CPS data summary Quarter 2 2022-2023

• Introduction
• Overall pre-charge and prosecutions
• Rape
• Domestic Abuse
• Hate crime
• Impact of COVID-19
• About CPS data
• Understanding CPS data definitions and caveats
• Data spreadsheets

Introduction

This Q2 data release covers the 3-month period 1 July 2022 – 30 September 2022, with the previous three quarters provided to illustrate trends.

In Q2 22/23 the key points to note are as follows:

• Referrals to the CPS have increased in Rape and Domestic Abuse this quarter – up 3.5% and 3.7% respectively. 
• The volume of suspects charged with Rape increased by 13.7% from 666 in Q1 22/23 to 757 in Q2 22/23. 
• Charge rates have increased for All Crime (for the third consecutive quarter), up 0.6 percentage points to 79.4% in Q2 22/23. However, Charge rates have seen slight reductions across Rape, Domestic Abuse and Hate Crime this quarter. 
• The average time for the police and CPS to charge has increased this quarter in All Crime (up just over 3 days on Q1 22/23 total of 42.7 days) and Rape (up just over a week on Q1 22/23 total of 168.5 days). 
• The live caseload in the Crown Court has increased by 6.9% this quarter from 69,786 in Q1 22/23 to 74,587 in Q2 22/23. Receipts into the Crown Court have remained relatively static (increasing by only 0.4% this quarter), however the ability to finalise cases has been affected by the Bar strike, with finalisations down 15.3% from 14,569 in Q1 to 12,340 in Q2. 
• Completed prosecutions decreased by 0.7% from 99,797 in Q1 22/23 to 99,117 in Q2 22/23. Whilst the magistrates’ court recorded a small increase in prosecutions, the Crown Court recorded a reduction of 15.3%, from 14,569 in Q1 22/23 to 12,340 in Q2 22/23. Completed prosecutions have reduced across Rape, Domestic Abuse and Hate Crime also this quarter. 
• Alongside completed prosecution volume reductions, conviction rates have also dropped across the board – with All Crime reducing from 83.0% in Q1 22/23 to 81.9% in Q2 22/23, Rape reducing from 69.1% to 61.9%, Domestic Abuse reducing from 77.8% to 75.7% and Hate Crime reducing from 84.0% to 83.5%.

Overall pre-charge and prosecutions

Rape

Domestic abuse

Hate crime

Casework Quality

Impact of COVID-19

The caseload has continued to increase into Quarter 2

The live caseload has increased by a further 2.9% this quarter, rising from 139,907 to 144,002. The live caseload is 31.5% higher than the pre-COVID quarter (Q4 19/20) figure of 109,469. 

Receipts have increased, up 1.0% from 96,254 in Q1 to 97,189 in Q2. However, finalisations have decreased slightly, down 0.7% from 99,797 in Q1 to 99,117 in Q2.

The caseload has reached a plateau in the magistrates’ court

After a slight increase in Q1 22/23 to the caseload, this quarter the caseload has reduced, down 1.0% from 70,121 to 69,415. 

Whilst receipts into the magistrates’ court are up 1.0% this quarter, finalisations have increased by 1.8% allowing the caseload to experience a slight reduction.

The Crown Court caseload continues to increase

The live caseload in the Crown Court has increased by 6.9% this quarter from 69,786 in Q1 22/23 to 74,587 in Q2 22/23. 

Receipts into the Crown Court have remained relatively static (increasing by only 0.4% this quarter), however the ability to finalise cases has been affected by the Bar strike, with finalisations down 15.3% from 14,569 in Q1 to 12,340 in Q2. 

About CPS data

The CPS uses 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.

Previously, the CPS has published annual data on Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG) offences and hate crime. In order to enhance accountability and transparency in regards to CPS performance, the CPS will now publish quarterly data on a wider range of offence types.

The CPS does not publish official statistics. The official statistics relating to crime and policing are maintained by the Home Office and Office for National Statistics. Official statistics relating to sentencing, criminal court proceedings, offenders brought to justice, the courts and the judiciary are maintained by the Ministry of Justice. 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.

Note in particular that the CPS maintains a central record of prosecution outcomes with reference to a number of case monitoring flags, including modern slavery and human trafficking, hate crime, domestic abuse, and rape. CPS statistics are dependent upon lawyers and administrative staff identifying and correctly flagging cases on the case management system. CPS data is accurate only to the extent that flags have been correctly applied. Note also that:

• A flag is 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.

Understanding CPS data

In these statistics, a defendant represents one person 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 statistics in these reports, comprise defendants dealt with by the 14 CPS Areas and those dealt with in specialised casework handled by CPS 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 release is derived from the CPS Case Management System (CMS) and its associated Management Information System (MIS). The data is held in a database within the MIS, based on defendants. The tables include total data on all defendants irrespective of sex or gender. Data has been broken down by overall volumes and proportions.

Pre-charge decision data

Pre-charge receipts:

The total number of suspects referred by the police to the CPS for 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 by the CPS, 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 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 in Tab 1.3 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.

The data is recorded retrospectively at the point of the first legal consultation, and this means that the data will refresh 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 decisions:

Of all the suspects referred by the police, pre-charge decisions are those where the CPS has completed making a decision on whether to charge; take no further action; recommend an out of court disposal; record thecase as Pending response - for further investigation; 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 at a later date, 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 include: charge, take no further action; and recommend an out of court disposal.

Charged:

Charging decisions are where the 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 the 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 taken into consideration (TIC) issued by the CPS at pre-charge stage.

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

Pending response - further investigation:

Decisions recorded as Pending response - further investigation 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.

These decisions were formerly known as Administrative finalisations. The change in the term used is designed to provide a clearer explanation of what has happened to the case. This follows recommendations to change the terminology used, both by Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate and in the November 2020 shadow report: The Decriminalisation of Rape. This is 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 are:

• The CPS may ask the police to provide further information where there is insufficient evidence to make a charging decision, or the police are requesting early investigative advice. If the police do not respond within three months, following reminders, the case is closed on CMS. If the police provide additional evidence, the case is reopened in CMS and, if possible, a charging decision is made.
• 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. If the suspect is subsequently located and charged the case is reopened in CMS.
• Cases where a file submission has been rejected at triage because items are missing, and the police have been asked to supply the additional material and have not responded to reminders.
• 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.
• The suspect has died.

Other:

The result of the charging decision is not known or has not been given for that suspect.

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. 

Complainant/Witness issues: This reason should be used when the evidence of the complainant/witness supports the prosecution case, but one or more of the following apply: 
the complainant/witness fails to attend;
the complainant/witness refuses to be called;
the complainant/witness refuses to give evidence as a witness;
the complainant/witness withdraws a complaint;
the case includes complainants/witnesses who have been intimidated but it is inappropriate to compel them to attend court. 

and 

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

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.

• D77 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.
• D78 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.
• D79 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.
• D80 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 or third party were at fault.
• D81 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.

Prosecution principal offence category data

The Principal Offence Category indicates the most serious offence with which the defendant is charged at the time of finalisation. 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 Table 2.1-2.31, Prosecution Data Tables.

Pre-charge principal offence category data

The Pre-Charge Principal Offence Category indicates the most serious alleged offence being considered at the first charging decision 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 recorded as pending response – further investigation. These are excluded from Table 6.1, Pre-Charge Data Tables.

Monitoring flags

The CPS monitoring of cases involving offences of child abuse, crimes against older people, domestic abuse, hate crime, modern slavery and rape involve the application of 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. The data is accurate only to the extent that the flags have been correctly applied.

The flag is applied from the onset of the case and will remain in place even if the charges are later amended or dropped. If a case commences under a different offence but during the prosecution an applicable charge is preferred, the case is flagged at that stage.

Child abuse:

Any criminal offence which falls within the criteria set out in Appendix A of the Working Together to Safeguard Children document and/or as defined in the CPS legal guidance on Child Abuse and involves a victim under the age of 18.

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 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 directly related, in laws or step family. This is not an exhaustive list and may also be extended to uncles, aunts, cousins etc.

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.

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.

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, also
  • 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

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.

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 new Casework Quality Assessment (CQA) second line assurance mechanism launched in January 2022, following development, and testing in 2021.  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 post-trial cases where the decisions to charge and proceed to trial are correct 
• 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 Compliance Managers (LCMs) in the Compliance and Assurance Team (CAT) to an agreed, consistent methodology.  Cases are reviewed a quarter in arrears. 210 cases are reviewed by quarter, 15 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 agreed with the Legal Unit Head. 
• 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 possible errors with data entry and processing.

Data caveats

Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) caseload data are available through 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 possible 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.