Early estimates
Source: data.gov.uk (2018-05-25)

Proven Re-offending statistics. Key statistics on proven reoffending in England and Wales. It gives proven reoffending figures for offenders who were released from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at court, or received a caution or reprimand.

Early estimates of proven 
reoffending  
January to December 2010,  
England and Wales 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Published 27 October 2011 

Early estimates of proven re-offending: results from 
2010 
 
Early estimates of proven re-offending use shorter follow-up and waiting 
periods. This is intended to provide offender managers feedback on the 
proven re-offending trends of offenders they are working with in time for them 
to adjust or build on offender management operational policy.  
 
Proven re-offending for these early estimates is measured in exactly the same 
way as for the headline proven re-offending measure except that the follow-up 
period and waiting period are both three months each. Therefore the early 
estimates provide 3 month proven re-offending rates (rather than the headline 
one year proven re-offending rate).  Please see the definitions and 
measurements document for more information 
www.justice.gov.uk/publications/statistics-and-data/reoffending 
 
Early estimates are presented for four particular offender groups who are 
subject to specific offender management arrangements. These are:  
 offenders managed by the probation service,  
 Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPO) who are managed by a 
partnership of local front-line services,  
 drug-misusing offenders who are managed by Drug Action Teams (DAT),  
 young offenders who are managed by Youth Offending Teams (YOT).  
 
Key Results  
 
Probation trusts 
Early estimates of proven re-offending ranged from 10.1 per cent to 19.7 per 
cent in the 35 probation trusts. Overall, 15 had lower early estimates of 
proven re-offending in 2010 than 2009, 20 had higher while none remained 
the same. 
 
Compared with the predicted rate of re-offending, two trusts had significantly 
lower rates of re-offending than expected. These were Gloucestershire and 
Staffordshire and West Midlands. Three trusts had significantly higher rates of 
re-offending than expected. These were Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and West 
Mercia. Figure 1 shows trusts’ re-offending rates compared to the predicted 
rate, by the expected number of re-offenders. 

Figure 1: Funnel plot showing changes in re-offending at the probation trust level  
 
Changes in re-offending at the probation trust level 
75
85
95
105
115
125
135
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Expected re-offenders
Standardised re-offending rate
Data
Average
95% confidence limits
99% confidence limits
  

Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPO) 
Early estimates of proven re-offending ranged from 7.1 per cent to 100.0 per 
cent in the 173 local authorities with PPO offenders in 2010. PPO’s in 37 local 
authorities showed lower early estimates of proven re-offending in 2010 than 
in 2009 and PPO’s in 42 showed higher.  
 
Drug misusing offenders 
Early estimates of proven re-offending ranged from 6.1 per cent to 66.7 per 
cent. Overall, 41 DATs had lower proven re-offending rates in 2010 than 2009 
and 123 had higher.  
 
Young offenders  
Early estimates of proven re-offending ranged from 2.3 per cent to 24.2 per 
cent. Overall, 48 YOTs showed lower proven re-offending rates in 2010 than 
2009 and 109 showed higher.  
 
List of quarterly tables 
 
Table 1 
Early estimates of proven adult re-offending by probation trust 
based on first commencement from each trust, 2009 – 2010 
 
Table 2   
Early estimates of proven re-offending of Prolific and other 
Priority Offenders by upper tier local authority, 2009 – 2010 
 
Table 3   
Early estimates of proven re-offending of drug-misusing 
offenders by Drug Action Team, 2009 - 2010 
 
Table 4    
Early estimates of proven juvenile re-offending, by Youth 
Offending Team, 2009 - 2010