Crime and Justice Statistics User Day 5 th March 2012 : Criminal Justice Social Work (CJSW) – future data collections

1. Crime and Justice Statistics User Day 5th March 2012 :Criminal Justice Social Work (CJSW) – future data collections Alan Fleming Project Manager – Review of CJSW Statistics Scottish Government, Justice Analytical Services

2. About current CJSW data • Collected from all 32 local authorities • Collected annually for financial year • Contains aggregate tables for completion – circa 60 • Generally supplied to the Scottish Government in July/August • Published around the following December or January

3. Topics covered by CJSW collection up to 2010-11 • CJSW reports (previously social enquiry reports) • Community service orders (CSOs) • Probation orders (POs) • Supervised attendance orders (SAOs) • Drug treatment & testing orders (DTTOs) • Statutory throughcare (community & custody) • Others e.g. home circumstance reports, voluntary assistance, diversion from prosecution, bail supervision

4. New addition for 2011-12 Community Payback Orders • Introduced by the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 • Available to be issued by judges/sheriffs/ JPs since 1 February 2011 • Replaces CSOs, POs and SAOs (not DTTOs) • CPO can only apply where offence(s) committed on or after 1 Feb 2011

5. About CPOs (1) • A CPO can contain anything from 1 to 9 requirements • Every order must contain one or both of: • Unpaid work or other activity reqt, • Offender supervision reqt • Unpaid work or other activity reqt minimum of 20 hours and maximum of 300 hours • Offender supervision reqt generally a min. of 6 months and a max. of 3 years

6. About CPOs (2) • If (and only if) an offender supervision reqt is imposed, 1 or more of the following 7 reqts can also be imposed: • Conduct • Programme • Alcohol treatment • Compensation • Drug treatment • Mental health • Residence

7. Why is SG performing a review of what it collects for CJSW? • Information collected on same basis for over a decade • Limitations to the usefulness of aggregate data • Introduction of CPOs a major catalyst • Need to reflect modern day customer demands • Need to collect data in the most efficient but least burdensome way

8. How review conducted • Identification of appropriate stakeholders in late 2009 • Stakeholder meeting in March 2010 • Formation of smaller working group (circa 15 members) • Working group met on nine occasions across 2010 and 2011 • Recommendations made by working group put to wider set of stakeholders for comment

9. Main outcomes from working group • Unit level data to be collected for CPOs and DTTOs from 2012-13 • Prior to 2012-13: • 12 aggregate tables for completion by LAs for 2011-12 • During 2011, monthly data obtained from SCS on CPOs imposed • Consideration also being given to unit level collection for CJSW reports (but later than 2012-13)

10. Why unit level data? • Intended to be material which local authorities themselves would collect for own purposes • Saves LAs from completing large number of aggregate tables • Main benefit that it increases the volume and depth of information that can be produced • LAs also able to use the data to answer own internal questions • Better addresses data quality issues • Precedence with other unit level data from LASW depts e.g. CLAS, Home Care

11. CPO data to be collected • Collected for 3 different stages of process: Stage 1 • Orders commenced in the course of the year Stage 2 • Orders in existence at the end of the year Stage 3 • Orders which terminated or were completed in the course of the year • Expected approx 15K to 20K CPOs annually, with collection of 130 different variables

12. Key pieces of data to be collected • Personal details e.g. unique ID (“S no.”), sex, DOB, ethnicity, employment status • Requirements imposed initially and (if app) length of supervision and hours of work • Timescale of such points as when initial offender contact and when work began • Details (via stage 2 & 3 data) of any new/ amended reqts introduced • No. of breach applications made • How order ended and outcome at finish

13. Questions unit level data can answer • Basic info such as how many CPOs issued, how many terminated, how many different requirements used • But much more than that! For example: • What proportion of orders commenced in a particular period were successfully completed? • How did this vary by the type of requirements in the CPO e.g. how success rate for alcohol treatment reqt compares with drug treatment reqt?

14. Questions unit level data can answer • For orders with unpaid work, how does the completion rate vary according to the number of hours of work? • How do the average number of breaches per order vary between those which have court progress reviews and those which don’t. • Are young people more or less likely to complete their orders than older individuals? How big is the difference? • Potential to link the data to data already available for reconvictions – how likely are people given different CPO reqts to reoffend?

15. CPO unit level data - timescales February 2011 • Data to be collected agreed in principle July 2011 • Some further minor changes made to data list • 9 local authorities selected to pilot the data collection April to November 2011 • Completion of data specifications, building of data input system (including error checks) and testing of system

16. CPO unit level data - timescales Since spring 2011 • LAs working with IT providers to make changes to systems to accommodate CPOs and the info needed First half of 2012 • Data pilot exercise open until end of July 2012 – 1 council has thus far loaded data • SG work closely with pilot LAs over data issues and, if necessary, make changes to data collection system

17. CPO unit level data - timescales Autumn 2012 • 1 or more demonstration days planned for local authorities From April 2012 • LAs record full detailed information required for unit level data and liaise with SG over any issues April 2013 • SG request 2012-13 data from LAs - data to be provided by end July 2013. End 2013 / early 2014 • Publication of 2012-13 CPO data

18. Advice if considering a unit collection in future • Allow plenty of time - new collections need plenty of “bedding-in” time • Ensure plenty of stakeholder liaison • Ensure data demands are a) truly needed and, b) able to serve the required purpose – no “collect it in case we are asked for it” • Ensure all involved are properly consulted and involved (e.g. IT security)

19. Plans for future • Assess success (and learn lessons from) the CPO and DTTO unit level collections • Work towards establishing unit level collection for CJSW reports in 2013-14 • Following separate review of throughcare (RRP2), look at whether this and other areas could be collected at unit level in future • Look at whether there are organisations other than LAs which are best placed to provide certain data

20. Some useful links • CJSW Review Sharepoint site (agendas, minutes, variable lists etc.): https://www.scotxed.net/criminaljusticesw/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx • CJSW statistics bulletins (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Crime-Justice/PubSocialWork) and accompanying tables (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Crime-Justice/Datasets/SocialWork) • CPO monthly numbers 2011 (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Crime-Justice/Datasets/CPOs)