CPS data summary Quarter 4 2022-2023

• About CPS data
• Introduction
• Overall pre-charge and prosecutions
• Rape flagged cases
• Domestic Abuse flagged cases
• Hate crime flagged cases
• Casework Quality
• Impact of COVID-19
• 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 indicators 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

In Q4 22/23 the key points to note are as follows:

• Rape flagged case referrals (including requests for a charging decision and for early advice) to the CPS have increased this quarter – up 21.3%, with requests for a charging decision up 7.5% However, domestic abuse flagged case referrals decreased by 0.2%.
• Charge rates across the board have largely remained stable, however the overall number of charges has increased by 2.3% with charges on rape flagged cases increasing by 18.9% and charges on hate crime flagged cases increasing by 10.6%. 
• The average time for the police and CPS to charge has decreased this quarter for the first time this year (down nearly 4 days on the Q3 22/23 total of 47.3 days). Rape flagged cases also saw a reduction, of just over 2 weeks this quarter, with domestic abuse flagged cases seeing a slight decrease of just under 2 days.
• The number of completed prosecutions increased by 4.7% from 99,251 in Q3 22/23 to 103,887 in Q4 22/23. Whilst the magistrates’ court recorded a small increase in completed prosecutions, the Crown Court recorded an increase of 8.9%, from 15,888 in Q3 22/23 to 17,315 in Q4 22/23. 
• Whilst conviction rates have risen for Hate Crime (from 83.6% to 85.1% this quarter), conviction rates for all crime, rape flagged cases and domestic abuse flagged cases have largely remained stable.

All crime, pre-charge and prosecutions

Rape flagged cases

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).

Domestic abuse flagged cases

Hate Crime flagged cases

Casework Quality

Impact of COVID-19

The caseload has remained relatively static into Q4

The live caseload has increased by 0.5% this quarter, rising from 145,391 to 146,173. The live caseload is 33.5% higher than the pre-Covid (Q4 19/20) figure of 109,469. 

Receipts have increased, up 24.1% from 28,141 in Q3 to 34,920 in Q4.

Finalisations have also increased, up 25.6% from 29,577 in Q3 to 37,160 in Q4.

The caseload has increased in the magistrates’ court

The live caseload has increased this quarter, up 1.4% from 70,852 in Q3 to 71,829 in Q4.

Receipts into the magistrates’ court are up 24.1% this quarter, from 28,141 in Q3 to 34,920 in Q4. Finalisations have also increased, up 26.6% from 24,370 in Q3 to 30,862 in Q4.

The Crown Court caseload remains stable

The live caseload in the Crown Court has remained relatively static with a small reduction of 0.3% this quarter from 74,539 in Q3 to 74,344 in Q4. 

Receipts into the Crown Court have increased by 30.3% this quarter, from 5,016 in Q3 to 6,536 in Q4. Finalisations have increased by 21.0% from 5,207 in Q3 to 6,298 in Q4. 

Understanding CPS data

In these data, 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 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. The tables include total data on all defendants irrespective of sex or gender. Data has been broken down by overall volumes and proportions. 

The annually reported complainant data is derived from the CPS Witness Management System (WMS) and its associated Management Information System (MIS). Defendant and complainant/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 perpetrators and complainants, irrespective of sex or gender.

In relation to complainant data, the WMS is a bespoke case management system designed by and for specialist Witness Care Unit (WCU) staff to effectively manage their cases. The WMS records complainant and witness data and, where recorded, the system includes data reporting equality profiles of complainants (and witnesses). The WMS can only provide data on the volumes of complainants 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 alleged complainants 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.

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 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 stepfamily. 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
• 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.

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.

Timeliness to charge:

The average timeliness of the decision to charge includes both CPS time and Police time and is a calculation of the average 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 were required to submit further evidence prior to a decision to charge. This generally includes more than one submission and more investigation. 

Rape and serious sexual offences (RASSO) investigations can be highly complex in nature and typically involve the review of a large quantity of evidence. In most cases suspects are on police bail 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 two key factors: 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.

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 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 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:

• 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, will also be administratively finalised. 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 all of the following apply:

• the complainant/witness fails to attend, or 
• refuses to be called, or 
• to give evidence as a witness, or 
• withdraws a complaint, and 
• 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.

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 – 2.3, 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 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 Table 6.1, Pre-Charge Data Tables.

Demographic Data

The equality profiles of defendants and complainants, by sex and age are reported in the quarterly data tables. Additionally, ethnicity is reported for defendants only. 

Sex: data on the sex of defendants and complainants 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.

Age: data on the age of defendants and complainants 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. 

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, 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 Head of Legal Assurance. 
• 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 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 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.