CPS data summary Quarter 3 2023-2024

• About CPS data
• Introduction
• All crime, pre-charge and prosecutions
• Rape flagged
• Adult rape flagged
• Domestic abuse flagged
• Hate crime flagged
• Casework quality
• Court Caseloads
• Regional Data
• Understanding CPS Data
• Data spreadsheets

About CPS data

The CPS does not publish official statistics. CPS data is operational management information, which can be used as an indicator of CPS performance.

Official statistics relating to crime and policing are maintained by the Home Office and Office for National Statistics.

Official statistics relating to criminal courts including caseload, timeliness, convictions, and sentencing outcomes are maintained by the Ministry of Justice.

The CPS uses operational management information to understand and address performance issues. This data is regularly shared with partners in the Criminal Justice System to improve understanding of efficiency and effectiveness, and where necessary, support the development of system-wide reforms.

CPS management information is derived from the CPS case management system, and as with any large-scale recording system, data is subject to possible errors in entry and processing. The figures are provisional and subject to change as more information is recorded by the CPS.

Introduction

This Q3 data release covers the 3-month period October-December 2023, with the previous three quarters provided to illustrate trends.

In Q3 23/24 the key points to note are as follows:

All crime, pre-charge and prosecutions

Overall pre-charge and prosecutions

The following tables show flagged cases and their outcomes. Due to the nature of CPS systems this will include cases where the eventual outcome may not relate to the flagged offence (see Understanding CPS data for further information).

Rape flagged

Adult rape flagged

Domestic abuse flagged

Hate crime flagged

Victims' Right to Review Scheme

Casework quality

Court Caseloads

The all crime caseload has continued to increase this quarter

CPS prosecutions – live caseload, receipts and finalisations

Figure 1: Line chart to show volumes of caseload, receipts and finalisations since April 2019

The live caseload has increased by a further 2% this quarter, increasing from 155,958 to 159,086.

Receipts have increased by 0.3%, from 121,621 in Q2 23/24, to 121,970 in Q3 23/24. Finalisations have decreased by 0.8% from 105,076 in Q2 23/24, to 104,195

Source: CPS Court Caseload Tables, tab 1.1 (see below to download)

The adult rape flagged caseload continues to increase with receipts outnumbering finalisations at a rate of over 2 to 1

CPS adult rape flagged prosecutions – live caseload, receipts and finalisations

Figure 2: Line chart to show volumes of adult rape flagged caseload, receipts and finalisations since April 2019

The live caseload has increased by 2.2% this quarter, increasing from 3,263 to 3,335.

Receipts have decreased by 7.9% from 1,426 in Q2 23/24 to 1,314 in Q3 23/24. 

Finalisations have increased by 10% from 559 in Q2 23/24 to 615 in Q3 23/24.

Source: CPS Court Caseload Tables, tab 1.1 (see below to download)

The magistrates’ court caseload has continued to increase this quarter 

CPS prosecutions in the magistrates’ court – live caseload, receipts and finalisations

Figure 3: Line chart to show volumes of caseload, receipts and finalisations in the magistrates’ court since April 2019

The magistrates’ court caseload has increased, up 5.5% from 76,690 in Q2 23/24 to 80,883 in Q3 23/24.

Receipt levels have increased by 0.9%, with finalisations decreasing by 2%. As receipts outnumber finalisations 1.2 to 1, the caseload continues to rise.

Source: CPS Court Caseload Tables, tab 1.2 (see below to download)

The Crown Court caseload has decreased by 1.3% this quarter

CPS prosecutions in the Crown Court – live caseload, receipts and finalisations

Figure 4: Line chart to show volumes of caseload, receipts and finalisations in the Crown Court since April 2019

The Crown Court caseload is down 1.3% this quarter, from 79,268 in Q2 23/24, to 78,203 in Q3 23/24.

Finalisations increased by 4.8% this quarter (from 17,470 to 18,300).

Source: CPS Court Caseload Tables, tab 1.3 (see below to download)

Regional level data

Key pre-charge metrics by CPS Area and Police Force Area

Figure 5: Heat map and table showing volumes of referrals, pre-charge decisions, legal decisions and charges, the charge (of legal decisions) and average days taken from referral to charge for the rolling year period January 2023 – December 2023

Source: CPS Area Level Data Tables, tab All Crime – Pre Charge (see below to download)

Key prosecution metrics by CPS Area and Police Force Area

Figure 6: Heat map and table showing volumes of prosecutions, convictions and non-convictions, the conviction and non-conviction rates and average days taken from decision to charge to finalisation for the rolling year period January 2023 – December 2023

Source: CPS Area Level Data Tables, tab All Crime – Prosecutions (see below to download)

Understanding CPS Data

In these data, a defendant represents one person (or on occasion ‘one company’) in a single set of proceedings, which may involve one or more charges. A set of proceedings usually relates to an incident or series of related incidents that are the subject of a police file. If a set of proceedings relates to more than one person, then each is counted as a defendant. Sometimes one person is involved in several sets of proceedings during the same year: if so, he or she is counted as a defendant on each occasion.

The quarterly casework data in these reports, comprise defendants dealt with by the 14 CPS Areas and the specialised casework handled by the Central Casework Divisions. This includes those proceedings previously conducted by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), the Department of Health (DoH) and the former Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office.

The data that forms the basis of this data release is derived from the CPS Case Management System (CMS) and its associated Management Information System (MIS). The data is held within a database within the MIS, based on defendants. Data has been broken down by overall volumes and proportions.

The victim data is derived from the CPS Witness Management System (WMS) and its associated Management Information System (MIS). Defendant and victim/witness data is held within separate databases within the MIS. Data cannot be correlated between the separate databases. The data tables include total data on all suspects/defendants and victims.

In relation to victim data, the WMS is a bespoke case management system designed by and for specialist Witness Care Unit (WCU) staff to effectively manage their cases. It is used by all police forces except for Hampshire and North Yorkshire. The WMS records victim and witness data and, where recorded, the system includes data reporting equality profiles of victims (and witnesses). The WMS can only provide data on the volumes of victims associated with prosecution proceedings, by sex and age (where available), rather than the outcome of those prosecutions. It does not include any data which reports the volumes of victims associated with pre-charge proceedings and therefore cannot include data on police referrals and CPS charging.

Monitoring flags

The CPS maintains a central record of pre-charge and prosecution outcomes with reference to a number of case monitoring flags, including cases involving offences of child abuse, crimes against older people, domestic abuse, hate crime, modern slavery, and rape.

CPS data are dependent upon lawyers and administrative staff identifying and correctly applying the monitoring ‘flags’ or case-markers to applicable cases that are recorded on the CPS’ electronic Case Management System (CMS).

The data that is produced through the application of the flag is primarily used for monitoring performance on all cases that involve allegations or charges where these categories of criminal offending apply. CPS data is accurate only to the extent that the flags have been correctly applied. Also note that:

• A flag is usually applied at the onset of any case referred by the police to the CPS and remains in place even if the charge is not proceeded with, is amended, or dropped
• A flag may be applied at a later point which differs from that originally identified by the police
• Although charges specifically related to a flag may be considered at the time of the pre-charge decision, the defendant may in fact be charged with another offence. Similarly, there may be cases where a person is convicted of a lesser offence than that with which they were proceeded against
• On flagging, we regularly publish management information to aid transparency and accountability, making clear any limitations. The way we measure our data allows us to track and monitor trends, including decisions to take no further action, to properly scrutinise how we’re approaching monitored cases and highlight areas for improvement.

A flag remains in place, even if a decision is taken to charge an alternate offence or where a charge is subsequently amended, to ensure we are properly applying our policies. The flag allows us to track and monitor trends, around decision to take no further action and review all monitored cases to understand how they progress and identify potential learnings.

Child abuse

Any criminal offence which falls within the criteria set out in the attached extract from Working Together to Safeguard Children and involves a victim under the age of eighteen.

Child abuse includes physical, emotional, and sexual criminal offences, as well as neglect, of a child. Such cases would normally include, for example:

• parental assault where reasonable chastisement is not a defence
• sexual offences
• child homicides
• child cruelty, including neglect
• child sexual abuse/exploitation
• harassment
• abandonment of a child
• forced marriage involving an under 18-year-old
• child sexual abuse materials
• trafficked children
• familial abduction; and
• non-recent child abuse where victim is now an adult

Cases that would not normally be expected to be flagged include:

• motoring offences where the child has been injured or killed
• medical negligence; and
• property offences.

Crime against an older person

Where the victim is aged 65 or over, any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be committed by reason of the victim’s vulnerability through age or presumed vulnerability through age.

Disability hate crime

Any incident which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards a person because of their disability or perceived disability.

Domestic abuse

Any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence, or abuse (psychological, physical, sexual, financial, or emotional) between those who are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexuality. Family members include mother, father, son, daughter, sister, and grandparents, whether related, in laws or stepfamily. This is not an exhaustive list and may also be extended to uncles, aunts, cousins etc.

Forced marriage

A person commits an offence under the law of England and Wales if he or she—

(a) uses violence, threats, or any other form of coercion for the purpose of causing another person to enter into a marriage, and

(b) believes, or ought reasonably to believe, that the conduct may cause the other person to enter into the marriage without free and full consent.

Section 121 criminalises four types of conduct:

• the use of violence, threats, or any other form of coercion for the purpose of causing a person to enter a marriage without full and free consent
• practicing deception in order that a victim leaves the UK for such a marriage (namely one which is entered into without full and free consent, because of the use of violence etc.)
• any conduct carried out with the purpose of causing a person who lacks capacity, within the meaning of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, to enter into a marriage
• any conduct carried out with the purpose of causing a person under the age of eighteen to enter into a marriage, from 27 February 2023 onwards following the 2022 legislation.

Homophobic crime

Any incident which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation.

Human trafficking / modern slavery

The following offences are flagged as human trafficking/modern slavery.

Offences committed prior to 31st July 2015, are:

• Sexual Offences Act 2003 (section 57)
• Sexual Offences Act 2003 (section 58)
• Sexual Offences Act 2003 (section 59)
• Sexual Offences Act 2003 (section 59A)
• Asylum and Immigration [Treatment of Claimants] Act 2004 section 4(1)
• Asylum and Immigration [Treatment of Claimants] Act 2004 section 4(2)
• Asylum and Immigration [Treatment of Claimants] Act 2004 section 4(3)
• Asylum and Immigration [Treatment of Claimants] Act 2004 section 4(1A)
• Asylum and Immigration [Treatment of Claimants] Act 2004 section 4(1B)
• Asylum and Immigration [Treatment of Claimants] Act 2004 section 4(1C)
• Coroners and Justice Act 2009 (Section 71)

The Modern Slavery Act 2015 came into force on 31st July 2015. The offences to be flagged after this date are:

• Modern Slavery Act 2015 (section 1(a))
• Modern Slavery Act 2015 (section 1(b))
• Modern Slavery Act 2015 (section 2)
• Modern Slavery Act 2015 (section 4(2))
• Modern Slavery Act 2015 (section 4(3))

Racist crime

Any incident which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice based on a person’s ethnicity or perceived ethnicity.

Rape

The following offences are defined and flagged as rape by the CPS.

• S1 Sexual Offences Act 1956
• S5 Sexual Offences Act 1956
• S1 Sexual Offences Act 2003
• S5 Sexual Offences Act 2003
• S30(3) Sexual Offences act 2003
• An attempt to commit any of the above offences under the Criminal Attempts Act 1981
• Incitement or conspiracy to commit any of the above offences.

Adult rape

The adult rape data is a subset of the rape flagged data and is derived from cases that have a rape monitoring flag applied but are not also flagged as child abuse.

Religious crime

Any incident which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice based on a person’s religion or perceived religion.

So-called honour based abuse

An incident or crime involving violence, threats of violence, intimidation coercion or abuse (including psychological, physical, sexual, financial, or emotional abuse) which has or may have been committed to protect or defend the honour of an individual, family and/ or community for alleged or perceived breaches of the family and/or community’s code of behaviour.

Transphobic crime

Any incident which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s transgender identity or perceived transgender identity.

Pre-charge decision data

Pre-charge receipts

The total number of suspects referred by the police to the CPS for early advice or a charging decision.

The number of pre-charge receipts, for different crime types, referred by the police relies on (a) the police identifying and flagging the cases, by suspect, prior to being referred to CPS and (b) CPS administrators identifying and flagging those cases on the CPS Casework Management System, when they are first registered.

Pre-charge receipts – the number of cases received from the police for a charging decision or early advice by the CPS, where a consultation has been completed:

Referrals received from the police for a charging decision where a consultation has been completed: The total number of suspects referred by the police to the CPS for a charging decision where the first legal consultation has been completed. It is only possible to tell what type of consultation a suspect has been referred for (i.e., for a charging decision) once the first consultation has been completed. A first legal consultation can be completed when the principles set down in the Code for Crown Prosecutors can be applied when making a charging decision. The time the data refers to is the time that the case was received by the CPS not the time when the consultation was completed.

The principles in the Code are applied when a prosecutor makes a legal decision. These are the Full Code Test when a case has passed both the evidential stage and the public interest stage and, in limited circumstances where the Full Code Test is not met, the Threshold Test may apply. Threshold Test cases are those where the seriousness or circumstances of the case justify the making of an immediate charging decision and there are substantial grounds to object to bail.

The data provided excludes any consultations which occurred prior to the application of the Full Code or Threshold Tests, such as early investigative advice requests. The data is therefore only counted and reported from the point of a Full Code or Threshold Test review. Non-legal consultations, such as those which are finalised as ‘Pending Response – Further Investigation’ are not counted in this data.

Referrals received from the police for early advice where a consultation has been completed: The total number of suspects referred by the police to the CPS for early advice where the first consultation has been completed. It is only possible to tell that an early advice has been referred and an action plan returned to the police once the first consultation has been completed (with the review type set as Early Advice). The time the data refers to is the time that the case was received by the CPS not the time when the consultation was completed.

The early advice referral data includes all consultations which occurred prior to the application of the Full Code or Threshold Tests. The data is therefore only counted and reported based on the first review type.

Comparing referrals received from the police for a charging decision where a consultation has been completed and referrals received from the police for early advice where a consultation has been completed.

It is important to note that the total referrals for a legal charging decision and referrals for early advice will not sum to the total of all referrals in each period. This is because the data is recorded retrospectively at the point of the first legal consultation or early advice review. This means that the data refreshes each time the report is run, meaning that volumes reported, in any given time-period, will always be subject to change as case files are updated.

Pre-Charge caseload

The Total Live Pre-Charge Caseload is extracted as a snapshot at the end of each fiscal year quarter and comprises the number of suspects waiting for the CPS to provide early advice or a charging decision, or with the police for further investigation.

Timeliness to charge

The timeliness of the decision to charge includes both CPS time and Police time and is a calculation of the number of calendar days that have elapsed since the first submission of a case was sought by the police, to the date in which the last decision was made to charge.

The data includes cases where the police have submitted a file for early advice as well as those for charging decision. The data includes cases where the police were required to submit further evidence prior to a decision to charge. This generally includes more than one submission and more investigation.

The publication has now been expanded to include a breakdown of timeliness where early advice has been sought and given and additionally where the referral was for a charging decision from the outset. Cases submitted for early advice are sent to the CPS during the investigative process and are therefore likely to record a higher number of average days to reach the point where the file is complete enough for a charging decision to be considered.

Rape and serious sexual offences (RASSO) investigations can be complex in nature and typically involve the review of a large quantity of evidence. In most cases suspects are released under investigation prior to a charging decision being made by the CPS and where the police seek a charging decision in such circumstances the CPS cannot authorise charges until the Full Code Test set out in the Code is met. The timeliness of a charging decision is determined by three key factors: whether the case has been sent to the CPS for early advice during the investigative process, how quickly the police can complete the necessary enquiries; and how quickly the CPS can then review the evidence provided by the police and finalise the charging decision.

Timeliness to charge (mean average)

Mean Average: The mean is the number you get by dividing the sum of a set of values by the number of values in the set.

The ‘mean average days from referral to charge’ is calculated by dividing the sum of the number of calendar days by the number of suspects with a charge decision.

The number of calendar days being the days that have elapsed between each suspect being referred (for a charging decision or early advice) and the date each decision to charge was made.

Timeliness to charge (median)

Median Average: the median is the middle number in a set of values when those values are arranged from smallest to largest.

The ‘median average days from referral to charge’ is calculated by arranging the suspects by their number of calendar days in order from smallest to largest, and then identifying the middle number.

The number of calendar days being the days that have elapsed between each suspect being referred (for a charging decision or early advice) and the date each decision to charge was made.

Percentage of consultations in 28 Days

This measure is the proportion of pre-charge consultations completed within 28 days of receipt of material. The consultation to which the measure applies may come from the first submission of the file, or the second or subsequent submission following an action plan. 

Cases not included in the measure:

• Cases in which the suspect is in custody and the charging advice is urgent and have a target of 3 hours rather than 28 days. Only certain police forces (who are live on the charging model) identify these consultations
• Consultations with a ‘Pending Response – Further Investigation’ outcome are excluded, because these are not legal reviews – they are a means to administratively finalise cases when (for example) there has been no update to an action plan after 3 months
• Early Advice consultations are excluded, because they deal with early-stage investigative advice before a pre-charge decision is sought
• Files rejected at triage which are sent back to the police and not submitted for a consultation.

Average consultations

A case referred to the CPS for a pre-charge decision may require more than one consultation before the charging decision can be made. Average consultations are derived for each suspect by dividing the number of completed consultations recorded on pre-charge cases by the number of suspects with completed charging decisions.

Pre-charge decisions

Of all the suspects referred by the police, pre-charge decisions are those where CPS has completed making a decision on whether to charge, take no further action, recommend an out of court disposal, administratively finalise or ‘other.’ The volume of pre-charge decisions, for each different crime type, completed by the CPS will be a total of those referred by the police (flagged by the police and CPS at registration) together with any flagged by CPS prosecutors and administrators later, but before the final pre-charge decision is completed. The total pre-charge decision data is based on the date the charging advice was completed and provided to the police. Therefore, data in this data release may include pre-charge decisions on cases referred by the police to the CPS in previous quarters or years.

Pre-charge legal decisions are: charge, take no further action or recommend an out of court disposal.

Charged

Charging decisions are where CPS is satisfied that the legal test for prosecution, set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors is met there is enough evidence to provide a ‘realistic prospect of conviction’ against each defendant and the prosecution is in the public interest.

No Further Action

NFA decisions are where CPS has decided that no further action should be taken; the case cannot proceed to charge as it does not meet the Code for Crown Prosecutor test, for either evidential or public interest reasons.

Out of court disposals

A simple caution, conditional caution, reprimand, final warning, or TIC (taken into consideration) recommended by the CPS at pre-charge stage.

Pre-charge non-legal decisions are pending response – further investigation finalised and ‘other.’

Pending response – further investigation

Decisions recorded as Pending response – further investigation (formally known as Administrative Finalisations) are finalised in the CPS Case Management System for administrative reasons following any further requests of the investigating authority. These are not legal decisions and may not be the end of the case. 

The change in the term used is designed to allow better understanding by the public and provide a clearer explanation of what has happened to the case. This follows recommendations to change the terminology used by Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate and in the November 2020 shadow report: The Decriminalisation of Rape. A report by The Centre for Women’s Justice, the End Violence against Women Coalition, et al. in response to the England and Wales Governments “end to end” Review of the Criminal Justice System’s Response to Rape. 

The reasons for recording a pending response – further investigation outcome include:

• Early advice provided case returned to the police – this reason is selected when early advice has been given to the police with an action plan and if no response is received within one month, the case will be finalised administratively as pending response - further investigation
• Action plan or rejection sent, pending response – this reason is selected when three months have passed following charging advice where the police have been asked to provide further material or where a file submission has been rejected at triage because items are missing. The police have not responded to the action plan or rejection and provided the additional material to allow a legal consultation to take place
• Police decision to take no further action – this reason is used where the case has been returned to the police, with or without a lawyer’s advice and/or actions, and the police decide to take no further action on the allegation
• Charge advised, pending response – this reason is used for cases where the CPS have advised the police to charge but the suspect has not been charged, due to the suspect not answering police bail or being located, will also be administratively finalised. If the suspect is subsequently located and charged the case is reopened in CMS
• Other including death of suspect, administratively finalised – this reason is used on cases where the suspect has died, or the result of the charging decision is not known or has not been given for that suspect.

Following a records management review, the volume of cases that were finalised pending response – further investigation in Q2 23/24 increased by 50.4%.

Specific offences

The CPS does not hold information detailing the conviction rates of specific offences; however, management information is held showing the volume of offences charged, in which a prosecution commenced and reached a first hearing in the magistrates’ courts.

• The data relates to the number of offences and not the number of individual defendants
• It is often the case that an individual defendant is charged with more than one offence against the same victim
• No data are held showing the outcome or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at finalisation.

Prosecution outcomes data

CPS outcomes are recorded on a defendant basis. In some cases, a number of defendants may be prosecuted together. All defendants may be convicted; all may be acquitted; or some may be convicted, and others acquitted.

Conviction outcomes

Guilty pleas:
The defendant pleads guilty. The data includes defendants who pleaded guilty to some charges and were either convicted or dismissed after trial of other charges.

Convictions after trial:
The defendant pleads not guilty but is convicted by the magistrates or by a jury after evidence is heard.

Proofs in absence:
These are mostly minor motoring matters which are heard by the court in the absence of the defendant.

Non-conviction outcomes

Acquittals/dismissals after trial:
The defendant pleads not guilty and, following a trial, is acquitted by the jury or proceedings are dismissed by the magistrates.

Prosecutions dropped:
Consideration of the evidence and of the public interest may lead the CPS to discontinue or drop proceedings at any time before the start of the trial. The figures include both cases discontinued in advance of the hearing, where the CPS offered no evidence and those withdrawn at court. Also included are cases in which the defendant was bound over to keep the peace.

Administratively finalised (post charge):
When the prosecution cannot proceed because the defendant has failed to appear at court and a Bench Warrant has been issued for his or her arrest; or the defendant has died; been found unfit to plead; or where proceedings are adjourned indefinitely. If the police trace a missing defendant, then proceedings can continue.

Discharged:
Committal proceedings in which the defendant is discharged.

Reasons for non-convictions

All cases resulting in an outcome other than a conviction are allocated a reason explaining why the case failed. If more than one reason applies, the principal reason is selected. Cases resulting in a post charge administrative finalisation are allocated the reason 'Admin Finalised'; no other reason need be recorded. If the defendant pleads not guilty, evidence is heard and the defence is required to present its case; and the case then results in acquittal or dismissal, then the reason 'Acquittal after trial' is allocated; no other reason applies. A reason must be allocated for all other non-conviction outcomes i.e., discontinued, withdrawn, no evidence offered, no case to answer, prosecution stayed, indictment stayed, left on file, judge directed acquittal, discharged committal.

Acquittals after trial: The defendant is found not guilty by the magistrates or jury after a contested hearing in which the defence is called on to present its case. (Cases dismissed no case to answer or judge directed acquittals are not included).

Post-charge administrative finalisation: When a prosecution cannot proceed because a defendant: has failed to appear at court and a Bench Warrant has been issued for his or her arrest; or the defendant has died or is found unfit to plead or where proceedings are adjourned indefinitely. If a Bench Warrant is executed the case may be reopened.

Victim/witness Reasons: This reason should be used when the evidence of the victim/witness supports the prosecution case, but one or all the following apply:

• the victim/witness does not attend, or 
• refuses to be called, to give evidence, or 
• withdraws/retracts a complaint, and 
• includes victim/witnesses who have been intimidated but it is inappropriate to compel them to attend court. 

and

If the evidence of the victim/witness fails to support the prosecution of the defendant including issues of credibility leading to a non-conviction outcome, but the victim/witness has not retracted.

Data shows a breakdown showing the volume and proportion of non-convictions due to victim reasons and due to witness reasons separately.

Disclosure reasons: These are reasons identifying where an issue with the disclosure of unused material occurred including timeliness or failure to provide material. The disclosure reasons can be disaggregated to provide more detailed analysis of the reason for the non-conviction outcome.

• Police/Investigator fault, including the timeliness and quality of disclosure – this reason applies when issues arising in the unused material were not dealt with adequately by the investigator, including failure to bring material to the attention of the prosecutor in a timely way and failing to provide schedules or requested material
• CPS fault, including timeliness and quality of disclosure – this reason applies when issues arising in the unused material were not dealt with adequately by the prosecutor, including failure to review material and incorrect decision making on disclosure
• Other party fault, including timeliness and quality of disclosure - applies when issues in the unused material were the fault of a third party, for example in failing to provide access to relevant material in a timely way or refusing to allow access to material required to enable any trial to be fair
• No fault: Timeliness and quality acceptable but disclosure was a factor - applies if the case ended because of issues with the content of unused material but in circumstances where neither investigator, prosecutor nor third party were at fault
• No fault: Public interest immunity issues - applies if the case is stopped because disclosure of material is required which, because of its nature, would have the effect of disclosing that which the prosecutor considers should not in the public interest be disclosed.

Evidential reasons: These include all other evidential reasons.

Public interest reasons: These include all other public interest reasons.

Other: This applies to cases where there is a CPS process failure, such as papers or evidence not being served and the court refuses to grant an adjournment, where a non-conviction outcome stems from either an issue of diplomatic immunity; or the deportation or extradition of the defendant or where no other reason applies.

Timeliness from the decision to charge to prosecution finalisation

The average timeliness from charge to finalisation includes both cases prosecuted in magistrates’ courts and those prosecuted at the Crown Court and is a calculation of the average number of calendar days that have elapsed from the date charges were authorised by CPS against suspects until the finalisation of the prosecution case. The timeliness data includes the time taken by the police to charge a suspect once the decision to authorise a charge or charges has been made by the CPS. Data is only available in respect of charging decisions made by the CPS. No corresponding data is held about cases charged by the police and subsequently prosecuted by the CPS.

The total time it takes to process a case through the criminal justice system is also dependent on factors outside of the CPS’s control, for example the time taken by the police to investigate a matter and when the case is listed in court (if that is appropriate), which is a matter for HM Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS). The data includes cases which are completed in magistrates’ courts and, more serious and complex, cases which proceed to the Crown Court. The precise time to list a case in court is a matter for HMCTS and the length of time cases take in court depends on the nature and complexity of the matters in question and whether matters are admitted or contested by the defendant.

Court caseloads

The CPS monitors incoming, outgoing and current caseloads in the magistrates’ court and at the Crown Court.

The incoming caseload is the total number of prosecution receipts in each month period. In the magistrates’ court the total prosecution receipts comprise both cases charged by the police and those cases referred to the CPS for a pre-charge decision in which the CPS took the decision to charge. The data shows the number of defendants listed for a first hearing at a magistrates' court. The Crown Court prosecution receipts are those defendants who are sent to the Crown Court for trial or sentence.

The outgoing caseload is the total number of prosecution finalisations in each month period. Completed prosecution outcomes comprise convictions (guilty pleas, convictions after trial and cases proved in the absence of the defendant) and non-convictions (prosecutions dropped by the CPS, discharges, acquittals after trial and administrative finalisations).

The caseload, often referred to as the ‘live caseload’, is a snapshot of the total number of defendants whose prosecution has not been completed at the end of the month period. It comprises the number of defendants in magistrates’ courts awaiting summary prosecution, transfer to the Crown Court for trial following magistrates’ direction or defendant election and a small number of non-criminal proceedings and the number of defendants awaiting trial or sentence at the Crown Court.

Magistrates’ Courts Live Caseload is extracted as a snapshot at the end of each month and comprises the number of defendants awaiting summary prosecution, transfer to the Crown Court for trial following magistrates’ direction or defendant election and a small number of non-criminal proceedings such as applications for the destruction of dangerous dogs, breaches of the peace and forfeiture of pornographic material.

Crown Court Live Caseload is extracted as a monthly snapshot at the end of each month and comprises the number of defendants awaiting trial or sentence.

Principal offence category data

The Principal Offence Category indicates the most serious offence with which the defendant is charged at the time the prosecution was finalised. Where the nature of the charges alters during the life of a case, the Principal Offence at the time of finalisation may be different than would have seemed appropriate at an earlier stage of proceedings. In all such cases the Principal Offence category to be recorded is that which applies at finalisation, regardless of whether this is more serious, or less serious, than would have applied earlier in the life of the case.

Offences are divided into 12 categories: homicide, offences against the person, sexual offences, burglary, robbery, theft & handling, fraud & forgery, criminal damage, drugs offences, public order, motoring, and all other offences excluding motoring.

CPS records do not identify the principal offence for cases resulting in an administrative finalisation or where the defendant has been committed for sentence. These are excluded from the Prosecution Data Tables and therefore the sum of the Principal Offence Categories will not add up to the overall totals.

Pre-charge principal offence category data

The pre-charge principal offence category indicates the most serious alleged offence being considered at the first consultation for that suspect irrespective of the outcome of the charging decision. If a decision is made to charge a suspect, the pre-charge principal offence category should be allocated based on the most serious offence considered not the most serious offence which may be subsequently charged. In all such cases the principal offence category to be recorded is that which applied at the first consultation, regardless of whether this is more serious, or less serious, than would have applied later in the life of the case.

Offences are divided into 12 categories: homicide, offences against the person, sexual offences, burglary, robbery, theft & handling, fraud & forgery, criminal damage, drugs offences, public order, motoring, and all other offences excluding motoring.

CPS records do not identify the pre-charge principal offence for cases resulting in a pending response – further investigation outcome. These are excluded from the Pre-Charge Data Tables and therefore the sum of the Pre-Charge Principal Offence Categories will not add up to the overall totals.

Demographic data

The equality profiles of defendants and victims, by sex and age are reported in the quarterly data tables. Additionally, ethnicity is reported for defendants only. All information about the defendant is received by the CPS from the police or other investigating authority.

Sex: data on the sex of defendants and victims are held in the CPS Management Information System, however the records are not complete. The sex of the defendant is unknown in some cases and may not be recorded in others.

Throughout our publication we refer to sex rather than gender, because the binary classification better reflects how individuals are generally reported or managed through the CJS. For example, prisons are either male or female institutions, with prisoners normally placed based on their legally recognised gender. However, given the range of recording practises throughout the CJS, it is likely that most recording includes a mixture of physiological and personal identity. Similarly, we refer to females/males and women/men in this publication, as a reflection of the binary classification in use.

Age: data on the age of defendants and victims are collated by the CPS with reference to a series of age bands calculated from the date of birth recorded by the police. This means that the age band defendants are allocated to represents their current age rather than their age at the time the offence was committed. Individual ages cannot be disaggregated from these bands. The age band information should not be viewed as a comprehensive record of defendants' ages. Defendants with no date of birth recorded are allocated to a 'not provided' category.

Ethnicity: up to the end of January 2021, data on the ethnicity of defendants were collected by the CPS in accordance with the agreed Criminal Justice System definitions for the 16+1 self-defined ethnicity (SDE) categories. From February 2021, a change was implemented on the Case Management System to provide for the collection of defendant and complainant ethnicity data in accordance with the agreed Criminal Justice System definitions for the 18+1 self-defined ethnicity (SDE) categories. Police forces are required to use the SDE 18+1 codes when spoken contact has taken place and an individual has been given an opportunity to state their self-perceived ethnicity. Defendants may not state their ethnicity, or it may not be recorded. Ethnicity data are provided by the police and are subject to varying levels of error and omission at local levels. We do not consider therefore that full reliance can be placed on this information.

Victims' Right to Review process

The VRR scheme is a two-stage process where requests can be reviewed by either local offices or a specialist Unit within HQ. In the first instance, that decision is reviewed by a manager in the local area. If he or she overturns the original decision, and if the victim so requests, the case may be further reviewed by the CPS Appeals and Review Unit (ARU). The ARU is a national CPS unit staffed with experienced specialist lawyers who conduct a fresh independent review of the evidence in every case referred to them. If an ARU lawyer decides that the original decision was wrong, and a prosecution is required to maintain confidence in the Criminal Justice System, that original decision will be overturned and proceedings reinstituted. The figures provided in the table represent all overturned decisions where the original decision was found to be wrong regardless of which stage the final decision was made.

Since the 2022/23 publication the CPS has used a new, more accurate calculation to represent the number of decisions that could have been subject to a request under the VRR scheme. This has reduced the number of decisions that could be subject to a review and therefore the overturn rate has increased. This calculation uses the Identified Victim flag to identify cases that could be subject to a request under the VRR scheme.  

Publications prior to 2022/23 included cases that did not have a princpal offence category attributed to them. From 2022/23 all cases have had a principal offence category allocated to them.

The CPS operates both Feedback and Complaints schemes to deal with concerns about legal decisions which do not fall within the scope of the VRR scheme.

Casework quality data

The percentage of post-trial cases where the decisions to charge and proceed to trial are correct.

The CPS Casework Quality success measure is underpinned by the Casework Quality Assessment (CQA) second line assurance mechanism launched in January 2022. This metric is intended to support the priority outcome: ‘improve public safety by delivering justice through independent and fair prosecutions.’

The measure provides data showing the proportions recorded against this key metric:

• The percentage of cases where the decisions to charge and proceed to trial are correct, based on a dip sample of post-trial cases finalised in the previous quarter from the CPS magistrates’ court, Crown Court and rape and serious sexual offences units.

The data produced is based on random dip sampling of cases by Legal Assurance Managers in the CPS Legal Assurance team to an agreed, consistent methodology. Cases are reviewed a quarter in arrears. 210 cases are reviewed by quarter, fifteen per CPS area, consisting of 84 magistrates’ court, 84 Crown Court and 42 RASSO cases.

In addition -

• Cases are selected at random and reviewed according to an agreed question and guidance process
• The data only includes finalised cases that went to trial
• The data produced is counted on an individual case basis. One case may involve several defendants and/or several counts but will be counted once. Only defendants who were the subject of a trial are included
• Cases from the Central Casework Divisions and Area Complex Casework Units have been excluded, as well as cases within Crown Court Units in exceptional circumstances
• These measures are published six rather than three months in arrears because the sampled cases are drawn from cases finalised during the previous three-month period. For example, the finalised case sample reviewed between January – March 2022 was drawn from the October – December 2021 period. These review arrangements will continue through subsequent quarterly periods; the January – March 2022 data will be reviewed between April – June 2022 and so on.

These data have been sampled and manually reviewed based on records held in the CPS’s administrative IT system, the Case Management Information System (CMS). These records are maintained for internal use only and as with any large-scale recording system are subject to errors with data entry and processing.

Live caseload

The Total Live Pre-Charge Caseload is extracted as a snapshot at the end of each fiscal year quarter and comprises the number of suspects waiting for the CPS to provide early advice or a charging decision, or with the police for further investigation.

Total Live Prosecution Caseload is extracted as a snapshot at the end of each month. It comprises the number of defendants in magistrates’ courts awaiting summary prosecution, transfer to the Crown Court for trial following magistrates’ direction or defendant election and a small number of non-criminal proceedings and the number of defendants awaiting trial or sentence at the Crown Court.

Magistrates’ Courts Live Caseload is extracted as a snapshot at the end of each month and comprises the number of defendants awaiting summary prosecution, transfer to the Crown Court for trial following magistrates’ direction or defendant election and a small number of non-criminal proceedings such as applications for the destruction of dangerous dogs, breaches of the peace and forfeiture of pornographic material.

Crown Court Live Caseload is extracted as a monthly snapshot at the end of each month and comprises the number of defendants awaiting trial or sentence.

Regional data

Pre-charge regional data

The data reported in the police force area tables show the proceedings that originated in the stated Police Force. Cases referred to the CPS for a charging decision or early advice may not necessarily be completed in the geographical area covered by that Force or the corresponding CPS Area due to cross border transfer of cases and the referral of others to the Specialist Casework Teams.

Prosecution regional data

The data reported in the police force area tables show the proceedings that originated in the stated Police Force. Prosecution cases completed by the CPS may not necessarily be completed in the geographical area covered by that Force or the corresponding CPS Area due to cross border transfer of cases and the referral of others to the Specialist Casework Teams.

Data caveats

Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) caseload data are derived from its Case Management System (CMS) and associated Management Information System (MIS). The CPS collects data to assist in the effective management of its prosecution functions. The CPS does not collect data which constitutes official statistics as defined in the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007.

These data have been drawn from the CPS's administrative IT system, which, as with any large-scale recording system, is subject to errors with data entry and processing. The figures are provisional and subject to change as more information is recorded by the CPS. We are committed to improving the quality of our data and from mid-June 2015 introduced a new data assurance regime which may explain some unexpected variance in some future data sets.

The official statistics relating to crime and policing are maintained by the Home Office and the official statistics relating to sentencing, criminal court proceedings, offenders brought to justice, the courts and the judiciary are maintained by the Ministry of Justice.

Data spreadsheets