Response to consultation on changes to proven reoffending statistics
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.

Response to consultation on changes to 
proven reoffending statistics  
England and Wales 
Ministry of Justice 
28 April 2016 

 
 
 
 
2
Contents 
Contents ......................................................................................................... 2 
1. 
Introduction ......................................................................................... 3 
2. 
Summary of changes .......................................................................... 4 
3. 
Summary of responses ....................................................................... 5 
4. 
Changes to proven reoffending measure .......................................... 7 
4.1 
Measuring proven reoffending ................................................................................... 7 
4.2 
Payment by results and National Probation Service proven reoffending 
performance measure ............................................................................................................ 8 
4.3 
Offender cohort breakdowns ...................................................................................... 9 
4.4 
Three month offender cohorts .................................................................................... 9 
4.5 
Historical data and geographical breakdowns ....................................................... 10 
4.6 
OGRS4/G and YOGRS – adult and juvenile likelihood of reoffending .............. 11 
4.7 
Interim results ............................................................................................................. 12 
4.8 
Publication outline ...................................................................................................... 13 
4.9 
Publication timetable .................................................................................................. 14 
Annex A: List of respondents .................................................................... 15 
Contact points ............................................................................................. 16 
 

 
 
 
 
3
1. Introduction 
In “Transforming Rehabilitation: A Strategy for Reform”, published in 2013, plans were set 
out to introduce a new system for the management and rehabilitation of offenders in the 
community across England and Wales. 
The programme, which was fully implemented in February 2015 aims to bring down 
reoffending rates while continuing to protect the public. 
From 30 July 2015 to 30 October 2015, the Ministry of Justice ran a consultation on changes 
to the proven reoffending statistical publication.  
The key change that was proposed was to align the existing reoffending measure with those 
measures necessary for assessing progress against the rehabilitation reforms. 
The consultation set out the following key proposals:  
1. To extend the existing reoffending quarterly publication of headline statistical 
information on adult and juvenile reoffending with one that will include 
 
reoffending outcomes for the payment by results (PbR) element of the 
reforms, split by relevant cohorts and Community Rehabilitation Companies 
(CRCs); and  
 
reoffending outcomes for the National Probation Service (NPS), split by 
relevant cohorts and the seven NPS divisions; 
2. Three month cohorts for all measures of reoffending including for juveniles, which will 
then align with the adult PbR element of the reforms. 
3. To replace the ‘adjusted to baseline’ reoffending rates previously available in the 
proven reoffending bulletin with OGRS4/G (Offender Group Reconviction Scale); and 
4. To produce interim PbR figures, this will help to address the information gap created 
by switching to three month cohorts for reporting reoffending and will allow CRCs’ 
progress to be assessed at the earliest opportunity. 
Users’ views were invited on these proposed changes and 19 responses to the consultation 
were received.  
This document provides feedback on the comments received and clarifies the changes to 
future publications of proven reoffending statistics that are planned in response to those 
comments.  
If you have any feedback, questions or requests for further information about this statistical 
consultation response, please direct them to xxx@xxx.xx. 

 
 
 
 
4
2. Summary of changes 
The key change that was proposed was to align the existing reoffending measure with those 
measures necessary for assessing progress against the rehabilitation reforms. Other 
proposals were around how this change would be supported. 
 
 
 Proposal 
 Post consultation position 
1 
To change to three month 
cohorts to measure all 
reoffending and the creation of 
annual cohorts, combining the 
preceding quarterly cohorts, to 
permit geographical 
breakdowns at LA level. 
Proven reoffending measures will be published 
using the proposed 3 month cohorts. In response 
to user feedback we will also publish average 
reoffending rates which will be formed by taking 
a weighted average of the four preceding 3 
month offender cohorts on a quarterly basis. This 
will enable local rates to be monitored on a 
quarterly basis. 
2 
To use OGRS4/G for all 
offender groups for assessing 
the likelihood of reoffending 
including juvenile offenders. 
Respondents were concerned about the 
suitability of using OGRS4/G for juveniles. As a 
result OGRS4/G will be used for adult cohorts 
only; for juvenile cohorts the Youth Offender 
Group Reconviction Scale (YOGRS) will be 
used. 
3 
To provide ‘interim estimates’ 
for publication as management 
information until headline 
results become available. 
We will provide ‘interim estimates’ by counting 
any proven reoffending to date as recorded on 
MoJ’s PNC data extract. 
4 
A new outline structure for the 
bulletin including reoffending 
splits by CRCs and the NPS 
divisions. 
The new outline structure will be adopted. In 
addition to this we will publish average 
reoffending rates to enable local rates to be 
monitored on a quarterly basis (see proposal 1). 
5 
To remove existing tables and 
increase the use of pivot tables 
and CSV files (with appropriate 
disclosure measures) for 
additional breakdowns of 
reoffending data. 
Some tables will be replaced by pivot tables and 
CSV files. We have made some of these 
changes with the existing reoffending publication 
from October 2015. 
6 
To include some statistics 
which show little quarterly 
change, for example long term 
reoffending rates, in an annual 
publication? 
We will publish some additional analysis on 
proven reoffending in the annual publication. In 
addition to this we will publish average 
reoffending rates to enable local rates to be 
monitored on a quarterly basis (see proposal 1). 
 

 
 
 
 
5
3. Summary of responses 
19 responses were received in response to the consultation and there was a wide range of 
respondents. These included Police, Charities, NPS, CRCs, Youth Offender Teams (YOTs), 
Local Authorities, Youth Justice Board, internal Ministry of Justice, Mayor of London, Office 
for Policing and Crime and HMI Probation. A full list of those that responded can be found at 
Annex A.  
The majority of respondents used the questionnaire but a few respondents preferred the 
format of a free letter. Of those who responded to the consultation, the vast majority 
supported the proposals. 
Below is a summary of the main comments received. 
 
 
Proposal 1: Do users agree with changing to three month cohorts to measure all 
reoffending (not just PbR outcomes) and the creation of annual cohorts, combining 
the preceding quarterly cohorts, to permit geographical breakdowns at LA level 
including those used by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) for Youth Offending Teams 
(YOTs) 
From the comments provided there was general agreement with changing to a three month 
cohort.  
Some respondents expressed concerns at the loss of geographical information on a 
quarterly basis as this was vital to manage reoffending at a local level. There was some 
concern that there would also be a loss of comparability as there would be a break in the 
series where the measure changed.  
One respondent was concerned that the measure would be to bias towards prolific 
offenders. Another respondent expressed concerns that measures such as previous 
offences per offender and serious reoffending may be lost; proposing that two different sets 
of reoffending measures should be produced for adults and young people. 
Respondents expressed interest on longer term reoffending rates (for example 2, 5 and 9 
year proven reoffending rates). It is foreseen that these will be published on an ad-hoc basis. 
Proposal 2: Are users content with the use of OGRS4 for all offender groups for 
assessing the likelihood of reoffending? 
The majority of respondents welcomed the inclusion of the use of OGRS4 but there would 
need to be appropriate explanation of the measure and its comparison to OGRS3 at the time 
of introduction.  
There was concern of the suitability of using OGRS4 for juveniles. Respondents suggested 
alternative measures such as YOGRS or asset plus as more appropriate measures for 
assessing the likelihood of youth reoffending.  

 
 
 
 
6
One user opposed as they wanted to use OGRS3. 
Proposal 3: Does the proposal for providing ‘interim estimates’ for publication as 
management information until headline results become available, cover users’ needs? 
Users supported the proposed move to provide ‘interim estimates’ by counting any proven 
reoffending to date as recorded on MoJ’s PNC data extract.  
Respondents also expressed interest in receiving these estimates for different follow-up 
periods, an estimate of the accuracy of these results and inclusion of different breakdowns, 
such as by local authority area and CRC owner.  
A few respondents requested offender level data for offenders they manage. 
One respondent objected to providing ‘interim estimates’ as had concerns that the 
information would be misleading. 
Proposal 4: Do users support the outline structure for the bulletin including 
reoffending splits by CRCs and the NPS divisions? 
Users supported the outline structure.  
However, over half of the respondents were concerned about the loss of geographical 
information on a quarterly basis as these data are used to manage reoffending at a local 
level. They would require reoffending information broken down by local authority area and 
youth offending team on a quarterly basis as well.  
Other geographical breakdowns were also requested; one respondent requested the data be 
broken down by Community Safety Partnerships and another requested that the information 
be broken down by Crime and Disorder Partnership level, ward and police beat level.  
A few respondents requested information for all prisons and not just for ‘resettlement’ 
prisons.  
Two respondents were concerned over the counting of offenders managed by NPS or 
CRCs. 
Proposal 5: Are users content with the proposed removal of existing tables and the 
use of pivot tables and CSV files (with appropriate disclosure measures) for additional 
breakdowns of reoffending data? 
Users supported the proposed move to CSVs and pivot tables with several commenting that 
they required offender level detail for management of offenders. 
Proposal 6: Are users content with including certain statistics which show little 
quarterly change, for example long term reoffending rates for inclusion in an annual 
publication? 
Generally respondents agreed with this proposal. One respondent did express concerns as 
even if trends show little change, this information will still help inform them about their 
activities and what they should or should not be doing. There was also concern that, if only 
high level data were reported on, too much detail would be lost as although national 
statistics may not show any change, locally they may. 
 
Respondents requested quarterly geographical information be available. 

 
 
 
 
7
4. Changes to proven reoffending measure 
The quarterly publication from October 2017 onwards will provide proven reoffending 
statistics for adult and juvenile offenders who were released from custody, received a non-
custodial conviction at court, or received a caution within a three month period (e.g. 1 
October 2015 to 31 December 2015). All statistics will be provided for both adult and 
juvenile (under 18) offenders. 
 
4.1 Measuring proven reoffending 
 
A proven reoffence, for all offenders, is defined as any offence committed in a one year 
follow-up period that leads to a court conviction or caution in the one year follow-up or within 
a further six month waiting period to allow the offence to be proven in court as shown in the 
diagram below. 
 
An offender enters the cohort if they are released from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at court, or 
received a caution in the period October 2015 to December 2015. 
 
Information regarding the proven reoffending behaviour of offenders will be compiled using 
the Ministry of Justice’s extract from the Police National Computer (PNC), probation data 
from the nDelius system managed by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) 
and data from the eAsset system managed by the Youth Justice Board (YJB). 
 
The definitions and measurements document that is published alongside proven reoffending 
quarterly statistics provides further information about the data sources mentioned above and 
it will be updated when interim results are published in October 2016 and the new 
publication is implemented in October 2017 to reflect any changes in methodology. 
01-Oct-15 31-Dec-15 31-Mar-16 30-Jun-16 01-Oct-16 31-Dec-16 31-Mar-17 30-Jun-17
27-Oct-17
First offender
enters cohort
One year period in which reoffences
are measured 
Last offender
enters cohort
We report on the offences that lead to a 
court conviction or caution within the year 
OR within a further 
six months to allow 
the offence to be
proven in court
Proven 
reoffending 
publication

 
 
 
 
8
4.2 Payment by results and National Probation Service proven reoffending 
performance measure 
 
The Transforming Rehabilitation reforms included opening up the probation service to a 
diverse range of rehabilitation providers from the private, voluntary and social sectors 
through 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) and creating a new public sector 
National Probation Service (NPS), to manage high risk offenders. 
 
A Payment by Results (PbR) approach was adopted for the 21 CRCs to develop and 
implement effective ways of rehabilitating offenders and rewarding providers that devise and 
deliver the most effective rehabilitation programmes. 
 
Offenders are only included in a CRC’s PbR cohort the first time they commence an eligible 
sentence (see below for exclusions) in the three month period. The same methodology will 
be used for each NPS division’s proven reoffending performance measure. 
 
 
 
Payment by Results for the binary rate (proportion of offenders who reoffend) and frequency 
rate (average number of reoffences per reoffender) will be assessed for each CRC against a 
baseline year of 20111. Using the same methodology as the 2011 baselines, 2012 and 2013 
binary and frequency rate estimates will be produced. A time series of PbR binary and 
frequency rates estimates from 2005 to 2013 will be published prior to the October 2017 
publication. 
 
                                                 
1 PbR is paid for the achievement of statistically significant reductions in reoffending against the 
baseline year of 2011 as set out in Transforming Rehabilitation Contracts with CRCs. 
Probation – all offenders:
• released from a custodial sentence;
• who begin a community order; 
• who begin a suspended sentence  order; 
• Aged 18 or over
Exclusions
• Supervision default order
• Youth rehabilitation orders
• Other pre-CJA community sentences
• Unpaid work only
• Curfew only
• Electronic monitoring only
• Any combination of unpaid 
work/curfew/electronic monitoring only
• Standalone Suspended sentence orders
NPS
High risk 
offenders
CRCs
Low to medium 
risk offenders 
NPS division 
performance 
measure cohort
CRC Payment by 
results cohort

 
 
 
 
9
4.3 Offender cohort breakdowns 
 
As well as PbR and the National Probation Service reoffending performance measure, key 
statistics will be provided for the following measures: 
 
The headline measure - An offender is included in the cohort the first time they are 
released from custody, convicted at court with a non-custodial sentence or receive a caution 
within the three month period. 
 
Index disposal (sentence type) - An offender is included in an index disposal cohort (e.g. 
custody, caution, court order etc.) the first time they receive that disposal within the three 
month period. 
 
National Probation Service (NPS)/Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRC) - An 
offender is included in an NPS division or a CRC’s offender cohort the first time they are 
managed by that entity within the three month period. 
 
Prison - An offender is included in a prison’s offender cohort the first time they are released 
from that prison within the three month period. 
 
4.4 Three month offender cohorts 
 
The current proven reoffending statistics publication reports on offenders who are released 
from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at court, or received a caution within a 12 
month period. The new proven reoffending statistics publication will report on adult and 
juvenile offenders who are released from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at 
court, or received a caution within a 3 month period, which will then align with the adult 
Payment by Results element of the transforming rehabilitation reforms. 
 
A proven reoffence, for all offenders, will continue to be defined as any offence committed in 
a one year follow-up period that leads to a court conviction or caution in the one year follow-
up or within a further six month waiting period to allow the offence to be proven in court. 
 
The impact of changing from 12 month offender cohorts to 3 month offender cohorts is that 
there will be a greater proportion of prolific offenders and hence higher reoffending rates 
when compared to the current measure of reoffending. On a financial year basis, annual 
average reoffending rates will be formed by taking a weighted average of the four preceding 
3 month offender cohorts. 
 
A comparison of the current measure and the new measure for April 2013 to March 2014 is 
presented below. It has been included to provide an indication of the impact of changing the 
cohort, and the figures presented may not exactly match those in any future publication. The 
new reoffending rate is around 4-5 percentage points higher for both adult and juvenile 
offenders than the current proven reoffending rate. 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
10
Proportion of adult and juvenile offenders who reoffend in the current measure and 
new measure: April 2013 to March 2014 quarterly and annual data 
 
 
Users should refer to supporting consultation Excel tables to see a time series of the 3 
month cohorts. 
4.5 Historical data and geographical breakdowns 
 
Proven reoffending rates for the annual and quarterly cohorts will be provided at the national 
level back to 2000 to ensure trends are available on the same time series as the current 
measure, and since this is the earliest date from which the data can be reliably produced. 
Data are not available for 2001 due to a problem with archived data on Court Orders. 
 
The three month cohorts limit the scope for geographical breakdowns owing to the smaller 
number of offenders. We had originally proposed only providing geographical breakdowns 
on an annual basis. There was, however, high user demand for these statistics on a 
quarterly basis. Therefore, on a quarterly basis we will publish average reoffending rates 
which will be formed by taking a weighted average of the four preceding 3 month offender 
cohorts. This will enable local rates to be monitored on a quarterly basis. 
 
We will provide local-level breakdowns of this data back to 2005 to provide a trend for local 
areas. Data will not be provided at local level further back than 2005, reflecting both 
concerns over quality of postcode information and the resources required to produce this 
additional data. 
 
 
New:
Annual 
average cohort
Current:
12 month 
cohort
Apr-Jun 
2013
Jul-Sep 
2013
Oct-Dec 
2013
Jan-Mar 
2014
Apr 2013-
Mar 2014
Apr 2013-
Mar 2014
Adult offenders
Proportion of offenders who reoffend (%)
30.6
30.4
29.5
29.4
30.0
25.2
Average number of reoffences per reoffender
3.58
3.54
3.57
3.62
3.58
3.12
Number of reoffences
148,522
149,562
143,403
145,224
586,711
367,605
Number of reoffenders
41,489
42,216
40,114
40,143
163,962
117,864
Number of offenders in cohort
135,480
138,676
135,827
136,558
546,541
468,134
Juvenile offenders
Proportion of offenders who reoffend (%)
42.9
42.6
42.6
43.5
42.9
38.0
Average number of reoffences per reoffender
3.36
3.37
3.46
3.46
3.41
3.12
Number of reoffences
19,380
19,514
19,093
18,568
76,555
50,184
Number of reoffenders
5,772
5,790
5,518
5,364
22,444
16,083
Number of offenders in cohort
13,443
13,600
12,943
12,321
52,307
42,299
All offenders
Proportion of offenders who reoffend (%)
31.7
31.5
30.7
30.6
31.1
26.2
Average number of reoffences per reoffender
3.55
3.52
3.56
3.60
3.56
3.12
Number of reoffences
167,902
169,076
162,496
163,792
663,266
417,789
Number of reoffenders
47,261
48,006
45,632
45,507
186,406
133,947
Number of offenders in cohort
148,923
152,276
148,770
148,879
598,848
510,433
New:
3 month cohort

 
 
 
 
11
4.6 OGRS4/G and YOGRS – adult and juvenile likelihood of reoffending 
 
As proven reoffending is related to the characteristics of offenders, the actual rate of proven 
reoffending will depend, in part, on the characteristics of offenders coming into the system. 
This actual rate provides users with sufficient information on what the level of reoffending is 
(e.g. in their local area) and how it is changing over time. 
 
In addition to the actual rate, we will use the OGRS4/G (Offender Group Reconviction Scale) 
score to control for some differences in offender characteristics across different offender 
groups. OGRS4/G is based on a well-established, peer-reviewed methodology for assessing 
and representing reoffending risk. 
 
OGRS4/G uses age, gender and criminal history to assess the reoffending risk of a given 
group of offenders by producing a score between 0 and 1. These scores can be used to 
compare the relative likelihood of reoffending either over time or between different groups of 
offenders, with a higher rate meaning a group of offenders who are more likely to reoffend. 
Reoffending rates (excluding frequency measures) will be adjusted by using OGRS4/G, to 
take account of the influence that differences in offender mix can have on binary reoffending 
rates. OGRS4/G adjusted rates will be used to determine PbR outcomes. 
 
The OGRS4/G adjusted reoffending rate for a given CRC cohort will be calculated as the 
observed reoffending rate for that cohort plus any difference between the OGRS4/G score in 
that cohort and the 2011 CRC baseline cohort. This calculation standardises the mix of 
offenders in each cohort of a given CRC to the 2011 mix for that same CRC. A similar 
approach will be used for other offender groups (for example, Local Authority). 
 
OGRS4/G is a model specifically developed for adult offenders and after consideration of 
responses to this consultation, OGRS4/G will not be provided for juvenile offenders. We will 
instead use the Youth Offender Group Reconviction Scale (YOGRS) to produce an adjusted 
reoffending rate for juveniles. YOGRS is based on a similar methodology to OGRS4/G but 
has some adjustments for younger age groups, its application to our data is in development. 
Any substantial changes to OGRS4/G or YOGRS will be published in the accompanying 
measurements and definitions document.  
 
How to interpret OGRS4/G and YOGRS 
In the example below we would say that the proven reoffending rate in CPA A has increased 
by 1 percentage point from 2011. However, when controlling for changes in offender 
characteristics, the proven reoffending rate fell by 1 percentage point since 2011. 
 
OGRS4/G adjusted binary rate example  
CPA A 
 Baseline 
2011 
 Cohort period 
(e.g. Oct-Dec 2015) 
Difference 
OGRS4/G 
53% 
55% 
2pp 
Proportion of offenders who reoffend (%) 
56% 
57% 
1pp 
 
 
 
 
OGRS4/G adjusted reoffending rate 
56% 
55% 
-1pp 

 
 
 
 
12
4.7 Interim results 
 
One year proven reoffending statistics for PbR will not be available until October 2017; we 
will produce interim PbR figures from October 2016. This will help to address the information 
gap created by switching to three month cohorts for reporting reoffending and allows CRCs’ 
progress to be assessed at the earliest opportunity. We will also produce the equivalent 
interim figures for the NPS divisions. 
 
An offender enters the cohort if they are released from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at court, or 
received a caution in the period October 2015 to December 2015. 
 
Users supported the proposed move to provide ‘interim estimates’ by counting any proven 
reoffending to date as recorded on MoJ’s PNC data extract instead of measuring reoffending 
with a defined follow-up and waiting period. Some offenders in the three month cohort will 
have a longer follow-up period in which to reoffend. Despite this difference, its key 
advantage is to provide users with a more accurate picture of reoffending to date. 
For this very reason we will use the ‘reoffending to date’ measure to produce interim 
reoffending information. While this does not represent real time management information, 
which CRCs might be able to procure themselves through local police force arrangements, it 
will provide our best indication of progress to date for both CRCs and NPS divisions. We will 
publish this as management information. 
 
This addresses the desire of users, including the CRCs and the NPS divisions, to have early 
indicators of progress in an accessible format. CRC’s are not obliged to share the real time 
reoffending information they collect so this management information will address this 
information gap until headline results are published. These estimates, however, will only give 
an indication of progress and, therefore, care should be taken when interpreting them.  
 
Alongside the current proven reoffending tables, early estimates of proven reoffending for 
young offenders by Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) are published as management 
information. This provides an earlier indication of proven reoffending trends for young 
offenders. Following the publication of this consultation response they will be discontinued, 
but will be replaced by interim results as described above by YOTs in the future. 
 
 
 
Oct-15
Nov-15
Dec-15
Jan-16
Feb-16
Mar-16
Apr-16
May-16
Jun-16
Jul-16
Aug-16
Sep-16
Oct-16
First offender
enters cohort
Time period (~11 months) in which reoffences are measured 
Time period (~8 months) in which reoffences are measured 
Last offender
enters cohort
We report on the offences that lead to a court conviction or caution
within this time period
Interim 
results 
publication

 
 
 
 
13
4.8 Publication outline 
 
The existing adult and juvenile reoffending statistics will continue in their current form until 
the reoffending outcomes for the first Payment by Results cohort become available in 
October 2017. 
  
The proven reoffending publication from October 2017 will provide proven reoffending 
statistics by:  
 
offender characteristics (e.g. gender, age group, ethnic group, index offence) 
 
type of reoffence (e.g. Violence Against Person, Burglary) 
 
index disposal (sentence type) 
 
individual prisons 
 
local authority 
 
Community Safety Partnerships 
 
Youth Offending Teams  
 
The publication will include an additional chapter on CRC Payment by Results and NPS 
division proven reoffending performance measure. 
 
For all offender cohorts the following reoffending measures will be published: 
 
The proportion of offenders who reoffend 
 
The average number of reoffences per reoffender 
 
Average OGRS4/G score for adults and average YOGRS for juveniles 
 
OGRS4/G adjusted reoffending rate for adults and YOGRS adjusted reoffending rate 
for  juveniles 
 
These will be published alongside these supporting values: 
 
Number of offenders 
 
Number of reoffenders 
 
Number of reoffences 
 
The number of reoffenders, reoffences and previous offences based on less than five 
offenders will be suppressed. This is to prevent the disclosure of individual information. 
 
From October 2016 interim results as described in section 2.7 will form part of the quarterly 
statistics. The October 2017 publication will include a summary on the differences in 
methodology from those presented in the previous publication.  
 
Proven reoffending statistics will be published in a set of Excel tables which provide key 
statistics, and data tools (pivot tables and CSVs) which provide more detailed breakdowns. 
We have made these changes with the existing reoffending publication from October 2015 
onwards so users will be familiar with this format. 
 
On an annual basis from January 2018, further analysis on proven reoffending statistics in 
emerging areas of interest will be published, for example, long term reoffending rates as 
described below and additional analysis on Serious Further Offences (SFOs). This will 
provide users with the opportunity to comment on plans for future reoffending analysis. 

 
 
 
 
14
 
In the headline measure a proven reoffence is defined as any offence committed in a one 
year follow-up period that leads to a court conviction or caution in the one year follow-up or 
within a further six month waiting period to allow the offence to be proven in court. Long term 
reoffending rates would be where reoffending is measured over a longer follow-up period 
(e.g. two years, five years). 
 
 
4.9 Publication timetable 
Publication 
date 
One year 
reoffending rate 
Quarterly cohort 
One year 
reoffending rate 
Annual average 
Interim  
reoffending rate 
Quarterly cohort 
Oct-16 
- 
- 
Oct15-Dec15 
Jan-17 
- 
- 
Jan16-Mar16 
Apr-17 
- 
- 
Apr16-Jun16 
Jul-17 
- 
- 
Jul16-Sep16 
Oct-17 
Oct15-Dec15 
- 
Oct16-Dec16 
Jan-18 
Jan16-Mar16 
Apr15-Mar16 
Jan17-Mar17 
Apr-18 
Apr16-Jun16 
- 
Apr16-Jun17 
Jul-18 
Jul16-Sep16 
- 
Jul16-Sep17 
Oct-18 
Oct16-Dec16 
- 
Oct16-Dec17 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
15
Annex A: List of respondents 
The list of respondents who gave details consisted of the following organisations: 
 
South Yorkshire Police 
 
Merseyside Criminal Justice Board (MCJB) 
 
Prison Reform Trust 
 
Barnsley Council  
 
Youth Justice Board 
 
Wales CRC 
 
Midlands NPS 
 
Kent, Surrey and Sussex CRC  
 
Reducing Reoffending Partnership (Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire 
and Rutland Community Rehabilitation Company and Staffordshire and West 
Midlands Community Rehabilitation Company).  
 
Interserve Justice / Purple Futures 
 
False Allegation Support Organisation 
 
The Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire CRC 
 
Dudley’s Community Safety Partnership – on behalf of Safe & Sound (Dudley’s 
Community Safety Partnership). Members includes West Midlands Police, West 
Midlands Fire and Rescue Service, Dudley CCG, Staffordshire and West 
Midlands CRC, Staffordshire and West Midlands NPS, Dudley MBC and a 
number of partners from the Community and Voluntary Sector. 
 
NPS Development and Business Change, Performance and Quality team 
 
MoJ Reducing Reoffending Analytical Programme 
 
County Durham Youth Offending Service  
 
The Solihull Partnership 
 
MOPAC – Mayor of London, Office for Policing and Crime 
 
HMI Probation 
 

 
 
 
 
16
Contact points 
Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office: 
 
Tel: xx-xxxx-xxxx 
 
Email: xxx@xxx.xx 
 
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to: 
 
Nick Mavron 
Ministry of Justice 
Justice Statistics Analytical Services 
7th Floor 
102 Petty France 
London 
SW1H 9AJ 
 
General enquiries about the statistical work of the Ministry of Justice can be e-
mailed to: xxx@xxx.xx 
 
General information about the official statistics system of the United Kingdom is 
available from http://statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-
system 
 
Alternative formats are available on request from 
xxx@xxx.xx. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
© Crown copyright 2015 
 
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 
except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit 
nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the 
Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: 
xxx@xxx.xx.