Met’s disclosures and parliamentary answers show Operation Grange has repeatedly received Home Office contingency funding extensions and special grants over the years, pushing cumulative spend into the millions and with continuing annual allocations to keep a small team active [4] [7] [5] [8]. Media reports and Freedom of Information material indicate the team has been reduced from dozens of officers during the review phase to only a handful of part‑time staff in recent years — often reported as three officers and one staff member — a fact the Met acknowledges while saying resourcing is “flexed” according to new information [2] [9] [7] [10].
3. Where public reporting highlights investigative progress — and where it does not
Reports point to focused activity on particular leads — including, as publicly stated, liaison with German authorities who have identified a suspect in their separate inquiries — but the Met has not published forensic or operational detail that would identify active suspects or disclose current investigative tactics, citing the risk of compromising an ongoing criminal investigation [5] [11]. Press and campaign sources emphasise the Met’s painstaking collation of material and checks of thousands of leads and sightings, but the publicly available material stops short of releasing the operational findings or evidence that substantively narrow the list of plausible scenarios in open reporting [2] [6].
4. What investigative steps the Met says remain open
According to Met statements and recent funding approvals, Operation Grange continues to support international enquiries and pursue “a small number of focused lines of enquiry,” using limited staff to follow up specific leads, and the Home Office has continued to award grants to enable those actions [1] [3] [7] [8]. The force’s public posture is that while the large review is complete, targeted investigative work — cross-border evidence gathering, follow-ups on intelligence and liaison with Portuguese and German counterparts — is still being undertaken where necessary [1] [10] [8].
5. Constraints, alternative perspectives and gaps in the public record
Independent commentators and former officers have criticised the small remaining team as insufficient for substantial new work and suggested some funding merely sustains the inquiry’s existence as much as it advances it, while the Met counters that resources are sized to active leads and that disclosure would prejudice the investigation [9] [11]. The publicly available record—press releases, parliamentary answers and campaign updates—documents the investigation’s scope, funding and cooperation but does not permit assessment of the evidential weight behind current leads nor reveal what operational steps (e.g., searches, warrants or forensic analyses) remain authorised or planned; those specifics have been withheld on grounds of protecting an ongoing criminal inquiry [11] [10].