1 APPG membership (as of 1 Nov 2023)
Speech and Language Difficulties2 Former APPG memberships
City Regions, City Regions TransportOrders and regulations - Main Chamber
Draft Strikes (Minimum Service Levels: NHS Ambulance Services and the NHS Patient Transport Service) Regulations 2023 and associated regret motion
View calendar
Note: This event involves a Department with which this person is linked, and does not guarantee their actual attendance.
voted Aye - in line with the party majority
One of 96 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 164 Noes - 75
My Lords, for over six years, the Government have promised to reform the 1983 Act, from manifesto commitments to the …
To ask His Majesty's Government what percentage of women remanded into custody in each of the past five years subsequently …
Division Voting information
Debates during the 2019 Parliament
Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.
Sparring Partners
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
(10 debate interactions)
(6 debate interactions)
(2 debate interactions)
Department Debates
(24 debate contributions)
(9 debate contributions)
(3 debate contributions)
(1 debate contributions)
Legislation Debates
(4,254 words contributed)
(3,633 words contributed)
(2,643 words contributed)
(1,638 words contributed)
Lords initiatives
These initiatives were driven by Lord Bradley, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.
Lord Bradley has not introduced any legislation before Parliament
Lord Bradley has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting
198 Written Questions in the current parliament
(View all written questions)Leaving the EU offers the opportunity to reform our procurement rules to create a new regulatory framework for public procurement. We will publish our proposals for reform shortly, which will include details on notification.
Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
1 Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Questions
(View all Lord Bradley's BEIS questions)Science and Discovery Centres in England have access to the unprecedented support the Government has announced for business and workers, to protect them against the current economic emergency. Many are also part of museum groups or are heritage sites. Museums and heritage organisations can access over £200 million of coronavirus support schemes from Arts Council England and the National Lottery Heritage Fund. Some centres may also be eligible for support from the £1.57 billion investment to protect cultural and heritage organisations announced by Government on 5 July.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The department does not hold the information centrally as data is not collected on the number of children who enter care as a result of their mother receiving a custodial sentence.
The department publishes annual information on the proportion of students from state-funded and special schools who entered higher education by age 19 by local authority in its ‘Widening Participation in Higher Education’ statistical release.
The table below shows figures for the latest five years for local authorities within Greater Manchester.
Table 1: Percentage of pupils from state-funded and special schools who entered Higher Education by age 19 by local authority.
Local Authority | 2013/14 | 2014/15 | 2015/16 | 2016/17 | 2017/18 |
Bolton | 40% | 43% | 43% | 46% | 43% |
Bury | 41% | 44% | 46% | 43% | 44% |
Manchester | 35% | 37% | 39% | 39% | 42% |
Oldham | 37% | 40% | 40% | 40% | 41% |
Rochdale | 37% | 38% | 40% | 40% | 39% |
Salford | 34% | 32% | 34% | 33% | 32% |
Stockport | 38% | 39% | 41% | 40% | 43% |
Tameside | 31% | 35% | 37% | 36% | 36% |
Trafford | 50% | 52% | 53% | 54% | 57% |
Wigan | 37% | 38% | 40% | 41% | 40% |
At the beginning of each financial year, all integrated care boards (ICBs) will agree a plan for the year with NHS England that includes expected expenditure against budgets for each month. At the end of the first quarter, several ICBs have reported an overspend against the agreed plan for that quarter. A table of the full list of these ICBs is attached.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department is considering the Committee’s recommendations carefully and we will respond in due course.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The final financial position for individual integrated care boards (ICBs) for the financial year 2022/23 will be confirmed in their year-end accounts which will be published in due course. The following table shows the latest projected year-end surplus/deficit position reported to the Department by NHS England and shows that 34 out of 42 ICBs are projected to end the financial year in a deficit position.
Integrated Care Board | 2022/23 Year End Surplus / (Deficit) (£m) |
South East London ICB | (1.0) |
North East London ICB | (9.2) |
North Central London ICB | (9.2) |
North West London ICB | (10.8) |
South West London ICB | 7.3 |
Herefordshire and Worcestershire ICB | 0.4 |
Birmingham and Solihull ICB | (100.5) |
Derby and Derbyshire ICB | 1.2 |
Lincolnshire ICB | (15.3) |
Leicester, Leicestershire, and Rutland ICB | (3.0) |
Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent ICB | (0.9) |
Shropshire, Telford, and Wrekin ICB | (25.3) |
Northamptonshire ICB | 5.8 |
Nottingham and Nottinghamshire ICB | (1.6) |
Black Country ICB | (1.3) |
Coventry and Warwickshire ICB | 0.1 |
Mid and South Essex ICB | (27.8) |
Bedfordshire, Luton, and Milton Keynes ICB | (9.0) |
Suffolk and North East Essex ICB | (11.6) |
Hertfordshire and West Essex ICB | (7.4) |
Norfolk and Waveney ICB | 1.7 |
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough ICB | 1.9 |
Lancashire and South Cumbria ICB | 20.6 |
Greater Manchester ICB | (69.8) |
Cheshire and Merseyside ICB | (13.6) |
South Yorkshire ICB | (5.8) |
North East and North Cumbria ICB | (22.8) |
Humber and North Yorkshire ICB | (16.9) |
West Yorkshire ICB | (19.2) |
Kent and Medway ICB | (1.4) |
Frimley ICB | (2.5) |
Sussex ICB | (16.2) |
Hampshire and Isle of Wight ICB | (16.3) |
Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Berkshire West ICB | (15.5) |
Surrey Heartlands ICB | (43.2) |
Devon ICB | (12.1) |
Bath and North East Somerset, Swindon and Wiltshire ICB | (62.0) |
Gloucestershire ICB | (10.0) |
Somerset ICB | (7.2) |
Cornwall and The Isles of Scilly ICB | (7.5) |
Bristol, North Somerset, and South Gloucestershire ICB | (7.1) |
Dorset ICB | 2.5 |
Source: NHS England
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
NHS England has advised that they are working with their partners to finalise the review and anticipate publication will be during the Summer of 2023.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We have announced the development of a new National Partnership Agreement between policing and health partners to ensure that the right agency responds to a mental health incident, removing police involvement earlier in the process where it’s not needed. This will support roll-out of the Right Care, Right Person approach, under which police will only engage in a mental health incident when there is a real and immediate risk to life or serious harm.
We have already achieved a significant reduction in the number of people taken to a police cell as a place of safety in recent years. In 2021/22 a police station was used as a place of safety 254 times in England out of a total of 36,594 Section 136 incidents. This represents less than 1% of incidents and is down from an estimated 8,667 times out of a total of 23,907 such incidents in 2011/12. The Draft Mental Health Bill contains provisions to remove police stations as a place of safety, so that people held under Section 136 will be in more appropriate health-based settings when in crisis or waiting for a place on a specialist ward. The Bill will be introduced when parliamentary time allows.
On 23 January 2023 we set out details on how £150 million of capital investment, first announced in the 2021 Spending Review, will be used to build mental health urgent and emergency care infrastructure. This includes £7 million for specialised mental health ambulances across the country to provide better care and support for people experiencing a mental health crisis.
We are also funding over 160 wider capital schemes including to provide and improve crisis cafes, crisis houses, mental health urgent care centres, health-based places of safety and broader improvements to crisis lines and emergency departments. This will mean care can be provided in more appropriate spaces for those in need, and will reduce pressure on wider parts of the system including accident and emergency.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Integrated care boards (ICBs) are required to publish the list of ICB board members including ordinary members in accordance with the Health and Care Act 2022. ICBs have made the information publicly available on its websites regarding board members including expertise and knowledge. Details of ICB board membership is not held by Government in a central record.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
This information is not held in the format requested. However, local commissioners will determine how this funding will be used to meet the health needs of the local population.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
This information is not held centrally. National Health Service regional commissioners hold contracts with a number of healthcare providers to deliver health services within each prison. While the contract specifies the services which should be provided, it may not stipulate the number of staff which should be employed or the specific roles of health professionals to fulfil those services.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
It has not proved possible to respond to this question in the time available before Prorogation. Ministers will correspond directly with the Member.
The information is not held in the format requested. Due to the way NHS England commissions integrated services across the secure and detained estate, it is not possible to determine specific expenditure on mental health services and substance misuse services.
In England, spending on health services in prisons has increased from £400 million in 2016/17 to approximately £496 million in 2020/21. Integrated spending on substance misuse and mental health services in prisons has increased from £148 million in 2016/17 to £203 million in 2020/21. This expenditure relates to both the male and female adult secure estate.
Information on health care spending in Wales is not held as this is a devolved matter.
All eligible adults in England were offered a booster vaccination by 31 December 2021, including those who received primary doses in the European Union and Switzerland.
Vaccines approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency administered overseas can be recorded via the National Booking Service or 119. Doses can be verified at a face-to-face appointment at a designated vaccination centre and updated within the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS). If an individual’s overseas vaccination is recorded in NIMS, they will automatically be invited to receive a booster dose when eligible. Vaccinations can also be accessed at a walk-in centre without the record being updated in advance.
No assessment has been made on the benefits of protecting funding to Clinical Commissioning Groups for diabetes technology. Clinical Commissioning Groups are responsible for commissioning diabetes services for their local populations and are best placed as clinically-led organisations that have both the local knowledge and accountability, to make commissioning decisions in the best interests of their patients. This includes prescribing technologies for people living with diabetes, for example glucose monitoring devices.
Commissioning decisions for the adoption of technology products in diabetes are always guided by clinical and cost effective assessments, delivered by NICE and other regulatory bodies.
The Local Improvement Finance Trust programme set up in 2001 has secured investment of over £2.5 billion to deliver 350 high quality, modern primary care and community facilities and supporting the integration of local services for the benefit of patients. The portfolio provides well maintained and flexible clinical space for over 1,400 individual general practitioner practices, dentists, community services, acute trusts, pharmacies and other healthcare professionals.
The information is not currently held in the format requested. A national access and waiting times standard for children and adolescent people’s mental health services has not yet been defined.
The NHS People Plan is not a single document but a shared programme of work to grow the workforce, support new ways of working and develop a compassionate and inclusive workplace culture in order to deliver the NHS Long Term Plan. The NHS People Plan 2020-21, published last summer, is focused on supporting National Health Service staff to manage the COVID-19 response and winter pressures, with a strong focus on looking after the health and wellbeing of staff.
We are working with NHS England and NHS Improvement, Health Education England and with systems and employers to determine our workforce and people priorities beyond April 2021 to support the recovery of NHS staff and of services. This will include building on many of the positive ways of working that have emerged through the pandemic whilst continuing to support the wellbeing of NHS staff.
We plan to publish a new all-age autism strategy this spring, subject to COVID-19 pressures.
All frontline health and social care staff, including dentists and dental staff, involved in direct patient care are included in phase one of the COVID-19 vaccine deployment. The definition of health and social care staff covers those delivering National Health Service or privately funded care.
Information is not published in the format requested as drug treatment services within the health and justice system are sometimes commissioned together with other services.
The Government launched its new NHS Test and Trace service on 28 May 2020. This brings together testing, contact tracing and outbreak management into an end-to-end service.
The information requested is not held.
Prevention of ill-health remains a top priority. The Government will continue its focus on health improvement and preventing ill-health, with support from the expert teams who currently sit in Public Health England (PHE), who will continue their excellent work. We are not envisaging any changes to where those responsibilities will sit until spring 2021. We will be consulting with staff and engaging with an external stakeholder advisory group on where PHE’s health improvement functions would be best placed in order to support the public health system in our aim to increase healthy life expectancy.
We recognise that many charities are facing difficult decisions at the exact time their services are needed most. On 8 April 2020 the Chancellor announced £750 million to support for the charity sector in response to COVID-19. This includes £200 million provided through the National Lottery’s Coronavirus Community Support Fund to support charities working with vulnerable people. Applications closed on 17 August with money being allocated by early November.
The Department does not routinely provide financial support to charities although, as before the COVID-19 pandemic, it is continuing to work with charities to deliver specific aims and objectives for which the organisations will be reimbursed.
We are working around the clock to give the social care sector and wider National Health Service the equipment and support they need to tackle this outbreak.
The Government published Coronavirus (COVID-19): Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) plan on 10 April. It incorporates guidance on who needs PPE and when they need it, routes to ensure those who need it can get it at the right time and sets out actions to secure enough PPE to last through the crisis. A copy of the guidance is attached.
Sourcing sufficient supplies of PPE is a challenge that many countries are facing. We are working to expand supply from overseas, improve domestic manufacturing capability and expand and improve the logistics network for delivering to the frontline.
The full weight of the Government is behind this effort and we are working closely with industry, social care providers, the NHS, and the army to ensure the right equipment continues to be delivered.
To improve the Government's understanding of the consequences of risks, such as the effect on the mental wellbeing of the population, the National Risk Register consults a wide variety of experts in Government departments, devolved administrations and outside of Government in agencies, academic institutions and industry.
The publication of the full NHS People Plan has been deferred to later in the year, so that the National Health Service can devote maximum operational effort to COVID-19 readiness and response.
While timing of publication continues to be kept under review, NHS England and NHS Improvement, together with Health Education England, are continuing to grow and transform the workforce and build lasting culture change, in line with the objectives of the People Plan.
This information is not available as autism training is not currently a mandatory requirement though under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, employers are required to take steps to ensure that their staff receive support and training to undertake their roles competently.
In ‘Right to be Heard’, which was published on 5 November 2019, we outlined our plans to introduce mandatory learning disability and autism training for health and social care staff in England. Work is currently underway with Health Education England and Skills for Care to develop and trial, during 2020/21, a standardised training package, which will be known as ‘the Oliver McGowan Mandatory Learning Disability and Autism Training’. The evaluation of the trial, which will be published at the end of March 2021, will inform future roll-out.
The number of individual patients aged under 18 cannot be provided, only the number of unplanned accident and emergency (A&E) attendances for patients aged under 18 with a primary diagnosis in A&E of ‘35 – Psychiatric Condition’.
Information can only be provided on the distance between a patient’s postcode and the A&E where they presented and not the hospital where the patient was subsequently admitted from A&E.
The number of individual patients aged under 18 cannot be provided, only the number of unplanned accident and emergency (A&E) attendances for patients aged under 18 with a primary diagnosis in A&E of ‘35 – Psychiatric Condition’.
Information can only be provided on the distance between a patient’s postcode and the A&E where they presented and not the hospital where the patient was subsequently admitted from A&E.
The number of individual patients aged under 18 cannot be provided, only the number of unplanned accident and emergency (A&E) attendances for patients aged under 18 with a primary diagnosis in A&E of ‘35 – Psychiatric Condition’.
Information can only be provided on the distance between a patient’s postcode and the A&E where they presented and not the hospital where the patient was subsequently admitted from A&E.
This NHS Funding Bill enshrines in law the biggest cash boost in National Health Service history, ensuring the NHS will get an extra £33.9 billion a year by 2023/24. The Bill does not limit the amount of funding we can put in the NHS, but instead sets that the budget must be “at least” what we have committed to.
The NHS Long Term Plan sets out that mental health will receive a growing share of the NHS budget, worth in real terms at least a further £2.3 billion a year by 2023/24.
Tables showing how NHS funding and mental health funding will increase year-on-year to 2023/24 are attached, due to the size of the data.
As part of the Police Officer Uplift Programme, the Home Office publishes a quarterly update on the number of officers in England and Wales, also broken down by Police Force Area. Data are available here: Police Officer uplift statistics - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Table U2 accompanying this quarterly publication shows that as at the financial year ending 31 March 2021, police forces in England and Wales had recruited 8,762 additional police officers attributable to the Police Uplift Programme. A further 494 additional officers had been recruited and funded through other means, such as the Council Tax precept (Table U3).
As at 31 December 2021, forces have recruited 11,048 of the 20,000 additional police officers. This is against a target of recruiting 12,000 additional police officers by March 2022. Data on uplift progress as at the financial year ending 31 March 2022 will be published on GOV.UK on Wednesday 27 April.
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The information requested is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
UKVI have ensured that sufficient casework capacity is in place and are engaging with the Education Sector, to plan to meet the demands of the student market for Autumn enrolments. UKVI are also working with their Commercial Partners to enable this within the confines of international restrictions in place because of COVID-19.
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
The Home Office continues to have regular contact with the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and other key stakeholders regarding custody related matters. The NPCC have circulated guidance for all police forces in order for them to safely manage their custody suites with respect to all detainees, staff and visitors.
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
1 Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities Questions
(View all Lord Bradley's DLUHC questions)NHS England employees are not subject to any requirements to resign due to parliamentary candidacy.
Health is devolved in Scotland and Wales – restrictions relating to parliamentary candidacy on employees of NHS Scotland and NHS Wales are a matter for the Scottish and Welsh governments.
A number of specified local authority positions are designated as ‘politically restricted’. Holders of such posts are required to resign before announcing their candidacy for Parliament. Individual local authorities have the flexibility to designate additional positions as ‘politically restricted’. Furthermore, they may also choose to include restrictions relating to parliamentary candidacy in their employment contracts with any of their employees.
Civil Servants are disqualified from holding the office of MP. Parliamentary candidates must confirm they are not disqualified from holding the office when completing their consent to nomination form, and therefore cannot be employed in the Civil Service at this point. Furthermore, Civil Servants who are categorised as belonging to politically restricted or politically intermediate groups must resign before being adopted as a prospective candidate by a political party.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The Ministry of Justice holds data on sentence outcomes and custodial sentence lengths after being remanded in custody. Data for the last five years is publicly available and can be viewed in remands data tool, available via the following link: Criminal Justice System statistics quarterly: December 2022 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
To view data relating to cases completed at magistrates’ courts, navigate to the ‘Magistrates’ Courts’ tab. To view data relating to cases completed at Crown courts, navigate to the ‘Crown Courts’ tab.
To select data for cases where the defendant is known to be female, ’01: Female’ should be selected within the Sex filter. To see data for cases where the female is aged over 18, select ‘02: Young adults’ and ’03: Adults’ in the Age group filter. To view those remanded in custody, ’03: Custody’ should be selected within the Remand status at magistrates’ court and Remand status at the Crown Court filters on the appropriate tabs.
Table 1: Proportion of women issued a custodial sentence, community sentence, other sentence, or no sentence, after being remanded in custody, in cases completed at all courts in England and Wales, between 2018 and 2022 (Note 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
Outcome | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 |
Immediate custody | 50% | 50% | 49% | 47% | 44% |
Community sentence | 9% | 10% | 8% | 9% | 9% |
Other | 18% | 17% | 19% | 18% | 20% |
No sentence | 23% | 23% | 24% | 26% | 28% |
Source: Court Proceedings Database
Table 2: Proportion of women issued a custodial sentence after being remanded in custody, by custodial sentence length, in cases completed at all courts in England and Wales, between 2018 and 2022. (Note 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
Custodial sentence length | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 |
1 year and over | 24% | 26% | 26% | 28% | 27% |
6 months and up to 1 year | 5% | 5% | 5% | 5% | 5% |
Over 3 months and up to 6 months | 5% | 5% | 6% | 4% | 4% |
Over 1 month and up to and including 3 months | 9% | 8% | 8% | 6% | 5% |
Up to and including 1 month | 7% | 6% | 5% | 4% | 3% |
N/A (received other sentence type or not sentenced) | 50% | 50% | 51% | 53% | 56% |
Source: Court Proceedings Database
Notes:
1) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
2) The figures given in the table relate to defendants for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
3) Defendants are reported against their principal (i.e. most serious) remand status. Court custody includes those remanded in custody at any stage of proceedings who may also have been given bail or not remanded at some stage of those proceedings.
4) 'To obtain percentages for cases completed at both magistrates' and Crown courts, cases where a defendant has failed to appear to their hearing have been excluded from the totals. This can be replicated within the remand tool, by deselecting '01: Failure to appear' in the Outcome filter within the Magistrates' Court tab.
5) Defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and subsequently committed to the Crown Court will have separate remand decisions made in both courts and will be included in both totals. To avoid duplication of figures, those committed to trial/sentence at Crown court following a hearing at magistrates' courts have been removed from the totals. This can be replicated within the remand tool, by deselecting '03: Committed to Crown Court for trial/sentencing' in the Outcome filters within the Magistrates' Court and Crown Courts tabs.
6) Please note, an issue we are currently investigating is the high proportion of unknown remand status at Crown Court – early findings suggest that these cases are split broadly proportionally (to offence breakdowns) across those remanded at custody and those granted bail. In 2022, 24% of defendants remanded at Crown Court had unknown remand status. We are working on a solution to fill in those unknown remand statuses with the actual status. Due to this, the figures presented only includes data for those where remand status is known.
7) The figures given in the table relate to those where sex is known to be female and age is known to be 18 or over.
8) An outcome of 'no sentence' includes cases where proceedings are discontinued, withdrawn, dismissed, or discharged Sec 6 at magistrates' courts, and not tried or acquitted at Crown Court.
9) The figures given in the table under outcome 'Other' relate to cases where the offender has been received a suspended sentence, absolute/conditional discharge, sentenced to pay a fine or compensation, or has been otherwise dealt with.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice holds data on sentence outcomes and custodial sentence lengths after being remanded in custody. Data for the last five years is publicly available and can be viewed in remands data tool, available via the following link: Criminal Justice System statistics quarterly: December 2022 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
To view data relating to cases completed at magistrates’ courts, navigate to the ‘Magistrates’ Courts’ tab. To view data relating to cases completed at Crown courts, navigate to the ‘Crown Courts’ tab.
To select data for cases where the defendant is known to be female, ’01: Female’ should be selected within the Sex filter. To see data for cases where the female is aged over 18, select ‘02: Young adults’ and ’03: Adults’ in the Age group filter. To view those remanded in custody, ’03: Custody’ should be selected within the Remand status at magistrates’ court and Remand status at the Crown Court filters on the appropriate tabs.
Table 1: Proportion of women issued a custodial sentence, community sentence, other sentence, or no sentence, after being remanded in custody, in cases completed at all courts in England and Wales, between 2018 and 2022 (Note 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
Outcome | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 |
Immediate custody | 50% | 50% | 49% | 47% | 44% |
Community sentence | 9% | 10% | 8% | 9% | 9% |
Other | 18% | 17% | 19% | 18% | 20% |
No sentence | 23% | 23% | 24% | 26% | 28% |
Source: Court Proceedings Database
Table 2: Proportion of women issued a custodial sentence after being remanded in custody, by custodial sentence length, in cases completed at all courts in England and Wales, between 2018 and 2022. (Note 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
Custodial sentence length | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 |
1 year and over | 24% | 26% | 26% | 28% | 27% |
6 months and up to 1 year | 5% | 5% | 5% | 5% | 5% |
Over 3 months and up to 6 months | 5% | 5% | 6% | 4% | 4% |
Over 1 month and up to and including 3 months | 9% | 8% | 8% | 6% | 5% |
Up to and including 1 month | 7% | 6% | 5% | 4% | 3% |
N/A (received other sentence type or not sentenced) | 50% | 50% | 51% | 53% | 56% |
Source: Court Proceedings Database
Notes:
1) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
2) The figures given in the table relate to defendants for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
3) Defendants are reported against their principal (i.e. most serious) remand status. Court custody includes those remanded in custody at any stage of proceedings who may also have been given bail or not remanded at some stage of those proceedings.
4) 'To obtain percentages for cases completed at both magistrates' and Crown courts, cases where a defendant has failed to appear to their hearing have been excluded from the totals. This can be replicated within the remand tool, by deselecting '01: Failure to appear' in the Outcome filter within the Magistrates' Court tab.
5) Defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and subsequently committed to the Crown Court will have separate remand decisions made in both courts and will be included in both totals. To avoid duplication of figures, those committed to trial/sentence at Crown court following a hearing at magistrates' courts have been removed from the totals. This can be replicated within the remand tool, by deselecting '03: Committed to Crown Court for trial/sentencing' in the Outcome filters within the Magistrates' Court and Crown Courts tabs.
6) Please note, an issue we are currently investigating is the high proportion of unknown remand status at Crown Court – early findings suggest that these cases are split broadly proportionally (to offence breakdowns) across those remanded at custody and those granted bail. In 2022, 24% of defendants remanded at Crown Court had unknown remand status. We are working on a solution to fill in those unknown remand statuses with the actual status. Due to this, the figures presented only includes data for those where remand status is known.
7) The figures given in the table relate to those where sex is known to be female and age is known to be 18 or over.
8) An outcome of 'no sentence' includes cases where proceedings are discontinued, withdrawn, dismissed, or discharged Sec 6 at magistrates' courts, and not tried or acquitted at Crown Court.
9) The figures given in the table under outcome 'Other' relate to cases where the offender has been received a suspended sentence, absolute/conditional discharge, sentenced to pay a fine or compensation, or has been otherwise dealt with.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice holds data on sentence outcomes and custodial sentence lengths after being remanded in custody. Data for the last five years is publicly available and can be viewed in remands data tool, available via the following link: Criminal Justice System statistics quarterly: December 2022 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
To view data relating to cases completed at magistrates’ courts, navigate to the ‘Magistrates’ Courts’ tab. To view data relating to cases completed at Crown courts, navigate to the ‘Crown Courts’ tab.
To select data for cases where the defendant is known to be female, ’01: Female’ should be selected within the Sex filter. To see data for cases where the female is aged over 18, select ‘02: Young adults’ and ’03: Adults’ in the Age group filter. To view those remanded in custody, ’03: Custody’ should be selected within the Remand status at magistrates’ court and Remand status at the Crown Court filters on the appropriate tabs.
Table 1: Proportion of women issued a custodial sentence, community sentence, other sentence, or no sentence, after being remanded in custody, in cases completed at all courts in England and Wales, between 2018 and 2022 (Note 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
Outcome | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 |
Immediate custody | 50% | 50% | 49% | 47% | 44% |
Community sentence | 9% | 10% | 8% | 9% | 9% |
Other | 18% | 17% | 19% | 18% | 20% |
No sentence | 23% | 23% | 24% | 26% | 28% |
Source: Court Proceedings Database
Table 2: Proportion of women issued a custodial sentence after being remanded in custody, by custodial sentence length, in cases completed at all courts in England and Wales, between 2018 and 2022. (Note 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
Custodial sentence length | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 |
1 year and over | 24% | 26% | 26% | 28% | 27% |
6 months and up to 1 year | 5% | 5% | 5% | 5% | 5% |
Over 3 months and up to 6 months | 5% | 5% | 6% | 4% | 4% |
Over 1 month and up to and including 3 months | 9% | 8% | 8% | 6% | 5% |
Up to and including 1 month | 7% | 6% | 5% | 4% | 3% |
N/A (received other sentence type or not sentenced) | 50% | 50% | 51% | 53% | 56% |
Source: Court Proceedings Database
Notes:
1) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
2) The figures given in the table relate to defendants for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
3) Defendants are reported against their principal (i.e. most serious) remand status. Court custody includes those remanded in custody at any stage of proceedings who may also have been given bail or not remanded at some stage of those proceedings.
4) 'To obtain percentages for cases completed at both magistrates' and Crown courts, cases where a defendant has failed to appear to their hearing have been excluded from the totals. This can be replicated within the remand tool, by deselecting '01: Failure to appear' in the Outcome filter within the Magistrates' Court tab.
5) Defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and subsequently committed to the Crown Court will have separate remand decisions made in both courts and will be included in both totals. To avoid duplication of figures, those committed to trial/sentence at Crown court following a hearing at magistrates' courts have been removed from the totals. This can be replicated within the remand tool, by deselecting '03: Committed to Crown Court for trial/sentencing' in the Outcome filters within the Magistrates' Court and Crown Courts tabs.
6) Please note, an issue we are currently investigating is the high proportion of unknown remand status at Crown Court – early findings suggest that these cases are split broadly proportionally (to offence breakdowns) across those remanded at custody and those granted bail. In 2022, 24% of defendants remanded at Crown Court had unknown remand status. We are working on a solution to fill in those unknown remand statuses with the actual status. Due to this, the figures presented only includes data for those where remand status is known.
7) The figures given in the table relate to those where sex is known to be female and age is known to be 18 or over.
8) An outcome of 'no sentence' includes cases where proceedings are discontinued, withdrawn, dismissed, or discharged Sec 6 at magistrates' courts, and not tried or acquitted at Crown Court.
9) The figures given in the table under outcome 'Other' relate to cases where the offender has been received a suspended sentence, absolute/conditional discharge, sentenced to pay a fine or compensation, or has been otherwise dealt with.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
It has not proved possible to respond to this question in the time available before Prorogation. Ministers will correspond directly with the Member.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
It has not proved possible to respond to this question in the time available before Prorogation. Ministers will correspond directly with the Member.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Data on the median number of nights children and young people spent in custody in secure children’s homes, secure training centres and young offender institutions, broken down by remand and sentence type, are provided in the table below. The figures in the Detention & Training Order and the “Other” categories include nights spent in custody following recall.
Year | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 |
Remand(1) | 39 | 43 | 59 | 68 | 47 |
Detention & Training Order | 92 | 91 | 97 | 115 | 91 |
Other(2) | 291 | 294 | 301 | 193 | 258 |
(1) Based on data from the Youth Justice Application Framework (YJAF), separate from adult offender data which is derived from the National Offender Management Information System (NOMIS).
(2) The sentences included in this category are those provided in: sections 90 and 91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000; sections 226, 226B and 228 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003; and sections 250 and 259 of the Sentencing Act 2020, Also included in this category are young people in custody under a civil order for breaching a gang injunction.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Departments have been asked to report on the current picture of suspected and confirmed Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) in their estates as soon as possible. This will be updated on a regular basis as new buildings are identified and surveying and remediation are carried out. The Government published lists of education settings confirmed as having RAAC on Wednesday 6 September and committed to providing further updates.
The potential mitigating actions for prison buildings will be to monitor them, prop them up or replace them, in line with Institute of Structural Engineers guidance.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Departments have been asked to report on the current picture of suspected and confirmed Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) in their estates as soon as possible. This will be updated on a regular basis as new buildings are identified and surveying and remediation are carried out. The Government published lists of education settings confirmed as having RAAC on Wednesday 6 September and committed to providing further updates.
The potential mitigating actions for prison buildings will be to monitor them, prop them up or replace them, in line with Institute of Structural Engineers guidance.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Departments have been asked to report on the current picture of suspected and confirmed Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) in their estates as soon as possible. This will be updated on a regular basis as new buildings are identified and surveying and remediation are carried out. The Government published lists of education settings confirmed as having RAAC on Wednesday 6 September and committed to providing further updates.
The potential mitigating actions for prison buildings will be to monitor them, prop them up or replace them, in line with Institute of Structural Engineers guidance.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
One of the strategic aims of the Female Offender Strategy Delivery Plan 2022-25 (Jan 2023) is to protect the public through better outcomes for women on release. We will work to reduce reoffending rates for women leaving custody, focusing on what we know works: a home, a job and access to treatment for substance misuse.
Contracts for holistic rehabilitative services for women deliver bespoke and specialist support to sentenced women (including those that have served short sentences) after their release from prison. These services support women to meet their resettlement and rehabilitative needs, including: help to find accommodation; help to find education, training or employment; support to meet finance, benefit and debt-related needs; help to address dependency issues; support to improve relationships with family or significant others; and support for their emotional wellbeing and social inclusion. These services are available post-release to all women who are subject to Probation supervision and we continue to explore how we might support those released unsentenced.
All women in prison, including those on remand, are supported to meet their immediate resettlement needs and prepare for release by probation staff in prisons and maintain accommodation whilst in prison respectively. This includes sustaining accommodation on reception where possible, making referrals for accommodation and signposting women towards specialist advice for finance and debt support.
A Short Sentence Function is being implemented in all regions which will work with all people on probation with ten months or fewer to serve in prison. This will enable them to be fast tracked and offered direct engagement.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We are unable to answer these questions within cost limits as the required detail is not within the prison NOMIS system. To obtain a robust estimate would require manually linking each incident to a prisoner, checking police records for all prisoners in scope, extracting and reporting on their criminal history and then linking to an additional database to identify seriousness of offence.
Data on absconds is published annually in the HMPPS annual digest. The latest version can be accessed via the following link: HMPPS Annual Digest, April 2021 to March 2022 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
Public protection is our top priority. When a prisoner absconds, police are immediately notified and are responsible for locating the offender. The majority of absconders are quickly recaptured and returned to custody.
Those who abscond face serious consequences, including being returned to closed prison conditions where they may serve up to two additional years on conviction. Prisoners subject to parole decisions will likely face longer before they are released.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We are unable to answer these questions within cost limits as the required detail is not within the prison NOMIS system. To obtain a robust estimate would require manually linking each incident to a prisoner, checking police records for all prisoners in scope, extracting and reporting on their criminal history and then linking to an additional database to identify seriousness of offence.
Data on absconds is published annually in the HMPPS annual digest. The latest version can be accessed via the following link: HMPPS Annual Digest, April 2021 to March 2022 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
Public protection is our top priority. When a prisoner absconds, police are immediately notified and are responsible for locating the offender. The majority of absconders are quickly recaptured and returned to custody.
Those who abscond face serious consequences, including being returned to closed prison conditions where they may serve up to two additional years on conviction. Prisoners subject to parole decisions will likely face longer before they are released.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
By law any prisoner serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence who has completed the minimum term (tariff) set by the Court at the point of sentence is eligible to be considered for release. However, the Parole Board will direct the prisoner’s release where it concludes that it is no longer necessary on the grounds of public protection for the prisoner to remain confined.
The Secretary of State must refer a prisoner’s case to the Parole Board at the end of their minimum tariff period and, if release is not directed, at least every two years thereafter. The Parole Board is responsible for the listing of cases referred to it. Ministers or officials may not intervene in this process.
The total number of prisoners serving an IPP sentence that had their first parole hearing after 2009 and were either (a) directed for release, or (b) not directed for release, following the hearing, is shown in the following table:
Hearing/Outcome Year | Release | Not directed for Release (including open condition decisions) |
2009 | (Note 3 below refers) | |
2010 | 39 | 1,033 |
2011 | 90 | 1,207 |
2012 | 69 | 658 |
2013 | 70 | 618 |
2014 | 49 | 344 |
2015 | 59 | 366 |
2016 | 64 | 246 |
2017 | 54 | 205 |
2018 | 48 | 127 |
2019 | 29 | 74 |
2020 | 18 | 46 |
2021 | 14 | 30 |
Notes:
- Cases not directed for release include open condition decisions.
- Providing the data as asked is not possible due to a number of process and system related issues that form part of the normal generic parole process.
- ‘Hearing/outcome year’ refers to the date of the hearing or, in instances where the date of the hearing is not recorded, the outcome date.
- Records prior to 2010 could not be located using administrative systems. The data provided only accounts for cases where the parole eligibility date starts from 2009. The first parole hearing data in the database is from 2010, so this restriction is necessary to improve identification of first parole hearings. It is likely that some cases with a parole eligibility date in 2009 or 2010 had a parole date hearing in 2009; these would not be captured in the table.
- Some hearings in recent years may be yet to conclude.
- This data does not account for deferrals or adjournments of parole hearings. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that this data has been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by HM Prison & Probation Service. Consequently, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below sets out the minimum terms of imprisonment (custodial tariffs) of prisoners serving an extended determinate sentence (EDS) who are eligible for release via parole as part of their EDS, who were released after their first parole review in each of the last five years in which full data is available.
Sentence length | Release year | ||||
| 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
Six months or less | 0 | 0 | * | * | * |
More than six months to less than twelve months | 0 | 0 | * | 0 | * |
From twelve months to less than two years | 4 | * | 8 | * | 6 |
From two years to less than four years | 38 | 31 | 38 | 59 | 43 |
From four years to less than six years | 72 | 137 | 166 | 208 | 192 |
From six years to less than ten years | 26 | 59 | 118 | 197 | 232 |
Ten years or more | 3 | * | 20 | 31 | 58 |
Data sources and quality:
1. Some prisoners were released without accessing the parole process because they were deported or, exceptionally, left prison following early release on compassionate grounds
2. Some parole hearings were not completed as a result of the prisoner receiving a new sentence or being transferred to secure hospital under the Mental Health Act 1983.
3. Total figures in the table do not match published total releases for EDS offenders, as some EDS offenders are not eligible for release via parole as part of their EDS.
4. The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
5. Disclosure control: An asterisk (*) has been used to suppress values of one or two. This is to prevent the disclosure of individual information. Further suppression may be applied where needed.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
By law any prisoner serving a life sentence who has completed the minimum term (tariff) set by the Court at the point of sentence is eligible to be considered for release, but will actually be released only when the Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary on the grounds of public protection for them to remain confined.
The total number of prisoners serving a life sentence that had their first parole hearing on or after tariff expiry; and were (1) directed for release, or (2) not directed for release, following the hearing, is shown in the following table;
| Number of Life Sentenced Offenders | |
Year | Release | Not directed for release |
2009 | * | * |
2010 | 40 | 32 |
2011 | 70 | 64 |
2012 | 77 | 31 |
2013 | 91 | 30 |
2014 | 74 | 41 |
2015 | 87 | 69 |
2016 | 119 | 98 |
2017 | 119 | 64 |
2018 | 110 | 76 |
2019 | 108 | 89 |
2020 | 133 | 72 |
2021 | 106 | 93 |
*Records from before 2010 could not be located using administrative systems.
Notes:
Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that this data has been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by HM Prison & Probation Service. Consequently, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
As of 11th January, no prisoners have been housed in police cells as part of Operation Safeguard since it was activated on 30th November 2022.
Police forces across the country use police cells occasionally in normal practice to house prisoners overnight, for example due to late sitting courts.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below identifies the overall operational capacity and population of the adult male open estate as at each Friday since 25th November 2022.
Date | Adult Male Open Estate | Total |
25/11/2022 | Operational Capacity | 5337 |
Population | 4712 | |
02/12/2022 | Operational Capacity | 5360 |
Population | 4708 | |
09/12/2022 | Operational Capacity | 5360 |
Population | 4741 | |
16/12/2022 | Operational Capacity | 5360 |
Population | 4762 | |
23/12/2022 | Operational Capacity | 5360 |
Population | 4771 | |
30/12/2022 | Operational Capacity | 5360 |
Population | 4732 | |
06/01/2023 | Operational Capacity | 5360 |
Population | 4702 |
The data provided in the table above does not include prisoners living in the open units of closed prisons (i.e. at HMP Norwich and HMP Stoke Heath).
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Every offender in the community on licence is liable to be recalled to prison, if they fail to comply with their licence conditions in such a way as to indicate the risk they present is no longer capable of being effectively managed in the community, so as to protect the public.
The following table shows the number of people serving (1) a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP), and (2) a life sentence, that were recalled to custody whilst on licence in the community in each year, from 31 December 2009 to 31 December 2021.
Year | Number of IPP offenders recalled (Bracketed figure is recalls as a percentage of total cases on licence) | Total number of IPP offenders on licence | Number of Life sentenced offenders recalled (Bracketed figure is recalls as a percentage of total cases on licence) | Total number of Life sentenced offenders on licence |
2010 (1) | 34 | -- | 95 | -- |
2011 | 60 (14%) | 429 | 118 (6%) | 1,896 |
2012 | 123 (14%) | 857 | 124 (6%) | 2,242 |
2013 | 240 (19%) | 1,231 | 174 (11%) | 1,656 |
2014 | 332 (23%) | 1,445 | 201 (9%) | 2,220 |
2015 | 363 (20%) | 1,850 | 212 (9%) | 2,410 |
2016 (1) | 482 | -- | 212 | -- |
2017 | 507 (19%) | 2,666 | 222 (7%) | 2,980 |
2018 | 637 (22%) | 2,935 | 288 (9%) | 3,256 |
2019 | 710 (23%) | 3,030 | 350 (9%) | 4,060 |
2020 | 639 (20%) | 3,125 | 290 (7%) | 4,361 |
2021 | 632 (20%) | 3,241 | 340 (8%) | 4,522 |
Notes:
- Due to a problem with the archived database, figures for 2010 and 2016 are unavailable.
- The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence was introduced in 2005 as an indeterminate sentence targeted at serious offenders who, although they were thought to pose an ongoing risk to public safety, did not merit a life sentence. IPP sentences were abolished in 2012 by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act.
- Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that this data has been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by HM Prison & Probation Service. Consequently, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government is committed to the protection of the public and the effective management of offenders. By law, prisoners serving indeterminate sentences who have completed their tariff will be released only when the Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary on the grounds of public protection for them to remain confined.
Statistics on the indeterminate population in prisons are routinely published as part of the Offender Management Statistics Quarterly: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly.
The following table shows the number of people, serving (1) a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection, and (2) a life sentence, under post-release supervision in the community by the Probation Service, from 31 December 2009 to 31 December 2021.
Year | Imprisonment for Public Protection (2) | Life imprisonment |
|
|
|
2009 | 93 | 1,507 |
2010 (1) | .. | .. |
2011 | 429 | 1,896 |
2012 | 857 | 2,242 |
2013 | 1,231 | 1,656 |
2014 | 1,445 | 2,220 |
2015 | 1,850 | 2,410 |
2016 (1) | .. | .. |
2017 | 2,666 | 2,980 |
2018 | 2,935 | 3,256 |
2019 | 3,030 | 4,060 |
2020 | 3,125 | 4,361 |
2021 | 3,241 | 4,522 |
Notes:
- Due to a problem with the archived database, figures for this year (2022) are unavailable.
- The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence was introduced in 2005 as an indeterminate sentence targeted at serious offenders who, although they were thought to pose an ongoing risk to public safety, did not merit a life sentence. IPP sentences were abolished in 2012 by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act.
- Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that this data has been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by HM Prison & Probation Service. Consequently, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The answer is given in the table below. In order to protect the public, offenders on licence are liable to be recalled to prison at any time if they breach their licence conditions in such a way as to demonstrate increased risk, such that the risk may no longer be effectively managed in the community.
Table 1: Recall prison population, by recorded sentence length(1) and sex, as at 30 Sep 2022; England & Wales | |||
|
|
|
|
| Total | Male | Female |
|
|
|
|
Total | 10,448 | 10,053 | 395 |
|
|
|
|
Less than 12 months | 680 | 621 | 59 |
12 months to less than 2 years | 911 | 857 | 54 |
2 years to less than 4 years | 2,206 | 2,091 | 115 |
4 years to less than 5 years | 954 | 914 | 40 |
5 years to less than 7 years | 1,315 | 1,281 | 34 |
7 years to less than 10 years | 1,247 | 1,215 | 32 |
10 years to less than 14 years | 639 | 627 | 12 |
14 years or over | 243 | 239 | 4 |
|
|
|
|
Other / Not Recorded(2) | 2,253 | 2,208 | 45 |
NOTES
(1) For recalled prisoners this should correspond with the original sentence length, but there may be cases for which this instead reflects the 'length of recall'
(2) This includes those recalled from indeterminate sentences who do not have a recorded sentence length.
Date Sources and Quality
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Source: prison-NOMIS (ref. PQ HL3589)
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below provides the information requested in relation to all prisoners in England and Wales, and to foreign nationals held in prison in England and Wales, by offence group as of 30 September 2022, the latest date for which information is available.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below shows the number of prisoners serving an extended determinate sentence (EDS), by custodial term, and by sex, as at 30 September 2022, in England and Wales:
| Male | Female |
Less than 1 year | 5 | 0 |
1 year to less than 2 years | 8 | 0 |
2 years to less than 4 years | 138 | * |
4 years to less than 5 years | 474 | 23 |
5 years to less than 7 years | 971 | 19 |
7 years to less than 10 years | 1,516 | 18 |
10 years to less than 14 years | 1,871 | 23 |
14 years or more | 1,895 | * |
Sentence length not recorded | 3 | 0 |
The data above shows the custodial term imposed under the extended determinate sentence and therefore the maximum time offenders serving the sentence could spend in custody. Such prisoners may be released after having served two thirds of this custodial term at the discretion of the parole board.
Data sources and quality
The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Small values marked by an asterisk have been suppressed in the above table to protect the identity of individuals.
Source: Prison NOMIS
PQ HL3588 (Ministry of Justice; Data and Analysis (Directorate))
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government is committed to the protection of the public and the effective management of offenders. By law, a prisoner serving an indeterminate sentence who has completed his/her tariff will be released only when the independent Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary on the grounds of public protection for the prisoner to remain confined.
The following table shows the (1) mean, and (2) median, number of months that prisoners serving (a) a life sentence, and (b) an indeterminate sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection, have spent in prison beyond their original tariff as at 30 September 2022.
| Over tariff Months | |
Status | Mean | Median |
Unreleased Life | 111 | 93 |
Unreleased IPP | 109 | 113 |
Notes for all figures in the above table:
- Tariff length is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date.
- Figures do not include whole-life orders.
- Figures relate only to cases where the tariff expiry date is passed, and the offender remains in prison unreleased.
- Numbers are subject to revision as more data become available.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Data has been supplied for as many of the requested years as it is possible to provide within cost limits; earlier years may not be available due to changes in recording over time.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table attached provides the information requested, as of 30 September in each of the last five years.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We ensure all our prison officers are trained in how to use PAVA professionally, safely and lawfully and that it is only used when necessary and proportionate.
There has been a total of 470 incidents involving PAVA since 1 April 2019. Of those, PAVA was drawn and deployed in 320 incidents and 150 were drawn only. See below for a breakdown by ethnicity and religion.
The data provided for this response is collected as internal management information and reflects the data held at the date of extraction. It is not quality assured in the same way as data prepared for publication and is subject to change.
| From Apr 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | To 22/11/2022 | Total |
Total Number of Incidents: | 55 | 104 | 148 | 163 | 470 |
Total Number of Drawn and Deployed Incidents | 42 | 62 | 103 | 113 | 320 |
Total Number of Drawn only Incidents | 13 | 42 | 45 | 50 | 150 |
Ethnicity:
Ethnicity | Individuals Impacted | Drawn and Deployed | Drawn only |
Asian/Asian British | 64 | 54 | 10 |
Black/Black British | 396 | 316 | 80 |
Mixed | 118 | 85 | 33 |
Other ethnic group | 24 | 19 | 5 |
White | 375 | 255 | 120 |
Not recorded | 8 | 3 | 5 |
Total | 985 | 732 | 253 |
Religion:
* denotes figures less than 5 which have been suppressed to avoid disclosure of information about individuals
Religion | Individuals Impacted | Drawn and Deployed | Drawn only |
Buddhist | * | * | * |
Christian | 431 | 318 | 113 |
Hindu | * | * | * |
Jewish | * | * | * |
Muslim | 279 | 217 | 62 |
Sikh | * | * | * |
Other | 20 | 15 | 5 |
No religion | 236 | 171 | 65 |
Not recorded | 8 | 4 | 4 |
Total | 985 | 732 | 253 |
PAVA is used in incidents such as prisoner on prisoner violence, therefore the number of incidents differs from the number of individuals impacted. Data for 2022 is to date (as of 22/11/22).
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below sets out the number of releases of prisoners serving an extended determinate sentence (EDS) who are eligible for release via parole as part of their EDS in each of the last five years in which full data are available.
Year of Release | Total EDS First-Time Releases | Total EDS Releases at First Hearing |
2017 | 143 | 55 |
2018 | 243 | 116 |
2019 | 352 | 137 |
2020 | 506 | 226 |
2021 | 533 | 220 |
Data sources and quality:
1. Some prisoners were released without accessing the parole process because they were deported or, exceptionally, left prison following early release on compassionate grounds
2. Some parole hearings were not completed as a result of the prisoner receiving a new sentence or being transferred to secure hospital under the Mental Health Act 1983.
3. Total figures in the table do not match published total releases for EDS offenders, as some EDS offenders are not eligible for release via parole as part of their EDS.
4. The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Relevant data are provided in the statistical publication Ethnicity and the Criminal Justice System. The most recent publication includes a snapshot of data for 30 June 2020. The relevant figures can be found in Table 6.01, which is reproduced in the attachment.
Data for 30 June 2021 and 30 June 2022 will be included in the next publication, which is scheduled for November 2023.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Please find the requested information in the attached data tables.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The number of people who had been held in prison on remand for longer than six months, one year and two years on 31 December 2021, also broken down by offence group, is provided in the attached tables.
The department’s latest prison population data as part of the Offender Management Statistics Quarterly is available up to 30 September 2022 and can be found here: Offender Management Statistics quarterly: April to June 2022 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The number of people who had been held in prison on remand for longer than six months, one year and two years on 31 December 2021, also broken down by offence group, is provided in the attached tables.
The department’s latest prison population data as part of the Offender Management Statistics Quarterly is available up to 30 September 2022 and can be found here: Offender Management Statistics quarterly: April to June 2022 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Please find the requested information in the attached data tables.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The latest available figures (October 2022) show that 1435 prisoners were studying with the Open University. In addition, 50 learners were enrolled on Access to Higher Education courses, with support from the Prisoners’ Education Trust.
We have recently changed the law to allow prisoners to begin apprenticeships whilst in custody, working in key industries such as hospitality and construction.
Information on the support available for prisoners wishing to undertake Higher Education is available in prison libraries.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) has been rolling out PAVA incapacitant spray to all band 3-5 staff in the adult closed male estate and this is still under way. Staff require appropriate training to use PAVA and only prisons that have implemented the key work scheme – which is vital in building relationships between offenders and staff – will receive it.
The figures for delivery of key work quoted in the joint inspection report are the latest currently available.
Key work remains a priority for HMPPS, however, and has an important role in supporting improvements to prisons safety, reducing the risk of harm and re-offending and promoting community reintegration.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The data requested is provided in the attached tables.
The Ministry of Justice publishes information on Extended Determinate Sentences and custodial sentence length, by ethnicity, in England and Wales, for the years 2017 to 2021 available in the Outcomes by Offence data tool (MS Excel Spreadsheet, 21 MB).
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
By law, prisoners serving life and other indeterminate sentences must complete their tariff in custody and thereafter be released only when the Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for them to remain confined to custody. The Government is committed to supporting prisoners to reduce their risk and so progress towards safe release, but the priority is always to protect the public.
HL1672
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of tariff lengths in years for prisoners who received a life sentence in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2002 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2003 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2004 | 5 | 11 | 14 | 9 |
2005 | 5 | 11 | 15 | 10 |
2006 | 7 | 12 | 18 | 11 |
2007 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 7 |
2008 | 11 | 14 | 20 | 9 |
2009 | 12 | 15 | 19 | 7 |
2010 | 13 | 17 | 22 | 9 |
2011 | 14 | 17 | 21 | 7 |
2012 | 14 | 18 | 24 | 10 |
2013 | 13 | 17 | 23 | 10 |
2014 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2015 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2016 | 12 | 17 | 22 | 10 |
2017 | 10 | 17 | 22 | 12 |
2018 | 13 | 18 | 23 | 10 |
2019 | 14 | 18 | 23 | 9 |
2020 | 14 | 19 | 24 | 10 |
2021 | 15 | 19 | 24 | 9 |
HL1673
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the number of months spent in custody by life sentence prisoners who were released in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 133 | 170 | 240 | 107 |
2011 | 119 | 157 | 213 | 94 |
2012 | 129 | 166 | 240 | 111 |
2013 | 136 | 174 | 243 | 107 |
2014 | 135 | 171 | 236 | 101 |
2015 | 144 | 176 | 224 | 81 |
2016 | 149 | 177 | 229 | 80 |
2017 | 151 | 180 | 247 | 96 |
2018 | 158 | 191 | 235 | 77 |
2019 | 172 | 200 | 268 | 96 |
2020 | 164 | 191 | 240 | 76 |
2021 | 165 | 205 | 263 | 98 |
Notes for above figures: Months spent in custody is calculated from date of sentence to release date. It does not take into consideration time spent in custody before sentence.
HL1674
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the age of prisoners serving a life sentence at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 37 | 45 | 53 | 16 |
2011 | 34 | 42 | 50 | 16 |
2012 | 38 | 45 | 53 | 15 |
2013 | 38 | 46 | 55 | 17 |
2014 | 39 | 47 | 54 | 15 |
2015 | 38 | 46 | 54 | 16 |
2016 | 40 | 47 | 54 | 14 |
2017 | 39 | 47 | 56 | 17 |
2018 | 40 | 49 | 57 | 17 |
2019 | 42 | 51 | 58 | 16 |
2020 | 39 | 48 | 57 | 18 |
2021 | 39 | 49 | 57 | 18 |
Notes for above figures: Age at time of release does not reflect how long the offender had been in custody.
HL1675
The following table shows the (1) mean, and (2) median, number of months spent in custody beyond tariff for life sentence prisoners at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Average | Median |
2010 | 67 | 47 |
2011 | 69 | 51 |
2012 | 81 | 60 |
2013 | 80 | 66 |
2014 | 83 | 65 |
2015 | 76 | 64 |
2016 | 79 | 63 |
2017 | 81 | 55 |
2018 | 90 | 69 |
2019 | 96 | 83 |
2020 | 79 | 44 |
2021 | 83 | 46 |
HL1676
The following table shows the proportion of prisoners serving a life sentence who were released at their first Parole Board hearing in each year since 2002.
| Knockback | Open | Release |
Hearing Start Year | % | % | % |
2010 | 28 | 44 | 28 |
2011 | 31 | 37 | 32 |
2012 | 18 | 39 | 43 |
2013 | 17 | 38 | 45 |
2014 | 26 | 28 | 47 |
2015 | 35 | 20 | 44 |
2016 | 36 | 20 | 44 |
2017 | 25 | 27 | 47 |
2018 | 32 | 22 | 46 |
2019 | 37 | 18 | 45 |
2020 | 28 | 19 | 52 |
2021 | 38 | 19 | 43 |
HL1677
The following table shows the number of 'unreleased IPP prisoners with a tariff length of 10 years or more, by ethnicity group, as at 30 June 2015 to 30 June 2021.
| 30/06/15 | 30/06/16 | 30/06/17 | 30/06/18 | 30/06/19 | 30/06/20 | 30/06/21 |
Total | 94 | 92 | 90 | 87 | 89 | 84 | 76 |
Asian/ Asian British | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
Black/ African/ Caribbean/ Black British | 26 | 26 | 25 | 25 | 26 | 26 | 22 |
Mixed/ Multiple ethnic groups | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
White | 57 | 55 | 55 | 52 | 53 | 48 | 45 |
Notes for above figures: Figures exclude prisoners recalled from an IPP sentence
Notes for all figures in the above tables:
Due to rounding, the interquartile range may not equal the difference between the third and first quartiles.
Tariff length is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date.
Figures do not include whole-life orders.
Numbers are subject to revision as more data become available.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Data has been supplied for as many of the requested years as it is possible to provide within cost limits; earlier years may not be available due to changes in recording over time.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
By law, prisoners serving life and other indeterminate sentences must complete their tariff in custody and thereafter be released only when the Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for them to remain confined to custody. The Government is committed to supporting prisoners to reduce their risk and so progress towards safe release, but the priority is always to protect the public.
HL1672
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of tariff lengths in years for prisoners who received a life sentence in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2002 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2003 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2004 | 5 | 11 | 14 | 9 |
2005 | 5 | 11 | 15 | 10 |
2006 | 7 | 12 | 18 | 11 |
2007 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 7 |
2008 | 11 | 14 | 20 | 9 |
2009 | 12 | 15 | 19 | 7 |
2010 | 13 | 17 | 22 | 9 |
2011 | 14 | 17 | 21 | 7 |
2012 | 14 | 18 | 24 | 10 |
2013 | 13 | 17 | 23 | 10 |
2014 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2015 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2016 | 12 | 17 | 22 | 10 |
2017 | 10 | 17 | 22 | 12 |
2018 | 13 | 18 | 23 | 10 |
2019 | 14 | 18 | 23 | 9 |
2020 | 14 | 19 | 24 | 10 |
2021 | 15 | 19 | 24 | 9 |
HL1673
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the number of months spent in custody by life sentence prisoners who were released in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 133 | 170 | 240 | 107 |
2011 | 119 | 157 | 213 | 94 |
2012 | 129 | 166 | 240 | 111 |
2013 | 136 | 174 | 243 | 107 |
2014 | 135 | 171 | 236 | 101 |
2015 | 144 | 176 | 224 | 81 |
2016 | 149 | 177 | 229 | 80 |
2017 | 151 | 180 | 247 | 96 |
2018 | 158 | 191 | 235 | 77 |
2019 | 172 | 200 | 268 | 96 |
2020 | 164 | 191 | 240 | 76 |
2021 | 165 | 205 | 263 | 98 |
Notes for above figures: Months spent in custody is calculated from date of sentence to release date. It does not take into consideration time spent in custody before sentence.
HL1674
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the age of prisoners serving a life sentence at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 37 | 45 | 53 | 16 |
2011 | 34 | 42 | 50 | 16 |
2012 | 38 | 45 | 53 | 15 |
2013 | 38 | 46 | 55 | 17 |
2014 | 39 | 47 | 54 | 15 |
2015 | 38 | 46 | 54 | 16 |
2016 | 40 | 47 | 54 | 14 |
2017 | 39 | 47 | 56 | 17 |
2018 | 40 | 49 | 57 | 17 |
2019 | 42 | 51 | 58 | 16 |
2020 | 39 | 48 | 57 | 18 |
2021 | 39 | 49 | 57 | 18 |
Notes for above figures: Age at time of release does not reflect how long the offender had been in custody.
HL1675
The following table shows the (1) mean, and (2) median, number of months spent in custody beyond tariff for life sentence prisoners at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Average | Median |
2010 | 67 | 47 |
2011 | 69 | 51 |
2012 | 81 | 60 |
2013 | 80 | 66 |
2014 | 83 | 65 |
2015 | 76 | 64 |
2016 | 79 | 63 |
2017 | 81 | 55 |
2018 | 90 | 69 |
2019 | 96 | 83 |
2020 | 79 | 44 |
2021 | 83 | 46 |
HL1676
The following table shows the proportion of prisoners serving a life sentence who were released at their first Parole Board hearing in each year since 2002.
| Knockback | Open | Release |
Hearing Start Year | % | % | % |
2010 | 28 | 44 | 28 |
2011 | 31 | 37 | 32 |
2012 | 18 | 39 | 43 |
2013 | 17 | 38 | 45 |
2014 | 26 | 28 | 47 |
2015 | 35 | 20 | 44 |
2016 | 36 | 20 | 44 |
2017 | 25 | 27 | 47 |
2018 | 32 | 22 | 46 |
2019 | 37 | 18 | 45 |
2020 | 28 | 19 | 52 |
2021 | 38 | 19 | 43 |
HL1677
The following table shows the number of 'unreleased IPP prisoners with a tariff length of 10 years or more, by ethnicity group, as at 30 June 2015 to 30 June 2021.
| 30/06/15 | 30/06/16 | 30/06/17 | 30/06/18 | 30/06/19 | 30/06/20 | 30/06/21 |
Total | 94 | 92 | 90 | 87 | 89 | 84 | 76 |
Asian/ Asian British | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
Black/ African/ Caribbean/ Black British | 26 | 26 | 25 | 25 | 26 | 26 | 22 |
Mixed/ Multiple ethnic groups | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
White | 57 | 55 | 55 | 52 | 53 | 48 | 45 |
Notes for above figures: Figures exclude prisoners recalled from an IPP sentence
Notes for all figures in the above tables:
Due to rounding, the interquartile range may not equal the difference between the third and first quartiles.
Tariff length is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date.
Figures do not include whole-life orders.
Numbers are subject to revision as more data become available.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Data has been supplied for as many of the requested years as it is possible to provide within cost limits; earlier years may not be available due to changes in recording over time.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
By law, prisoners serving life and other indeterminate sentences must complete their tariff in custody and thereafter be released only when the Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for them to remain confined to custody. The Government is committed to supporting prisoners to reduce their risk and so progress towards safe release, but the priority is always to protect the public.
HL1672
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of tariff lengths in years for prisoners who received a life sentence in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2002 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2003 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2004 | 5 | 11 | 14 | 9 |
2005 | 5 | 11 | 15 | 10 |
2006 | 7 | 12 | 18 | 11 |
2007 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 7 |
2008 | 11 | 14 | 20 | 9 |
2009 | 12 | 15 | 19 | 7 |
2010 | 13 | 17 | 22 | 9 |
2011 | 14 | 17 | 21 | 7 |
2012 | 14 | 18 | 24 | 10 |
2013 | 13 | 17 | 23 | 10 |
2014 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2015 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2016 | 12 | 17 | 22 | 10 |
2017 | 10 | 17 | 22 | 12 |
2018 | 13 | 18 | 23 | 10 |
2019 | 14 | 18 | 23 | 9 |
2020 | 14 | 19 | 24 | 10 |
2021 | 15 | 19 | 24 | 9 |
HL1673
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the number of months spent in custody by life sentence prisoners who were released in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 133 | 170 | 240 | 107 |
2011 | 119 | 157 | 213 | 94 |
2012 | 129 | 166 | 240 | 111 |
2013 | 136 | 174 | 243 | 107 |
2014 | 135 | 171 | 236 | 101 |
2015 | 144 | 176 | 224 | 81 |
2016 | 149 | 177 | 229 | 80 |
2017 | 151 | 180 | 247 | 96 |
2018 | 158 | 191 | 235 | 77 |
2019 | 172 | 200 | 268 | 96 |
2020 | 164 | 191 | 240 | 76 |
2021 | 165 | 205 | 263 | 98 |
Notes for above figures: Months spent in custody is calculated from date of sentence to release date. It does not take into consideration time spent in custody before sentence.
HL1674
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the age of prisoners serving a life sentence at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 37 | 45 | 53 | 16 |
2011 | 34 | 42 | 50 | 16 |
2012 | 38 | 45 | 53 | 15 |
2013 | 38 | 46 | 55 | 17 |
2014 | 39 | 47 | 54 | 15 |
2015 | 38 | 46 | 54 | 16 |
2016 | 40 | 47 | 54 | 14 |
2017 | 39 | 47 | 56 | 17 |
2018 | 40 | 49 | 57 | 17 |
2019 | 42 | 51 | 58 | 16 |
2020 | 39 | 48 | 57 | 18 |
2021 | 39 | 49 | 57 | 18 |
Notes for above figures: Age at time of release does not reflect how long the offender had been in custody.
HL1675
The following table shows the (1) mean, and (2) median, number of months spent in custody beyond tariff for life sentence prisoners at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Average | Median |
2010 | 67 | 47 |
2011 | 69 | 51 |
2012 | 81 | 60 |
2013 | 80 | 66 |
2014 | 83 | 65 |
2015 | 76 | 64 |
2016 | 79 | 63 |
2017 | 81 | 55 |
2018 | 90 | 69 |
2019 | 96 | 83 |
2020 | 79 | 44 |
2021 | 83 | 46 |
HL1676
The following table shows the proportion of prisoners serving a life sentence who were released at their first Parole Board hearing in each year since 2002.
| Knockback | Open | Release |
Hearing Start Year | % | % | % |
2010 | 28 | 44 | 28 |
2011 | 31 | 37 | 32 |
2012 | 18 | 39 | 43 |
2013 | 17 | 38 | 45 |
2014 | 26 | 28 | 47 |
2015 | 35 | 20 | 44 |
2016 | 36 | 20 | 44 |
2017 | 25 | 27 | 47 |
2018 | 32 | 22 | 46 |
2019 | 37 | 18 | 45 |
2020 | 28 | 19 | 52 |
2021 | 38 | 19 | 43 |
HL1677
The following table shows the number of 'unreleased IPP prisoners with a tariff length of 10 years or more, by ethnicity group, as at 30 June 2015 to 30 June 2021.
| 30/06/15 | 30/06/16 | 30/06/17 | 30/06/18 | 30/06/19 | 30/06/20 | 30/06/21 |
Total | 94 | 92 | 90 | 87 | 89 | 84 | 76 |
Asian/ Asian British | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
Black/ African/ Caribbean/ Black British | 26 | 26 | 25 | 25 | 26 | 26 | 22 |
Mixed/ Multiple ethnic groups | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
White | 57 | 55 | 55 | 52 | 53 | 48 | 45 |
Notes for above figures: Figures exclude prisoners recalled from an IPP sentence
Notes for all figures in the above tables:
Due to rounding, the interquartile range may not equal the difference between the third and first quartiles.
Tariff length is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date.
Figures do not include whole-life orders.
Numbers are subject to revision as more data become available.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Data has been supplied for as many of the requested years as it is possible to provide within cost limits; earlier years may not be available due to changes in recording over time.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
By law, prisoners serving life and other indeterminate sentences must complete their tariff in custody and thereafter be released only when the Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for them to remain confined to custody. The Government is committed to supporting prisoners to reduce their risk and so progress towards safe release, but the priority is always to protect the public.
HL1672
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of tariff lengths in years for prisoners who received a life sentence in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2002 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2003 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2004 | 5 | 11 | 14 | 9 |
2005 | 5 | 11 | 15 | 10 |
2006 | 7 | 12 | 18 | 11 |
2007 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 7 |
2008 | 11 | 14 | 20 | 9 |
2009 | 12 | 15 | 19 | 7 |
2010 | 13 | 17 | 22 | 9 |
2011 | 14 | 17 | 21 | 7 |
2012 | 14 | 18 | 24 | 10 |
2013 | 13 | 17 | 23 | 10 |
2014 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2015 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2016 | 12 | 17 | 22 | 10 |
2017 | 10 | 17 | 22 | 12 |
2018 | 13 | 18 | 23 | 10 |
2019 | 14 | 18 | 23 | 9 |
2020 | 14 | 19 | 24 | 10 |
2021 | 15 | 19 | 24 | 9 |
HL1673
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the number of months spent in custody by life sentence prisoners who were released in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 133 | 170 | 240 | 107 |
2011 | 119 | 157 | 213 | 94 |
2012 | 129 | 166 | 240 | 111 |
2013 | 136 | 174 | 243 | 107 |
2014 | 135 | 171 | 236 | 101 |
2015 | 144 | 176 | 224 | 81 |
2016 | 149 | 177 | 229 | 80 |
2017 | 151 | 180 | 247 | 96 |
2018 | 158 | 191 | 235 | 77 |
2019 | 172 | 200 | 268 | 96 |
2020 | 164 | 191 | 240 | 76 |
2021 | 165 | 205 | 263 | 98 |
Notes for above figures: Months spent in custody is calculated from date of sentence to release date. It does not take into consideration time spent in custody before sentence.
HL1674
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the age of prisoners serving a life sentence at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 37 | 45 | 53 | 16 |
2011 | 34 | 42 | 50 | 16 |
2012 | 38 | 45 | 53 | 15 |
2013 | 38 | 46 | 55 | 17 |
2014 | 39 | 47 | 54 | 15 |
2015 | 38 | 46 | 54 | 16 |
2016 | 40 | 47 | 54 | 14 |
2017 | 39 | 47 | 56 | 17 |
2018 | 40 | 49 | 57 | 17 |
2019 | 42 | 51 | 58 | 16 |
2020 | 39 | 48 | 57 | 18 |
2021 | 39 | 49 | 57 | 18 |
Notes for above figures: Age at time of release does not reflect how long the offender had been in custody.
HL1675
The following table shows the (1) mean, and (2) median, number of months spent in custody beyond tariff for life sentence prisoners at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Average | Median |
2010 | 67 | 47 |
2011 | 69 | 51 |
2012 | 81 | 60 |
2013 | 80 | 66 |
2014 | 83 | 65 |
2015 | 76 | 64 |
2016 | 79 | 63 |
2017 | 81 | 55 |
2018 | 90 | 69 |
2019 | 96 | 83 |
2020 | 79 | 44 |
2021 | 83 | 46 |
HL1676
The following table shows the proportion of prisoners serving a life sentence who were released at their first Parole Board hearing in each year since 2002.
| Knockback | Open | Release |
Hearing Start Year | % | % | % |
2010 | 28 | 44 | 28 |
2011 | 31 | 37 | 32 |
2012 | 18 | 39 | 43 |
2013 | 17 | 38 | 45 |
2014 | 26 | 28 | 47 |
2015 | 35 | 20 | 44 |
2016 | 36 | 20 | 44 |
2017 | 25 | 27 | 47 |
2018 | 32 | 22 | 46 |
2019 | 37 | 18 | 45 |
2020 | 28 | 19 | 52 |
2021 | 38 | 19 | 43 |
HL1677
The following table shows the number of 'unreleased IPP prisoners with a tariff length of 10 years or more, by ethnicity group, as at 30 June 2015 to 30 June 2021.
| 30/06/15 | 30/06/16 | 30/06/17 | 30/06/18 | 30/06/19 | 30/06/20 | 30/06/21 |
Total | 94 | 92 | 90 | 87 | 89 | 84 | 76 |
Asian/ Asian British | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
Black/ African/ Caribbean/ Black British | 26 | 26 | 25 | 25 | 26 | 26 | 22 |
Mixed/ Multiple ethnic groups | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
White | 57 | 55 | 55 | 52 | 53 | 48 | 45 |
Notes for above figures: Figures exclude prisoners recalled from an IPP sentence
Notes for all figures in the above tables:
Due to rounding, the interquartile range may not equal the difference between the third and first quartiles.
Tariff length is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date.
Figures do not include whole-life orders.
Numbers are subject to revision as more data become available.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Data has been supplied for as many of the requested years as it is possible to provide within cost limits; earlier years may not be available due to changes in recording over time.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
By law, prisoners serving life and other indeterminate sentences must complete their tariff in custody and thereafter be released only when the Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for them to remain confined to custody. The Government is committed to supporting prisoners to reduce their risk and so progress towards safe release, but the priority is always to protect the public.
HL1672
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of tariff lengths in years for prisoners who received a life sentence in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2002 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2003 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2004 | 5 | 11 | 14 | 9 |
2005 | 5 | 11 | 15 | 10 |
2006 | 7 | 12 | 18 | 11 |
2007 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 7 |
2008 | 11 | 14 | 20 | 9 |
2009 | 12 | 15 | 19 | 7 |
2010 | 13 | 17 | 22 | 9 |
2011 | 14 | 17 | 21 | 7 |
2012 | 14 | 18 | 24 | 10 |
2013 | 13 | 17 | 23 | 10 |
2014 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2015 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2016 | 12 | 17 | 22 | 10 |
2017 | 10 | 17 | 22 | 12 |
2018 | 13 | 18 | 23 | 10 |
2019 | 14 | 18 | 23 | 9 |
2020 | 14 | 19 | 24 | 10 |
2021 | 15 | 19 | 24 | 9 |
HL1673
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the number of months spent in custody by life sentence prisoners who were released in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 133 | 170 | 240 | 107 |
2011 | 119 | 157 | 213 | 94 |
2012 | 129 | 166 | 240 | 111 |
2013 | 136 | 174 | 243 | 107 |
2014 | 135 | 171 | 236 | 101 |
2015 | 144 | 176 | 224 | 81 |
2016 | 149 | 177 | 229 | 80 |
2017 | 151 | 180 | 247 | 96 |
2018 | 158 | 191 | 235 | 77 |
2019 | 172 | 200 | 268 | 96 |
2020 | 164 | 191 | 240 | 76 |
2021 | 165 | 205 | 263 | 98 |
Notes for above figures: Months spent in custody is calculated from date of sentence to release date. It does not take into consideration time spent in custody before sentence.
HL1674
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the age of prisoners serving a life sentence at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 37 | 45 | 53 | 16 |
2011 | 34 | 42 | 50 | 16 |
2012 | 38 | 45 | 53 | 15 |
2013 | 38 | 46 | 55 | 17 |
2014 | 39 | 47 | 54 | 15 |
2015 | 38 | 46 | 54 | 16 |
2016 | 40 | 47 | 54 | 14 |
2017 | 39 | 47 | 56 | 17 |
2018 | 40 | 49 | 57 | 17 |
2019 | 42 | 51 | 58 | 16 |
2020 | 39 | 48 | 57 | 18 |
2021 | 39 | 49 | 57 | 18 |
Notes for above figures: Age at time of release does not reflect how long the offender had been in custody.
HL1675
The following table shows the (1) mean, and (2) median, number of months spent in custody beyond tariff for life sentence prisoners at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Average | Median |
2010 | 67 | 47 |
2011 | 69 | 51 |
2012 | 81 | 60 |
2013 | 80 | 66 |
2014 | 83 | 65 |
2015 | 76 | 64 |
2016 | 79 | 63 |
2017 | 81 | 55 |
2018 | 90 | 69 |
2019 | 96 | 83 |
2020 | 79 | 44 |
2021 | 83 | 46 |
HL1676
The following table shows the proportion of prisoners serving a life sentence who were released at their first Parole Board hearing in each year since 2002.
| Knockback | Open | Release |
Hearing Start Year | % | % | % |
2010 | 28 | 44 | 28 |
2011 | 31 | 37 | 32 |
2012 | 18 | 39 | 43 |
2013 | 17 | 38 | 45 |
2014 | 26 | 28 | 47 |
2015 | 35 | 20 | 44 |
2016 | 36 | 20 | 44 |
2017 | 25 | 27 | 47 |
2018 | 32 | 22 | 46 |
2019 | 37 | 18 | 45 |
2020 | 28 | 19 | 52 |
2021 | 38 | 19 | 43 |
HL1677
The following table shows the number of 'unreleased IPP prisoners with a tariff length of 10 years or more, by ethnicity group, as at 30 June 2015 to 30 June 2021.
| 30/06/15 | 30/06/16 | 30/06/17 | 30/06/18 | 30/06/19 | 30/06/20 | 30/06/21 |
Total | 94 | 92 | 90 | 87 | 89 | 84 | 76 |
Asian/ Asian British | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
Black/ African/ Caribbean/ Black British | 26 | 26 | 25 | 25 | 26 | 26 | 22 |
Mixed/ Multiple ethnic groups | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
White | 57 | 55 | 55 | 52 | 53 | 48 | 45 |
Notes for above figures: Figures exclude prisoners recalled from an IPP sentence
Notes for all figures in the above tables:
Due to rounding, the interquartile range may not equal the difference between the third and first quartiles.
Tariff length is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date.
Figures do not include whole-life orders.
Numbers are subject to revision as more data become available.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Data has been supplied for as many of the requested years as it is possible to provide within cost limits; earlier years may not be available due to changes in recording over time.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
By law, prisoners serving life and other indeterminate sentences must complete their tariff in custody and thereafter be released only when the Parole Board concludes that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for them to remain confined to custody. The Government is committed to supporting prisoners to reduce their risk and so progress towards safe release, but the priority is always to protect the public.
HL1672
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of tariff lengths in years for prisoners who received a life sentence in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2002 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2003 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 9 |
2004 | 5 | 11 | 14 | 9 |
2005 | 5 | 11 | 15 | 10 |
2006 | 7 | 12 | 18 | 11 |
2007 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 7 |
2008 | 11 | 14 | 20 | 9 |
2009 | 12 | 15 | 19 | 7 |
2010 | 13 | 17 | 22 | 9 |
2011 | 14 | 17 | 21 | 7 |
2012 | 14 | 18 | 24 | 10 |
2013 | 13 | 17 | 23 | 10 |
2014 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2015 | 11 | 17 | 23 | 12 |
2016 | 12 | 17 | 22 | 10 |
2017 | 10 | 17 | 22 | 12 |
2018 | 13 | 18 | 23 | 10 |
2019 | 14 | 18 | 23 | 9 |
2020 | 14 | 19 | 24 | 10 |
2021 | 15 | 19 | 24 | 9 |
HL1673
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the number of months spent in custody by life sentence prisoners who were released in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 133 | 170 | 240 | 107 |
2011 | 119 | 157 | 213 | 94 |
2012 | 129 | 166 | 240 | 111 |
2013 | 136 | 174 | 243 | 107 |
2014 | 135 | 171 | 236 | 101 |
2015 | 144 | 176 | 224 | 81 |
2016 | 149 | 177 | 229 | 80 |
2017 | 151 | 180 | 247 | 96 |
2018 | 158 | 191 | 235 | 77 |
2019 | 172 | 200 | 268 | 96 |
2020 | 164 | 191 | 240 | 76 |
2021 | 165 | 205 | 263 | 98 |
Notes for above figures: Months spent in custody is calculated from date of sentence to release date. It does not take into consideration time spent in custody before sentence.
HL1674
The following table shows the (1) lower quartile, (2) median, (3) upper quartile, and (4) interquartile range, of the age of prisoners serving a life sentence at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Lower Quartile | Median | Upper Quartile | Interquartile Range |
2010 | 37 | 45 | 53 | 16 |
2011 | 34 | 42 | 50 | 16 |
2012 | 38 | 45 | 53 | 15 |
2013 | 38 | 46 | 55 | 17 |
2014 | 39 | 47 | 54 | 15 |
2015 | 38 | 46 | 54 | 16 |
2016 | 40 | 47 | 54 | 14 |
2017 | 39 | 47 | 56 | 17 |
2018 | 40 | 49 | 57 | 17 |
2019 | 42 | 51 | 58 | 16 |
2020 | 39 | 48 | 57 | 18 |
2021 | 39 | 49 | 57 | 18 |
Notes for above figures: Age at time of release does not reflect how long the offender had been in custody.
HL1675
The following table shows the (1) mean, and (2) median, number of months spent in custody beyond tariff for life sentence prisoners at the point of release in each year since 2002.
Year of Sentence | Average | Median |
2010 | 67 | 47 |
2011 | 69 | 51 |
2012 | 81 | 60 |
2013 | 80 | 66 |
2014 | 83 | 65 |
2015 | 76 | 64 |
2016 | 79 | 63 |
2017 | 81 | 55 |
2018 | 90 | 69 |
2019 | 96 | 83 |
2020 | 79 | 44 |
2021 | 83 | 46 |
HL1676
The following table shows the proportion of prisoners serving a life sentence who were released at their first Parole Board hearing in each year since 2002.
| Knockback | Open | Release |
Hearing Start Year | % | % | % |
2010 | 28 | 44 | 28 |
2011 | 31 | 37 | 32 |
2012 | 18 | 39 | 43 |
2013 | 17 | 38 | 45 |
2014 | 26 | 28 | 47 |
2015 | 35 | 20 | 44 |
2016 | 36 | 20 | 44 |
2017 | 25 | 27 | 47 |
2018 | 32 | 22 | 46 |
2019 | 37 | 18 | 45 |
2020 | 28 | 19 | 52 |
2021 | 38 | 19 | 43 |
HL1677
The following table shows the number of 'unreleased IPP prisoners with a tariff length of 10 years or more, by ethnicity group, as at 30 June 2015 to 30 June 2021.
| 30/06/15 | 30/06/16 | 30/06/17 | 30/06/18 | 30/06/19 | 30/06/20 | 30/06/21 |
Total | 94 | 92 | 90 | 87 | 89 | 84 | 76 |
Asian/ Asian British | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
Black/ African/ Caribbean/ Black British | 26 | 26 | 25 | 25 | 26 | 26 | 22 |
Mixed/ Multiple ethnic groups | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
White | 57 | 55 | 55 | 52 | 53 | 48 | 45 |
Notes for above figures: Figures exclude prisoners recalled from an IPP sentence
Notes for all figures in the above tables:
Due to rounding, the interquartile range may not equal the difference between the third and first quartiles.
Tariff length is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date.
Figures do not include whole-life orders.
Numbers are subject to revision as more data become available.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Data has been supplied for as many of the requested years as it is possible to provide within cost limits; earlier years may not be available due to changes in recording over time.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The requested information can be found in the table below. This information includes male and female prisoners held in prisons and young offender institutions in England and Wales and was accurate as of Friday 25th March 2022.
Age Group | Average Straight-Line Distance from home address (Miles) |
15–17 | 48.7 |
18–24 | 37.5 |
25–29 | 42.0 |
30 and over | 47.4 |
Total | 45.1 |
There are complex and wide-ranging issues involved in transferring and locating prisoners, and allocation decisions must reflect both the specific needs and circumstances of the prisoner, including their security assessment, as well as the operating environment and range of services at the receiving prison.
HMPPS is committed to ensuring, where practicable, that prisoners are accommodated as close as possible to their resettlement communities and families. Whilst this is a priority, it is not always possible due to a variety of factors including wider population pressures, or where prisoners have specific sentence planning needs which can only be met at certain establishments.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
Figures for convicted foreign national prisoners by offence group and nationality as of 31 December 2021 in England and Wales can be found in the table attached.
We are committed to removing foreign offenders from the UK by working with international governments and reviewing our early removal mechanisms to maximise the removal of serious and persistent offenders.
Since January 2019 we have removed more than 10,000 foreign national offenders from our prisons, immigration removal centres and the community (to year ending September 2021).
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The answer is given in Table 1.
Table 1: Determinate sentenced prisoners(1) with a Parole Eligibility Date (PED), by time between First Movement Date(2) and Date of Release; as at 31 December 2021, England & Wales
| Total |
Determinate sentenced prisoners with a Parole Eligibility Date | 8,511 |
less than a year | * |
Between 1 and 2 years | * |
Between 2 and 4 years | 159 |
Between 4 and 5 years | 402 |
Between 5 and 7 years | 1,030 |
Between 7 and 10 years | 1,901 |
Between 10 and 14 years | 2,426 |
14 years and over | 2,586 |
|
Data sources and quality
The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Notes
(1) Recalled prisoners have not been included in these figures
(2) First Movement Date has been used, as it would reflect any time on remand deducted from total sentence length
Disclosure control
An asterisk (*) has been used to suppress values of one and two. This is to prevent the disclosure of individual information. Further disclosure control may be completed where this alone is not sufficient
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Every use of physical force is reviewed, and prison officers receive appropriate training to ensure that it is only used when necessary, reasonable and proportionate, and as a last resort.
HMPPS is working hard to retain staff, providing opportunities for them to progress their careers, and significant investment to keep them safe.
As at 31st December each year the median length of service, in years, held by all prison officers is given in the following table.
Table 1: The median length of service (years)1,2 of band 3-5 officers 3,4 as at 31 March 2009-2021 and 31 December 2021.
| Median years of experience |
31/03/2009 | 10 |
31/03/2010 | 11 |
31/03/2011 | 12 |
31/03/2012 | 12 |
31/03/2013 | 13 |
31/03/2014 | 13 |
31/03/2015 | 12 |
31/03/2016 | 12 |
31/03/2017 | 12 |
31/03/2018 | 10 |
31/03/2019 | 6 |
31/03/2020 | 5 |
31/03/2021 | 5 |
31/12/2021 | 4 |
Source:
HMPPS - Oracle HRMS and Single Operating Platform
Notes:
1. The length of service in HMPPS is calculated from most recent hire date. Where staff have transferred in from another Government Department or have transferred in through HMPPS taking over a function, length of service is calculated from entry to HMPPS. These figures represent the length of service employed in HMPPS, and not necessarily of that employed as a prison officer.
2. Completed years of service.
3. Band 3-5 Officers includes Band 3-4 / Prison Officers (including specialists), Band 4 / Supervising Officers, and Band 5 / Custodial Managers.
4. Only data for HM Prison Service and Youth Custody Service and so excludes staff working in other areas such HQ etc
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
As of Friday 25th March 2022, there were 14,711 individuals with an origin address in London who were in HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) custody.
Of these, 94 (0.2%) were housed in prisons in Wales. 2,734 (18.6%) were housed within the geographical area covered by the HMPPS North Region.
Prison cell occupancy is certified by the Prison Group Director (PGD) in accordance with Prison Service Instruction (PSI) 17/2012, which provides guidelines for determining cell capacities. Cells are only shared where a PGD has assessed them to be of an adequate size and condition. In addition, they must have adequate lighting, heating, ventilation and fittings, have 24-hour access to water and sanitation, and allow prisoners to communicate at any time with a prison officer. These standards ensure that prisoners are always accommodated safely.
The Government is investing £3.8 billion over the next three years to deliver 20,000 new prison places. These additional prison places will have a positive impact on lowering the proportion of crowding within the prison estate by providing accommodation that is safe, decent and uncrowded.
Data on prison crowding is published annually in the HMPPS Annual Digest.
The 2020/21 Annual Digest shows that, across the year ending in March 2021, 15,941 prisoners were housed in crowded accommodation. Of these, 15,589 were housed in double cells originally designed for one person, and a further 259 were housed in triple cells designed for two people. The remaining 93 were recorded in a miscellaneous category. This category may include those housed in triple cells originally designed for one but will also include those in higher occupancy accommodation designed for fewer people (i.e., 6 people in a room/dormitory designed for 5).
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The average length of the minimum term (sometimes known as a ‘tariff’) for life sentences for murder convictions since 2000 is as follows:
Year of Sentence | Mean Tariff (years) | Mean Tariff (months) |
2000 | 13 | 165 |
2001 | 13 | 161 |
2002 | 13 | 156 |
2003 | 13 | 163 |
2004 | 14 | 172 |
2005 | 15 | 190 |
2006 | 17 | 208 |
2007 | 15 | 190 |
2008 | 17 | 212 |
2009 | 17 | 209 |
2010 | 19 | 227 |
2011 | 18 | 227 |
2012 | 20 | 244 |
2013 | 20 | 246 |
2014 | 20 | 245 |
2015 | 20 | 248 |
2016 | 20 | 251 |
2017 | 20 | 248 |
2018 | 21 | 253 |
2019 | 21 | 255 |
2020 | 21 | 254 |
2021 | 21 | 252 |
Data sources and quality
Note that the minimum term is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date. The figures do not include whole-life orders. The numbers are subject to revision as more data become available; any changes in the numbers since the last publication of this information is as a result of more sentencing data becoming available.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Source: Public Protection Unit Database.
As of 31 December 2021, there were 329 sentenced male prisoners and 2 sentenced female prisoners aged 80 or over in England and Wales.
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
The Ministry of Justice publishes information on the remand status and outcome of defendants in England and Wales at magistrates’ courts in the Remands: Magistrates' Court data tool: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987718/remands-magistrates-court-tool-2020.xlsx and at Crown Court in the Remands: Crown Court data tool here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987720/remands-crown-court-tool-2020.xlsx.
The data requested is in the tables below:
Table 1: Number of female defendents with remand status of custody at magistrates' court and outcome of immediate custody, England and Wales, 2016-2020*
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
Total remanded in custody | 3756 | 3860 | 3460 | 3345 | 3022 |
Total outcome: not immediate custody | 2990 | 3164 | 2851 | 2769 | 2551 |
Total outcome: immediate custoday | 766 | 696 | 609 | 576 | 471 |
Proportion remanded in custody not receiving an immediate custodial sentence | 80% | 82% | 82% | 83% | 84% |
Source: Remands: Magistrates' Court data tool (Ministry of Justice: Data & Analysis)
Table 2: Number of female defendents with remand status of custody at Crown Court and outcome of immediate custody, England and Wales, 2016-2020*
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
Total remanded in custody | 2068 | 2045 | 1806 | 1912 | 1775 |
Total outcome: not immediate custody | 892 | 844 | 728 | 771 | 730 |
Total outcome: immediate custody | 1176 | 1201 | 1078 | 1141 | 1045 |
Proportion remanded in custody not receiving an immediate custodial sentence | 43% | 41% | 40% | 40% | 41% |
Source: Remands: Remands: Crown Court data tool (Ministry of Justice: Data & Analysis)
Notes
*Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
Table 1: Prisoners serving an Extended Determinate Sentence (EDS) by custodial tariff, as at 30 September 2021, in England and Wales
30/09/2021 | EDS |
|
|
Less than 6 months | 4 |
6 months to less than 12 months | * |
12 months to less than 4 years | 143 |
4 years to less than 10 years | 3,184 |
10 years and longer | 2,940 |
Not Recorded | * |
|
|
PQ HL5531 (Ministry of Justice; Data and Analysis Directorate)
Disclosure control
Values of 1 or 2 have been suppressed (*) in the above table to protect the identity of individuals.
Table 2: Prisoners serving life sentences, extended determinate sentences, and imprisonment for public protection sentences, by age group, as at 30 September 2021, in England and Wales.
| Life Sentence | Imprisonment for Public Protection | Extended Determinate Sentence |
Total | 6,971 | 1,661 | 6,274 |
15 - 17 | 16 | 0 | 12 |
18 - 20 | 168 | 0 | 190 |
21 - 24 | 352 | 0 | 549 |
25 - 29 | 684 | 49 | 1,056 |
30 - 39 | 1,857 | 606 | 2,127 |
40 - 49 | 1,645 | 444 | 1,173 |
50 - 59 | 1,358 | 372 | 760 |
60 - 69 | 679 | 141 | 306 |
70 and over | 212 | 49 | 101 |
Source: Prison NOMIS. The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Table 1: Prisoners serving an Extended Determinate Sentence (EDS) by custodial tariff, as at 30 September 2021, in England and Wales
30/09/2021 | EDS |
|
|
Less than 6 months | 4 |
6 months to less than 12 months | * |
12 months to less than 4 years | 143 |
4 years to less than 10 years | 3,184 |
10 years and longer | 2,940 |
Not Recorded | * |
|
|
PQ HL5531 (Ministry of Justice; Data and Analysis Directorate)
Disclosure control
Values of 1 or 2 have been suppressed (*) in the above table to protect the identity of individuals.
Table 2: Prisoners serving life sentences, extended determinate sentences, and imprisonment for public protection sentences, by age group, as at 30 September 2021, in England and Wales.
| Life Sentence | Imprisonment for Public Protection | Extended Determinate Sentence |
Total | 6,971 | 1,661 | 6,274 |
15 - 17 | 16 | 0 | 12 |
18 - 20 | 168 | 0 | 190 |
21 - 24 | 352 | 0 | 549 |
25 - 29 | 684 | 49 | 1,056 |
30 - 39 | 1,857 | 606 | 2,127 |
40 - 49 | 1,645 | 444 | 1,173 |
50 - 59 | 1,358 | 372 | 760 |
60 - 69 | 679 | 141 | 306 |
70 and over | 212 | 49 | 101 |
Source: Prison NOMIS. The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
A year-by-year summary of distance from home for prisoners in female and male prisons is listed below.
| Female Prisons Average Distance (miles) | Male Prisons Average Distance (miles) |
01/09/2010 | 48.4 | 43.2 |
01/09/2011 | 46.5 | 42.7 |
01/09/2012 | 45.6 | 43 |
01/09/2013 | 44.6 | 43.5 |
01/09/2014 | 45.7 | 42.8 |
01/09/2015 | 44.7 | 42.6 |
01/09/2016 | 46.9 | 43.2 |
01/09/2017 | 47.3 | 44.5 |
01/09/2018 | 47.8 | 45.1 |
01/09/2019 | 49.2 | 46 |
01/09/2020 | 47.5 | 45.6 |
01/09/2021 | 45.8 | 45 |
There are complex and wide-ranging issues involved in transferring and locating prisoners, and allocation decisions must reflect both the specific needs and circumstances of the prisoner, including their security assessment, as well as the operating environment and range of services at the receiving prison.
HM Prisons and Probation Service is committed to ensuring, where practicable, that prisoners are accommodated as close as possible to their resettlement communities and families. Whilst this is a priority, it is not always possible due to a variety of factors, including wider population pressures, or where prisoners have specific sentence planning needs which can only be met at certain establishments.
The attached table shows the numbers of prisoners in each prison who tested positive for COVID-19 in each month of 2021.
From March 2020 to the end of December 2021 a total of 81 people died while under probation supervision having tested positive for COVID-19 within 60 days of death or where it was confirmed post-mortem as a contributing factor. This data was published in the December edition of the HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) COVID-19 statistics monthly series.
Data on the number of individuals who were recorded as having no stable accommodation at the time of death could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
We recognise how important it is that everyone leaving prison should have somewhere to live, as accommodation enables offenders to hold down a job and reduces the likelihood of them re-offending. Our Prisons White Paper sets out our vision that no-one subject to probation supervision is released from prison homeless. By 2024-25 we will spend £200 million a year to reduce reoffending, including improving prison leavers’ access to accommodation.
To ensure offenders are not homeless upon release, HMPPS has developed a Community Accommodation Service (CAS) so that people leaving prison can access suitable accommodation. CAS brings Approved Premises (AP), Bail Accommodation and Support Service (BASS), and a new provision of transitional accommodation together under the auspices of one accommodation system.
There are a total of 97 Men’s Prisons (84 closed and 13 open) in England and Wales, which are run by Her Majesty’s Prison & Probation Service.
Of the 84 closed men’s prisons:
- 59 prisons have received In-Cell Telephony throughout
- 3 prisons are currently mid-way through delivery, with 50% of cells now having In-Cell Telephony across the 3 sites
- 22 prisons do not have any In-Cell Telephony currently, with 11 of these scheduled to receive it over the next six months
Of the 13 open men’s prisons:
- 1 prison has In-Cell Telephony throughout
- 12 prisons do not have any In-Cell Telephony currently
There are a total of 10 Women’s Public Sector Prisons (8 closed and 2 open) in England which are run by Her Majesty’s Prison & Probation Service.
All cells in the 8 prisons within the women’s closed estate have In-Cell Telephony.
Neither of the 2 prisons within the women’s open estate has any In-Cell Telephony.
The number of people who joined or transferred internally to take up a role as a band three to five prison officer for the past ten years, by ethnicity, is shown in the tables attached.
The number of band 3-5 prison officers who left HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) by ethnicity for the past ten years is shown in the table below.
Table 1: Band 3-5 Prison Officer1 leavers to HMPPS by ethnicity2 for the years October to September 2011/12 to 2020/213
Headcount
|
| 2011/12 | 2012/13 | 2013/14 | 2014/15 | 2015/16 | 2016/17 | 2017/18 | 2018/19 | 2019/20 | 2020/21 |
All Ethnic minorities (excluding white minorities) groups | 59 | 132 | 75 | 74 | 68 | 108 | 54 | 121 | 132 | 141 | |
| Of which: |
| |||||||||
| Asian or Asian British4 | 13 | 17 | 16 | 18 | 19 | 29 | 16 | 35 | 45 | 50 |
| Black or Black British | 22 | 62 | 31 | 32 | 27 | 35 | 17 | 48 | 45 | 41 |
| Other ethnic group | 15 | 32 | 19 | 12 | 13 | 31 | 16 | 28 | 29 | 44 |
| Mixed Ethnic Groups | 9 | 21 | 9 | 12 | 9 | 13 | 5 | 10 | 13 | 6 |
White | 1,147 | 2,427 | 1,413 | 1,241 | 1,309 | 1,325 | 1,101 | 1,473 | 1,525 | 1,702 | |
Not known / Prefer not to say | 106 | 244 | 163 | 176 | 343 | 520 | 1,146 | 1,272 | 676 | 744 | |
Total |
| 1,312 | 2,803 | 1,651 | 1,491 | 1,720 | 1,953 | 2,301 | 2,866 | 2,333 | 2,587 |
Source: HMPPS - Oracle HRMS and Single Operating Platform
Data Quality and Scope: Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the data collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system.
Movements due to machinery of Government changes or due to staff transferring to or from the private sector as a result of changes in the management of establishments are not included in these tables.
Notes:
- Band 3-5 Officers includes Band 3-4 / Prison Officers (incl specialists), Band 4 / Supervising Officers, and Band 5 / Custodial Managers.
- Race is a self-declared, optional field. Since the introduction of Single Operating Platform (SOP) in January 2017, there has been a large decrease in the declaration rates of new joiners to HMPPS. It is likely that the lower declaration rates are due to the user-friendliness issues of SOP when it was first introduced.
- Years are 12 months to 30 September i.e. October to September and not financial years.
- Includes Chinese.
~ denotes suppressed values of 2 or fewer or other values which would allow values of 2 or fewer to be derived by subtraction. Low numbers are suppressed to prevent disclosure in accordance with the Data Protection Act, 2018.
The requested data on use of force incidents is available for the year ending March 2012 to March 2021. This is detailed in the attached Excel spreadsheet.
Ethnicity data is available from March 2019 to March 2021, and included, however data for March 2012 to March 2018 could only be obtained at disproportionate cost and is not included.
There was a steady increase in the number of force incidents between 2011 and 2019, which was in part attributable to an increase in violent incidents in prisons, improved recording processes and inclusion of guiding holds as recordable Use of Force incidents.
Every use of physical force is reviewed and prison officers receive appropriate training to ensure that it is only used when necessary, reasonable and proportionate, and as a last resort.
The attached table shows the numbers of prisoners aged (a) 15–17, (b) 18–20, (c) 21–24, (d), 25–29, (e) 30–39, (f) 40–49, (g) 50–59, (h) 60–69, and (i) 70 and over, broken down by ethnicity as (1) black, (2) mixed race, (3) Asian, and (4) white as of 30 June 2020.
There are no current plans to alter the ethnic groups for the regular quarterly published data on the prison population. The broad categories included in the information released are in line with current guidance from the Race Disparity Unit of the Cabinet Office.
Numbers self-designating as ‘Irish Traveller or Gypsy’ are published as part of a more detailed data set which is released annually as part of the series Offender Management Statistics Quarterly. The most recent release of this data formed part of the January to March 2021 issue, published in July 2021. Figures were included in Table A1.9ii of the Annual Prison Population: 2021 document. This showed that as of 30 June 2021, 1,365 prisoners self-designated as Irish Traveller or Gypsy. Of these, 1,337 were male and 28 were female.
The Ministry of Justice holds the data on the number of people currently in prison broken down by the sentence categories required and the ethnicity breakdown in each of those categories.
These data can be viewed in the attached table.
The Ministry of Justice holds data on the average period served in custody for offenders serving the following sentences - ‘Extended Sentence of Detention', 'Extended Determinate Sentence' or 'Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern' - covering the period requested, and the data can be viewed in table 1 below:
Table 1: Average (mean) time served in custody (days) for those from an 'Extended Sentence of Detention', 'Extended Determinate Sentence' or 'Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern' with a minimum judicially imposed sentence of 10 years, 2016-2020; England & Wales:
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
Extended Sentence of Detention | 2,510 | 2,499 | 2,779 | 3,106 | 3,436 |
Extended Determinate Sentence | 1,484 | 2,281 | 2,296 | 2,927 | 3,170 |
Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern | - | - | - | 3,840 | 1,406 |
Notes:
1. No prisoners serving a Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern (of 10 years or more) were released in 2016, 2017 or 2018.
2. The figures in this table has been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
The Ministry of Justice also holds data on the average period to be served in custody for life sentences, covering the period requested, and this can be viewed in table 2 below:
Table 2: Average (mean) Minimum Tariff for Life sentences imposed with a minimum tariff of 10 years in 2016-2020:
Life Sentence Type | Average Minimum Tariff (years) |
Automatic | 17 |
Discretionary | 15 |
Mandatory (MLP) | 21 |
Notes:
1. Minimum tariff refers to time from date of sentence to tariff expiry date
2. Figures exclude whole-life cases
3.The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing
The Ministry of Justice holds data on the average period served in custody for offenders serving the following sentences - ‘Extended Sentence of Detention', 'Extended Determinate Sentence' or 'Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern' - covering the period requested, and the data can be viewed in table 1 below:
Table 1: Average (mean) time served in custody (days) for those from an 'Extended Sentence of Detention', 'Extended Determinate Sentence' or 'Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern' with a minimum judicially imposed sentence of 10 years, 2016-2020; England & Wales:
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
Extended Sentence of Detention | 2,510 | 2,499 | 2,779 | 3,106 | 3,436 |
Extended Determinate Sentence | 1,484 | 2,281 | 2,296 | 2,927 | 3,170 |
Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern | - | - | - | 3,840 | 1,406 |
Notes:
1. No prisoners serving a Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern (of 10 years or more) were released in 2016, 2017 or 2018.
2. The figures in this table has been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
The Ministry of Justice also holds data on the average period to be served in custody for life sentences, covering the period requested, and this can be viewed in table 2 below:
Table 2: Average (mean) Minimum Tariff for Life sentences imposed with a minimum tariff of 10 years in 2016-2020:
Life Sentence Type | Average Minimum Tariff (years) |
Automatic | 17 |
Discretionary | 15 |
Mandatory (MLP) | 21 |
Notes:
1. Minimum tariff refers to time from date of sentence to tariff expiry date
2. Figures exclude whole-life cases
3.The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing
The Ministry of Justice holds data on the minimum period served in custody for the relevant sentences covering the period requested and this can be viewed in the attached table.
We are unable to provide separate data relating to those offenders who are given automatic and discretionary life sentences. The minimum period served in custody for both these groups of offenders is listed under ‘other lifers’.
Equivalent data for the average (mean and median) time served for those released from Mandatory Life sentences and ‘Other life’ sentences can be found in Table A3.3 which is also attached. For those released in 2020, prisoners released from Mandatory Life sentences served 17 years on average (mean) and 15 years (median).
No prisoners serving a sentence for offenders of particular concern were released in 2016 as the sentence was only introduced in 2015.
The Ministry of Justice holds data on the minimum period served in custody for the relevant sentences covering the period requested and this can be viewed in the attached table.
Data on the use of force on children in the youth custodial estate is included in the aggregated annually published “Youth Justice Statistics” report which form part of the Youth justice statistics series.
Table 8.6 in the supplementary tables of the 2019 to 2020 edition, published this January, gives data on Incidents of Restrictive Physical Intervention (RPI) sorted by ethnicity age and gender for years ending March between 2015 and 2020. The same table in the 2017 to 2018 edition covers the period from 2012 to 2018. The 2020 to 2021 edition is due to be published on 27 January 2022 and will include data for the year ending March 2021.
All prisons are required to comply with the Prisoner complaints policy framework. This framework sets out requirements and information on providing a fair and effective system for dealing with prisoner complaints, including by ensuring procedural justice and taking a problem-solving approach for both adult prisoners and young people.
Separate to the Complaints procedure, a prisoner can submit a Discrimination Incident Reporting Form (DIRF) if they feel they have been discriminated against any of the protected characteristics, as defined by the Equality Act 2010. The DIRF process has been renewed to be launched in early 2022. As part of the updated process, and following a pilot in 2021, data will be collated regionally and nationally.
Until then, to confirm the number of racial complaints made by prisoners and which were upheld, a search of each prison’s complaints log would be required. The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The Ministry of Justice holds data on sentences covering the period requested and this can be viewed in the attached table.
The Ministry of Justice holds data on sentences covering the period requested and this can be viewed in the attached table.
The table below shows the numbers of prisoners aged 18 to 24, and 25 to 29, broken down by ethnicity as of 30 September 2021.
Table 1: Number of prisoners, by specific age group and ethnicity, England and Wales as at 30 September 2021
| 18-24 | 25-29 | All age groups |
All ethnicity groups | 11,703 | 13,031 | 78,756 |
Asian or Asian British | 1,260 | 1,188 | 6,435 |
Black or Black British | 2,442 | 2,128 | 10,029 |
Mixed | 976 | 854 | 3,865 |
Other ethnic group | 289 | 262 | 1,208 |
White | 6,617 | 8,498 | 56,573 |
Unrecorded | 87 | 61 | 421 |
Not stated | 32 | 40 | 225 |
Data quality
The figures in this table has been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Source: Prison NOMIS System, PQ HL3924 (Ministry of Justice; DASD-DES)
The number of months which prisoners who are serving an indeterminate sentence were held on average beyond tariff, as at 30 September 2021, in England and Wales, is shown as follows:
Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) prisoners who are post-tariff:
- 98 months post-tariff (mean)
- 101 months post-tariff (median)
Life sentenced prisoners who are post-tariff:
- 110 months post-tariff (mean)
- 96 months post-tariff (median)
Notes:
- Tariff length is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date and takes into account any time served on remand.
- This data does not include those who have been recalled.
- The IPP sentence was abolished in late 2012 by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act. This means that the average number of months will continue to increase as offenders can no longer receive this sentence. The figures for life sentenced prisoners will be lower as offenders continue to receive this type of sentence which will reduce the average figure.
Data sources and quality
The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Source: Public Protection Unit Database (PPUD)
Statistics on the tariff length of the indeterminate prison population are routinely published as part of the quarterly Offender Management Statistics on Gov.uk - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly
The number of prisoners serving Extended Determinate Sentences, Imprisonment for Public Protection sentences, and Life sentences, by ethnicity, as at 30 September 2021, in England and Wales, is shown in the following table:
| Extended Determinate Sentence | Imprisonment for Public Protection | Life Sentence |
Asian or Asian British | 365 | 84 | 591 |
Black or Black British | 794 | 216 | 1,187 |
Mixed | 308 | 66 | 356 |
Other ethnic group | 83 | 5 | 71 |
White | 4,700 | 1,285 | 4,738 |
Not stated | 15 | 3 | 20 |
Unrecorded | 9 | 2 | 8 |
Note: These figures do not include recalled prisoners |
|
Data sources and quality |
The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Source: Prison NOMIS |
|
Statistics on the ethnicity of the prison population are routinely published as part of the quarterly Offender Management Statistics on Gov.uk - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly |
HM Prison and Probation Service use a system called the Offender Assessment System (OASys) for assessing the risks and needs of an offender. The system is designed to assess how likely an offender is to re-offend, identify offending-related needs, and assess the risk of serious harm and risks to the individual and the community. It also links the assessment to the supervision or sentence plan, along with any indication of the need for further specialist assessments, including changes during the period of supervision.
Automatic screening data is held on the segmentation tool for those young adult men aged up to 25 who have a full OASys assessment completed. This does not include data for anyone without a full OASys, on remand, or aged over 25. There is not currently any maturity screening available for women.
Records for screening are held locally – there is no national system that collates the data. Data is only available from 2019 to present as the tool was not launched until July 2019. 89% of prisons holding young adults are currently using the screening tool.
The table below shows the data on the numbers of prisoners who have been screened as having low psychosocial maturity. These figures are not cumulative, but representative of the population on that date.
Year | Population of young adult males | Population which could be assessed (those with a full OASYs) | Number screened as having low psychosocial maturity |
31/03/2019 | 14,716 | Not available | 8,856 |
31/03/2020 | 15,340 | 10,445 | 6,400 |
31/03/2021 | 13,695 | 9,085 | 5,875 |
As at 30 June 2021 there were 3,196 women in prison of which 643 were on remand. This can be found at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1006269/Population_30June2021_quarterly.ods
The number of women in prison serving a sentence of (1) 0–1 months, (2) 2–3 months, (3) 4–6 months, (4) 7–12 months, (5) 13–24 months, and (6) over 24 months is in the table below.
The number of female prisoners serving determinate sentences by sentence length 1
Sentence Length 2 | Number of female Prisoners |
Less than or equal to two months | 21 |
More than two months to four months | 66 |
More than four months to six months | 97 |
More than six months to twelve months | 131 |
More than twelve months to twenty four months | 202 |
More than twenty four months | 1,304 |
Total | 1,821 |
Notes
1) This table only includes prisoners who have a recorded judicially imposed sentence length. Prisoners who are serving life or imprisonment for public protection sentences, or have been recalled, or are non-criminals, are excluded from the table. Prisoners serving a sentence for defaulting on a fine are included in this table.
2) The sentence length banding has been adjusted to remove any gaps in time between the bands specified in the request.
Data sources and quality
The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Source: Prison NOMIS
As noted on the table it only includes prisoners who have a recorded judicially imposed sentence length. Prisoners who are serving life or imprisonment for public protection sentences, or have been recalled, or are non-criminals, including those held on immigration grounds, are excluded from the table, but prisoners serving a sentence for defaulting on a fine are included. For more information on other sentence types, please see Table 1.1.
As at 30 June 2021 there were 3,196 women in prison of which 643 were on remand. This can be found at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1006269/Population_30June2021_quarterly.ods
The number of women in prison serving a sentence of (1) 0–1 months, (2) 2–3 months, (3) 4–6 months, (4) 7–12 months, (5) 13–24 months, and (6) over 24 months is in the table below.
The number of female prisoners serving determinate sentences by sentence length 1
Sentence Length 2 | Number of female Prisoners |
Less than or equal to two months | 21 |
More than two months to four months | 66 |
More than four months to six months | 97 |
More than six months to twelve months | 131 |
More than twelve months to twenty four months | 202 |
More than twenty four months | 1,304 |
Total | 1,821 |
Notes
1) This table only includes prisoners who have a recorded judicially imposed sentence length. Prisoners who are serving life or imprisonment for public protection sentences, or have been recalled, or are non-criminals, are excluded from the table. Prisoners serving a sentence for defaulting on a fine are included in this table.
2) The sentence length banding has been adjusted to remove any gaps in time between the bands specified in the request.
Data sources and quality
The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Source: Prison NOMIS
As noted on the table it only includes prisoners who have a recorded judicially imposed sentence length. Prisoners who are serving life or imprisonment for public protection sentences, or have been recalled, or are non-criminals, including those held on immigration grounds, are excluded from the table, but prisoners serving a sentence for defaulting on a fine are included. For more information on other sentence types, please see Table 1.1.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Government has not expected key workers, including those working in education, to serve on a jury.
Anyone who is summoned for jury service and who cannot serve should contact the Jury Central Summoning Bureau (JCSB). While by law we cannot automatically defer jurors, during the pandemic HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) issued guidance to help staff deal sympathetically with all requests from the public who wish to be released or deferred from jury service as a result of COVID-19. Each application for deferral/excusal is considered on its own merit, in a way that is both fair to the individual and consistent with the needs of the court in providing a representative jury.
As of 30 June 2021, a woman in prison was on average 47 miles from their origin address.
There are complex and wide-ranging issues involved in transferring and locating prisoners, and allocation decisions must reflect both the specific needs and circumstances of the prisoner, including their security assessment, as well as the operating environment and range of services at the receiving prison.
HMPPS is committed to ensuring, where practicable, that prisoners are accommodated as close as possible to their resettlement communities and families. Whilst this is a priority, it is not always possible due to a variety of factors including wider population pressures, or where women have specific sentence planning needs which can only be met at certain establishments.
Around 97% of prisoners have an origin location; i.e. addresses that are recorded in our central IT system. If no address is given, an offender’s committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident. This information is included in the data provided above. Those with no recorded origin are typically foreign nationals or those recently received into custody.
The numerical information provided has been drawn from administrative IT systems, which as with any large scale recording system are subject to possible error with data entry and processing.
The Government has made good progress in implementing the recommendations from Lord Farmer’s 2019 report on ‘The Importance of Strengthening Female Offenders’ Family and other Relationships to Prevent Reoffending and Reduce Intergenerational Crime’.
So far, 17 recommendations have been completed, including increased access to family contact for women in custody through the rollout of video calling and email reply systems in all women’s prisons, the installation of in-cell telephony in all closed women’s prisons, improvements to Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) policy, and routine access to telephone contact for women and primary carers in court custody suites.
We are continuing to work across the MOJ, HMPPS, and wider government to take forward Lord Farmer’s recommendations.
Table 1 shows the total number of prisoner releases, and mean and median time spent in all female prisons for those released between 2011 and 2020, broken down by year and releasing prison establishment.
Table 2 shows the total number of sentenced prisoner receptions, and mean and median time spent on remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Table 3 shows the total number of convicted unsentenced prisoner receptions and mean and median time spent on pre-trial remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Table 4 shows the total number of sentenced prisoner receptions, and mean and median time spent on convicted unsentenced remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Table 1 shows the total number of prisoner releases, and mean and median time spent in all female prisons for those released between 2011 and 2020, broken down by year and releasing prison establishment.
Table 2 shows the total number of sentenced prisoner receptions, and mean and median time spent on remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Table 3 shows the total number of convicted unsentenced prisoner receptions and mean and median time spent on pre-trial remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Table 4 shows the total number of sentenced prisoner receptions, and mean and median time spent on convicted unsentenced remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Table 1 shows the total number of prisoner releases, and mean and median time spent in all female prisons for those released between 2011 and 2020, broken down by year and releasing prison establishment.
Table 2 shows the total number of sentenced prisoner receptions, and mean and median time spent on remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Table 3 shows the total number of convicted unsentenced prisoner receptions and mean and median time spent on pre-trial remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Table 4 shows the total number of sentenced prisoner receptions, and mean and median time spent on convicted unsentenced remand in all female prisons for those received into prison between 2011 to 2020, broken down by year and reception prison establishment.
Public Health England advice is that we should aim for the highest possible level of vaccination coverage, and higher coverage will help limit outbreaks. Even with a fully vaccinated population, however, smaller outbreaks could occur, because the vaccine does not offer complete protection. The risk of outbreaks is also influenced by other factors including the local demographics, previous exposure, and community prevalence.
HMPPS strongly encourages all staff and prisoners to have the COVID-19 vaccine. We ask employees to let us know when they have had each dose of the COVID-19 vaccine by recording their vaccine status on our HR system. As the disclosure of their vaccine status is entirely voluntary, it means the self-declaration rates will be lower than the actual number of staff who have been vaccinated.
The population of adult prisoners in England as of 09 July 2021 is 73,642. Of those in prison on 09 July, 61,073 had been offered1 a first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Of those offered, 42,301 have received their first dose (58% of the population), and 18,772 have been offered a first dose but have not yet received one. This may be due to the patient declining the vaccine, or it not being given due to clinical reasons. As of 09 July 2021, 21,476 adult prisoners have had two doses of the vaccine (29% of the population).
All staff can access the COVID-19 vaccine through the NHS. However, as of 09 July 2021, 169 staff declared on our HR system that they have declined the COVID-19 vaccine.
The total number of HMPPS staff who have declared that they have received their first COVID-19 vaccination, as at midday 09 July 2021 was 24,122. This is equivalent to approximately 44.4% of total staff numbers.
The total number of HMPPS Staff who have declared that they have received their second COVID-19 vaccination, as at midday 09 July 2021 was 15,104. This is equivalent to approximately 27.8% of total staff numbers.
Now that all adults are eligible, HMPPS will be increasing efforts to encourage staff to record their vaccination status.
1. The “offered” figure is calculated on a current population-basis to provide an indicative figure for this request. Actual offers of appointments are not recorded or captured.
The population of adult prisoners in England as of 09 July 2021 is 73,642. Of those in prison on 09 July, 61,073 had been offered1 a first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Of those offered, 42,301 have received their first dose (58% of the population), and 18,772 have been offered a first dose but have not yet received one. This may be due to the patient declining the vaccine, or it not being given due to clinical reasons. As of 09 July 2021, 21,476 adult prisoners have had two doses of the vaccine (29% of the population).
All staff can access the COVID-19 vaccine through the NHS. However, as of 09 July 2021, 169 staff declared on our HR system that they have declined the COVID-19 vaccine.
The total number of HMPPS staff who have declared that they have received their first COVID-19 vaccination, as at midday 09 July 2021 was 24,122. This is equivalent to approximately 44.4% of total staff numbers.
The total number of HMPPS Staff who have declared that they have received their second COVID-19 vaccination, as at midday 09 July 2021 was 15,104. This is equivalent to approximately 27.8% of total staff numbers.
Now that all adults are eligible, HMPPS will be increasing efforts to encourage staff to record their vaccination status.
1. The “offered” figure is calculated on a current population-basis to provide an indicative figure for this request. Actual offers of appointments are not recorded or captured.
There are 161 prisoners with Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences identified as currently waiting for an accredited offending behaviour or sexual offending programme. For the purposes of answering this question we have considered accredited offending behaviour programmes to be defined as both offending behaviour and sexual offending programmes. Substance misuse programmes are the responsibility of NHS commissioners and we do not hold this information.
This table below shows each prison with IPP prisoners waiting to commence an accredited general, violence, domestic violence, or sexual offending programme based on information gathered from an April 2021 snapshot of data returns from prisons which run accredited offending behaviour programmes. The information has been drawn from local records and, as with any large-scale reporting tool, may be subject to inaccuracies as well as subject to change.
The numbers presented reflect those who are fully assessed as suitable and identified as motivated and waiting for a place. The symbol ‘- ‘denotes suppressed values of 5 or fewer to avoid the risk of identifying individuals.
Prison | Offending Behaviour Programmes | Sexual Offending Programmes |
Ashfield |
| 6 |
Belmarsh | _ |
|
Birmingham | _ |
|
Buckley Hall | _ |
|
Bullingdon |
| _ |
Bure |
| _ |
Channings Wood | _ |
|
Dartmoor | _ | 8 |
Dovegate | _ |
|
Downview | _ |
|
Elmley | _ |
|
Erlestoke | _ |
|
Forest Bank | _ |
|
Frankland | _ | _ |
Full Sutton | _ |
|
Garth | _ | _ |
Gartree | _ |
|
Guys Marsh | _ |
|
Highpoint | _ |
|
Hindley | _ |
|
Holme House | _ |
|
Hull |
| _ |
IOW |
| _ |
Lancaster Farms | _ |
|
Lewes | _ |
|
Lindholme | 12 |
|
Littlehey | _ | 8 |
Long Lartin | _ |
|
Lowdham Grange | _ |
|
Manchester | _ |
|
Moorland | _ |
|
New Hall | _ |
|
Northumberland | _ | _ |
Oakwood | _ |
|
Parc | _ |
|
Risley | _ |
|
Rye Hill | _ | 6 |
Stafford |
| _ |
Stocken | _ |
|
Stoke Heath | _ |
|
Swaleside | _ |
|
Swinfen Hall | _ |
|
The Mount | _ |
|
Wakefield | _ | _ |
Wayland | _ |
|
Wealstun | _ |
|
Whatton |
| 7 |
Whitemoor | _ |
|
Woodhill | _ |
|
Wymott | _ | _ |
Grand Total | 109 | 52 |
It has not been possible to provide the information requested in respect of average waiting time as it could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation and risk reduction opportunities available. In recent years, there has been a reinvestment from shorter, moderate intensity programmes in favour of longer, higher intensity programmes. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP and life sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release, or as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.
The Government is committed to ensuring vulnerable women are supported on their release from prison to rebuild their lives and stay out of prison. There is a range of activity underway to deliver this commitment.
We are investing more than £20m in supporting prison leavers at risk of homelessness into temporary accommodation. Individuals released from prison will be provided up to 12 weeks of temporary accommodation and will be supported to secure long-term settled accommodation before the end of that 12-week period. Initially launching in five probation regions, the service will support around 3,000 offenders in its first year and will be commencing this Summer. It will be in operation during the financial year 2021-22, with a view to scaling up and rolling out nationally.
The service will take account of the needs of women, including those with complex needs and accommodation provision will be dedicated to single gender usage as required. Community Probation Practitioners, working together with local partners, will be responsible for ensuring that vulnerable female prison leavers receive appropriate support and are provided with housing beyond the 12 weeks emergency accommodation.
Under the new probation arrangements, women’s contracts worth £46 million have been let under the dynamic framework, and awarded to organisations providing wraparound support to address the complex needs of women in or at risk of contacting the criminal justice system. Commissioned Rehabilitation Services started delivery on 26th June 2021 and will include services to assist with accommodation, employment training and education, financial benefit and debt and personal well-being.
These will provide a holistic service for all women leaving prison from providers based in the community they are released to. The accommodation service and mentoring service both start pre- release. The mentoring service aims to support those who lack social support make the transition from prison to community and assist in building social networks
The Government recognises the vital role played by women’s community sector organisations in supporting women released from prison and preventing them from returning. On 11th June 2021, the Government launched a £2.5 million grant funding opportunity to provide further support to these organisations, on top of £7 million already invested since the Female Offender Strategy was published in 2018. Like a similar competition held last year, the present funding is available to pay core costs and is designed to promote greater financial stability throughout the sector.
We have responded to your request in line with the statistical definition of offending behaviour programmes (OBP) used in the HMPPS Annual Digest and HMPPS Offender Equality Report. Therefore, Sexual Offender Treatment Programmes and Substance Misuse Programmes have been excluded.
National data on all prisoner enrolments (starts) and completions in prison-delivered accredited OBPs are collected and published annually.
The latest available statistics are from April 2019 to March 2020 and were published this month. This data will include some individuals who may have attended more than one accredited programme over time. The available national data does not provide further break-down by those currently in custody or by sentence type to be able to identify who accessed a programme after the expiry of their tariff period. However, data-gathering and further analysis has been able to provide some of the information requested in line with the statistical definition which are primarily for general, domestic violence and violence related offending behaviour programmes. The accredited programmes data was matched with the National Offender Management Information System to obtain data on tariff expiry and this process achieved a 90% match rate of records between the two sources.
The table attached provides the number of indeterminate sentenced prisoners serving a life sentence, and those serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence who (a) enrolled on and (b) completed a general or violence offending behaviour course after the expiry of their tariff.
The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation and risk reduction opportunities available. In recent years, there has been a reinvestment from shorter, moderate intensity programmes in favour of longer, higher intensity programmes. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP and life sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release, or as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.
We have responded to your request in line with the statistical definition of offending behaviour programmes (OBP) used in the HMPPS Annual Digest and HMPPS Offender Equality Report. Therefore, Sexual Offender Treatment Programmes and Substance Misuse Programmes have been excluded.
National data on all prisoner enrolments (starts) and completions in prison-delivered accredited OBPs are collected and published annually.
The latest available statistics are from April 2019 to March 2020 and were published this month. This data will include some individuals who may have attended more than one accredited programme over time. The available national data does not provide further break-down by those currently in custody or by sentence type to be able to identify who accessed a programme after the expiry of their tariff period. However, data-gathering and further analysis has been able to provide some of the information requested in line with the statistical definition which are primarily for general, domestic violence and violence related offending behaviour programmes. The accredited programmes data was matched with the National Offender Management Information System to obtain data on tariff expiry and this process achieved a 90% match rate of records between the two sources.
The table attached provides the number of indeterminate sentenced prisoners serving a life sentence, and those serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence who (a) enrolled on and (b) completed a general or violence offending behaviour course after the expiry of their tariff.
The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation and risk reduction opportunities available. In recent years, there has been a reinvestment from shorter, moderate intensity programmes in favour of longer, higher intensity programmes. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP and life sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release, or as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.
The information needed to provide a comprehensive answer to each question could be provided only at disproportionate cost as central data was not stored in a way that it can be filtered by the required fields to obtain the information, until 2009. As a result, the tables below provide data for each year from 2009.
The Government is committed to the protection of the public and the effective management of offenders. By law, prisoners serving indeterminate sentences who have completed their tariff will be released only when the independent Parole Board concludes that the risk they present to the public is capable of being safely managed in the community under probation supervision.
The total number of prisoners serving a life sentence who were released at their first eligible parole date in each year since 2009, is shown in the following table:
Outcome year | Count of release decisions at first eligible parole date |
2009 | 81 |
2010 | 86 |
2011 | 82 |
2012 | 86 |
2013 | 101 |
2014 | 71 |
2015 | 76 |
2016 | 96 |
2017 | 121 |
2018 | 127 |
2019 | 115 |
2020 | 122 |
The total number of prisoners serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection who were released at their first eligible parole date in each year since 2009, is shown in the following table:
Outcome year | Count of release decisions at first eligible parole date |
2009 | 45 |
2010 | 37 |
2011 | 77 |
2012 | 72 |
2013 | 81 |
2014 | 58 |
2015 | 61 |
2016 | 69 |
2017 | 66 |
2018 | 59 |
2019 | 30 |
2020 | 25 |
Notes for all tables:
1. These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database and Prison-NOMIS held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. As with any large scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
2. The figures in these tables do not include recalled indeterminate-sentence prisoners.
Statistics on the indeterminate sentence population in prisons are routinely published as part of the Quarterly Offender Management Statistics on Gov.uk - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly
The information needed to provide a comprehensive answer to each question could be provided only at disproportionate cost as central data was not stored in a way that it can be filtered by the required fields to obtain the information, until 2009. As a result, the tables below provide data for each year from 2009.
The Government is committed to the protection of the public and the effective management of offenders. By law, prisoners serving indeterminate sentences who have completed their tariff will be released only when the independent Parole Board concludes that the risk they present to the public is capable of being safely managed in the community under probation supervision.
The total number of prisoners serving a life sentence who were released at their first eligible parole date in each year since 2009, is shown in the following table:
Outcome year | Count of release decisions at first eligible parole date |
2009 | 81 |
2010 | 86 |
2011 | 82 |
2012 | 86 |
2013 | 101 |
2014 | 71 |
2015 | 76 |
2016 | 96 |
2017 | 121 |
2018 | 127 |
2019 | 115 |
2020 | 122 |
The total number of prisoners serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection who were released at their first eligible parole date in each year since 2009, is shown in the following table:
Outcome year | Count of release decisions at first eligible parole date |
2009 | 45 |
2010 | 37 |
2011 | 77 |
2012 | 72 |
2013 | 81 |
2014 | 58 |
2015 | 61 |
2016 | 69 |
2017 | 66 |
2018 | 59 |
2019 | 30 |
2020 | 25 |
Notes for all tables:
1. These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database and Prison-NOMIS held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. As with any large scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
2. The figures in these tables do not include recalled indeterminate-sentence prisoners.
Statistics on the indeterminate sentence population in prisons are routinely published as part of the Quarterly Offender Management Statistics on Gov.uk - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly
National data on all prisoner enrolments (starts) and completions of prison delivered accredited offending behaviour programmes (OBPs) is collected and published annually. The latest available data goes up to and includes March 2019. Data up to and including March 2020 is due to be published shortly by the Ministry of Justice. This data will include some individuals who may have attended more than one accredited programme over time. Data on starts and completions before 2010 is not available, and the data available does not break-down information further by those currently in custody, or by sentence type.
Data shown in the tables below identify the number of enrolments (starts) in Table 1 and the completions each year over the same period in Table 2. The data shows a general maintained level of sexual offending programmes delivered over time. However, for other accredited offending behaviour programmes there has been a reduction in the volumes delivered.
Accredited programmes have significantly changed over time from a range of shorter programmes to more intensive specialist programmes which take longer to deliver and target prisoners with a medium and higher risk of reoffending. In 2011, responsibility for commissioning substance misuse programmes moved to the NHS resulting in a reduction in delivered volumes of accredited programmes. The changes have decreased the volume of places available, but places are better aligned to demands and the evidence base which suggests accredited programmes are most effective when targeted at cohorts with medium and higher risk of reoffending.
Table 1: Number of starts for OBPs in custody between the years ending March 2010 and March 2019, England and Wales
Year | Offending Behaviour Programmes | Sexual Offender Treatment Programmes | Substance Misuse Programmes | TOTAL |
2010 | 8,209 | 1,153 | 10,166 | 19,528 |
2011 | 8,752 | 1,189 | 8,901 | 18,842 |
2012 | 8,607 | 1,162 | 7,330 | 17,099 |
2013 | 7,977 | 1,077 | 3,320 | 12,374 |
2014 | 7,179 | 934 | 882 | 8,995 |
2015 | 6,937 | 1,056 | 724 | 8,717 |
2016 | 6,373 | 1,113 | 458 | 7,944 |
2017 | 6,185 | 1,141 | 362 | 7,688 |
2018 | 4,979 | 1,022 | 147 | 6,148 |
2019 | 4,504 | 1,154 | 169 | 5,827 |
Table 2: Number of completions for OBPs in custody between the years ending March 2010 and March 2019, England and Wales
Year | Offending Behaviour Programmes | Sexual Offender Treatment Programmes | Substance Misuse Programmes | TOTAL |
2010 | 7,339 | 1,130 | 7,630 | 16,099 |
2011 | 7,757 | 1,191 | 6,968 | 15,916 |
2012 | 7,692 | 1,166 | 5,943 | 14,801 |
2013 | 7,374 | 1,034 | 2,708 | 11,116 |
2014 | 6,390 | 877 | 749 | 8,016 |
2015 | 6,047 | 947 | 597 | 7,591 |
2016 | 5,545 | 1,144 | 368 | 7,057 |
2017 | 5,479 | 1,150 | 331 | 6,960 |
2018 | 4,403 | 993 | 122 | 5,518 |
2019 | 3,958 | 1,114 | 145 | 5,217 |
Table note: As with any data derived from large-scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
Source: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/873346/accredited-programmes-prisons-2018-19-march-2020-update.XLSX
The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation opportunities available. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP and life sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release as soon as it is safe to do so.
National data on all prisoner enrolments (starts) and completions of prison delivered accredited offending behaviour programmes (OBPs) is collected and published annually. The latest available data goes up to and includes March 2019. Data up to and including March 2020 is due to be published shortly by the Ministry of Justice. This data will include some individuals who may have attended more than one accredited programme over time. Data on starts and completions before 2010 is not available, and the data available does not break-down information further by those currently in custody, or by sentence type.
Data shown in the tables below identify the number of enrolments (starts) in Table 1 and the completions each year over the same period in Table 2. The data shows a general maintained level of sexual offending programmes delivered over time. However, for other accredited offending behaviour programmes there has been a reduction in the volumes delivered.
Accredited programmes have significantly changed over time from a range of shorter programmes to more intensive specialist programmes which take longer to deliver and target prisoners with a medium and higher risk of reoffending. In 2011, responsibility for commissioning substance misuse programmes moved to the NHS resulting in a reduction in delivered volumes of accredited programmes. The changes have decreased the volume of places available, but places are better aligned to demands and the evidence base which suggests accredited programmes are most effective when targeted at cohorts with medium and higher risk of reoffending.
Table 1: Number of starts for OBPs in custody between the years ending March 2010 and March 2019, England and Wales
Year | Offending Behaviour Programmes | Sexual Offender Treatment Programmes | Substance Misuse Programmes | TOTAL |
2010 | 8,209 | 1,153 | 10,166 | 19,528 |
2011 | 8,752 | 1,189 | 8,901 | 18,842 |
2012 | 8,607 | 1,162 | 7,330 | 17,099 |
2013 | 7,977 | 1,077 | 3,320 | 12,374 |
2014 | 7,179 | 934 | 882 | 8,995 |
2015 | 6,937 | 1,056 | 724 | 8,717 |
2016 | 6,373 | 1,113 | 458 | 7,944 |
2017 | 6,185 | 1,141 | 362 | 7,688 |
2018 | 4,979 | 1,022 | 147 | 6,148 |
2019 | 4,504 | 1,154 | 169 | 5,827 |
Table 2: Number of completions for OBPs in custody between the years ending March 2010 and March 2019, England and Wales
Year | Offending Behaviour Programmes | Sexual Offender Treatment Programmes | Substance Misuse Programmes | TOTAL |
2010 | 7,339 | 1,130 | 7,630 | 16,099 |
2011 | 7,757 | 1,191 | 6,968 | 15,916 |
2012 | 7,692 | 1,166 | 5,943 | 14,801 |
2013 | 7,374 | 1,034 | 2,708 | 11,116 |
2014 | 6,390 | 877 | 749 | 8,016 |
2015 | 6,047 | 947 | 597 | 7,591 |
2016 | 5,545 | 1,144 | 368 | 7,057 |
2017 | 5,479 | 1,150 | 331 | 6,960 |
2018 | 4,403 | 993 | 122 | 5,518 |
2019 | 3,958 | 1,114 | 145 | 5,217 |
Table note: As with any data derived from large-scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
Source: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/873346/accredited-programmes-prisons-2018-19-march-2020-update.XLSX
The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation opportunities available. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP and life sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release as soon as it is safe to do so.
The average length of the minimum term (sometimes known as a ‘tariff’) for life sentences for murder convictions since 2000 is as follows:
Year of Sentence | Average minimum term (years) |
2000 | 13 |
2001 | 13 |
2002 | 13 |
2003 | 13 |
2004 | 14 |
2005 | 15 |
2006 | 17 |
2007 | 15 |
2008 | 17 |
2009 | 17 |
2010 | 19 |
2011 | 18 |
2012 | 20 |
2013 | 20 |
2014 | 20 |
2015 | 20 |
2016 | 20 |
2017 | 20 |
2018 | 21 |
2019 | 21 |
2020 | 20 |
Data sources and quality
Note that the minimum term is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date. Time on remand is taken into account when setting the tariff expiry date. The figures do not include whole-life orders.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Source: Public Protection Unit Database.
The safety of our staff and those under our supervision remains a top priority, and testing is an important element of our overall set of measures to limit the importation of infection into and between prisons. We have therefore been working closely with the Department of Health and Social Care, the NHS, and health authority colleagues in England and Wales since last summer on providing access to Covid-19 tests in both publicly and privately-run prisons.
Data on prisoners in England and Wales who tested positive broken down by establishment and month was published in the February edition of the HM Prison and Probation Service COVID-19 statistics monthly series. I have attached copy of the summary tables included in the release, with data on positive test results provided in Table 2.
Over the course of the pandemic we have expanded the use of testing based on public health recommendations, and we now offer testing routinely to all staff and those prisoners who are moving into or within the prison estate. We also conduct mass testing as part of a multi-agency response to outbreaks.
The safety of our staff and those under our supervision remains a top priority, and testing is an important element of our overall set of measures to limit the importation of infection into and between prisons. We have therefore been working closely with the Department of Health and Social Care, the NHS, and health authority colleagues in England and Wales since last summer on providing access to Covid-19 tests in both publicly and privately-run prisons.
Data on prisoners in England and Wales who tested positive broken down by establishment and month was published in the February edition of the HM Prison and Probation Service COVID-19 statistics monthly series. I have attached copy of the summary tables included in the release, with data on positive test results provided in Table 2.
Over the course of the pandemic we have expanded the use of testing based on public health recommendations, and we now offer testing routinely to all staff and those prisoners who are moving into or within the prison estate. We also conduct mass testing as part of a multi-agency response to outbreaks.
The (1) total number and (2) proportion of life sentence prisoners currently in custody, who have an up to date Offender Assessment System (OASys) assessment, is shown in the following table:
Number of life sentence prisoners currently in Custody | Number with an OASys record able to be matched | Number of those identified within OASys with an up to date assessment | Percentage of those identified within OASys with an up to date assessment |
7542 | 7464 | 6550 | 88% |
Notes for all tables:
- These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database and OASys National Reporting System held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. This data was matched on PNC and Prison NOMIS ID. As with any large scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
In order to determine whether an assessment was ‘up to date’, the policy and guidance under the HM Prison and Probation Service’s Offender Management in Custody Model has been applied.
1) An initial OASys assessment must be completed within 16 weeks of a new life sentenced prisoner being received into custody. In the interim, where there is a Court OASys risk assessment prepared for sentencing purposes, that is deemed to be an up to date assessment.
2) Following completion of an initial assessment, a review is required as a minimum every 3 years.
Life sentence prisoners will often have reviews of their OASys assessment undertaken more frequently than once every three years due to parole hearings or other significant events.
There are significant vacancies across the Prison Estate, which has an impact on the number of completed assessments. In order to address this, there are ongoing recruitment campaigns for prisons to employ additional probation officers and qualified probation officers and prison officers.
The total number of people currently in custody serving a determinate sentence of 20 years or more who have never been released is 1,276. There are a further 27 people in custody serving a determinate sentence of 20 years or more, having been recalled from the community.
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
The power to recall is a vital public protection measure and all individuals on licensed supervision in the community are liable to recall to prison if they fail to comply with the conditions of their licence in such a way as to indicate that their risk has escalated to the point where they may no longer be safely managed in the community.
The total number of life and imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentence prisoners currently in prison, who have spent a total of at least 10 years in custody and who have either (1) never been released or (2) are in custody having been recalled, is provided below.
Sentence Type | Unreleased | Recalled |
IPP (10+ years in custody) | 1311 | 257 |
Life (10+ years in custody) | 3262 | 210 |
These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. As with any large-scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
The total unreleased IPP population is reducing year on year - it stood at 1,849 as of 31 December 2020, down from 2,134 on 31 December 2019. IPP prisoners continue to have a high chance of a positive outcome from Parole Board hearings. In 2019/20 72% of Parole Board hearings resulted in either a recommendation for a progressive transfer to an open prison or release.
Offenders on licence in the community will be recalled to custody where they breach their licence conditions in such a way as to indicate that their risk has increased to the level where it may no longer be managed effectively in the community, even by the imposition of additional licence conditions and other controls. Recall is a vital measure to protect the public from those who are assessed as likely to commit further offences causing serious harm if they were to remain in the community.
The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP and life sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release or, as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.
The information requested is shown in the tables below.
I can also confirm that sentencing is a matter for the independent judiciary based on the facts of each case.
Prisoners serving a determinate sentence of 20 years or more, by ethnicity, as at 31 December 2020, in England and Wales.
All | 1,276 |
|
|
Asian / Asian British | 150 |
Black / African / Caribbean / Black British | 194 |
Mixed / Multiple ethnic groups | 36 |
Other ethnic group | 17 |
White | 874 |
Not stated | 5 |
Figures covering the period 2009 to 2019 for the number of individuals sentenced to custody for 20 years or more who were not subject to a life sentence can be found in the table below.
Number of individuals sentenced to custody at all courts, 2009 to 2019(1)(2)
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 |
Total sentenced to custody | 100,231 | 101,513 | 106,170 | 98,044 | 92,966 | 91,313 | 90,348 | 89,862 | 86,354 | 78,876 | 75,971 |
Less than 20 years | 98,778 | 100,073 | 104,907 | 96,848 | 92,491 | 90,807 | 89,888 | 89,376 | 85,874 | 78,291 | 75,391 |
20 years or more and less than life | 31 | 37 | 49 | 37 | 71 | 64 | 91 | 79 | 118 | 153 | 124 |
Imprisonment for Public Protection(3) | 1,001 | 1,019 | 819 | 747 | 9 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Life sentence | 421 | 384 | 395 | 412 | 395 | 442 | 369 | 407 | 362 | 432 | 456 |
Source: MoJ court proceedings database
Notes
1. The figures given in the table relate to defendants for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
2. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
3. Sentences of imprisonment for public protection were introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 2003, and abolished by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.
The total number of releases and subsequent recalls in the last year that figures are available is provided as follows, broken down by (1) determinate sentences of 20 or more years, (2) prisoners serving life sentences who have been in custody for 10 or more years, and (3) prisoners serving imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentences who have been in custody for 10 years or more.
Sentence Type | Total released between 1 Oct 2019 and 30 Sept 2020 | Total recalled since release |
Determinate – 20+ years | 33 | 4 |
Life (10+ years in custody) | 326 | 24 |
IPP (10+ years in custody) | 210 | 51 |
These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. As with any large-scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
Offenders on licence in the community will be recalled to custody where they breach their licence conditions in such a way as to indicate that their risk has increased to the level where it may no longer be managed effectively in the community, even by the imposition of additional licence conditions and other controls. Recall is a vital measure to protect the public from those who are assessed as likely to commit further offences causing serious harm if they were to remain in the community.
Our primary responsibility is to protect the public. HMPPS remains committed to supporting all offenders recalled to custody to reduce their risk, so that the independent Parole Board (or, in the case of some determinate sentence offenders, the Secretary of State using executive powers) may direct their re-release as soon as it is safe to do so.
The total number of releases and subsequent recalls in the last year that figures are available is provided as follows, broken down by (1) determinate sentences of 20 or more years, (2) prisoners serving life sentences who have been in custody for 10 or more years, and (3) prisoners serving imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentences who have been in custody for 10 years or more.
Sentence Type | Total released between 1 Oct 2019 and 30 Sept 2020 | Total recalled since release |
Determinate – 20+ years | 33 | 4 |
Life (10+ years in custody) | 326 | 24 |
IPP (10+ years in custody) | 210 | 51 |
These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. As with any large-scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
Offenders on licence in the community will be recalled to custody where they breach their licence conditions in such a way as to indicate that their risk has increased to the level where it may no longer be managed effectively in the community, even by the imposition of additional licence conditions and other controls. Recall is a vital measure to protect the public from those who are assessed as likely to commit further offences causing serious harm if they were to remain in the community.
Our primary responsibility is to protect the public. HMPPS remains committed to supporting all offenders recalled to custody to reduce their risk, so that the independent Parole Board (or, in the case of some determinate sentence offenders, the Secretary of State using executive powers) may direct their re-release as soon as it is safe to do so.
The total number of life and imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentence prisoners currently in prison, who have spent a total of at least 10 years in custody and who have either (1) never been released or (2) are in custody having been recalled, is provided below.
Sentence Type | Unreleased | Recalled |
IPP (10+ years in custody) | 1311 | 257 |
Life (10+ years in custody) | 3262 | 210 |
These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. As with any large-scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
The total unreleased IPP population is reducing year on year - it stood at 1,849 as of 31 December 2020, down from 2,134 on 31 December 2019. IPP prisoners continue to have a high chance of a positive outcome from Parole Board hearings. In 2019/20 72% of Parole Board hearings resulted in either a recommendation for a progressive transfer to an open prison or release.
Offenders on licence in the community will be recalled to custody where they breach their licence conditions in such a way as to indicate that their risk has increased to the level where it may no longer be managed effectively in the community, even by the imposition of additional licence conditions and other controls. Recall is a vital measure to protect the public from those who are assessed as likely to commit further offences causing serious harm if they were to remain in the community.
The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP and life sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release or, as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.
None. Offences contrary to section 1 of the Theft Act 1968 (“theft”) never qualified as serious specified offences within the meaning of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for which a sentence of imprisonment for public protection (IPP) could have been imposed . However, a conviction for certain other offences within the Theft Act 1968, such as that for robbery or aggravated burglary, could have led to an IPP sentence. As of 31 December 2020, there were 714 (339 unreleased and 375 recalled) prisoners serving an IPP sentence who have a recorded offence in the category of “robbery” and 80 (34 unreleased and 46 recalled) prisoners serving an IPP sentence who have a recorded offence in the category of “theft offences”. But these data do not give an indication of the precise specific serious specified offence, or the context or severity of the crimes, which led to a Judge deciding that the case was so serious that it merited the imposition of an IPP sentence.
The independent Parole Board determine whether it is safe to release prisoners serving an IPP sentence. Consequently, where a prisoner remains in custody, it is because the Parole Board has judged that their risk is too high for them to be safely managed in the community.
The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public; however, HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporter prisoners to reduce their risk to the level where the Parole Board will judge that they may now be safely supervised on licence in the community.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) ensures that assessment of the equalities impacts of its policy proposals is integrated in the development, implementation and review of its policies. Where potential negative impacts are identified, including the potential for indirect discrimination, we take the necessary mitigating actions or adopt alternative approaches. We do not keep central records of all our equality assessments undertaken since December 2019 but publish our policy consultation equality assessments regularly on the MoJ consultation hub which is publicly available on GOV.UK: https://consult.justice.gov.uk/consultation_finder/.
For offenders serving an IPP sentence, the policy change did not lead to an extended minimum period for all before suspension of supervision can be considered. In fact, in the new policy, for some IPP cases, the minimum period is less than it was previously.
This policy change represents a clear, fair and consistent position for those subject to indeterminate licences in the community and supports my primary responsibility to protect the public.
The development or amendment of all justice policy frameworks incudes significant internal consultation. No non-Government organisations were consulted.
The revised policy framework, ‘Managing Parole Eligible Offenders on Licence’ was disseminated across HM Prison and Probation Service via internal communications, which included a leaflet for those serving a qualifying sentence; it is also published and available in the public domain. It falls to probation officers in the National Probation Service to discuss any implications of a policy change directly with those affected.
The minimum period of supervision in the previous policy of either four or 10 years, depending on certain factors relating to the offence and notoriety, applied to those offenders serving life and Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences. Under the previous policy, anyone serving a life sentence for the murder of an adult or for some other serious offences, had to serve a minimum of four continuous years on licence in the community before becoming eligible for consideration for the supervision requirements in the licence to be suspended. The change in policy brought such individuals into line with all others serving a life sentence, in that they must now spend 10 continuous years on licence in the community before becoming eligible for supervision to be suspended, unless exceptional circumstances apply. This change was necessary both to enhance public protection and to ensure public confidence with respect to offenders who had committed murder.
For offenders serving an IPP sentence, the policy change did not lead to an extended minimum period for all before suspension of supervision can be considered. In fact, in the new policy, for some IPP cases, the minimum period is less than it was previously.
This policy change represents a clear, fair and consistent position for those subject to indeterminate licences in the community and supports my primary responsibility to protect the public.
The development or amendment of all justice policy frameworks incudes significant internal consultation. No non-Government organisations were consulted.
The revised policy framework, ‘Managing Parole Eligible Offenders on Licence’ was disseminated across HM Prison and Probation Service via internal communications, which included a leaflet for those serving a qualifying sentence; it is also published and available in the public domain. It falls to probation officers in the National Probation Service to discuss any implications of a policy change directly with those affected.
The minimum period of supervision in the previous policy of either four or 10 years, depending on certain factors relating to the offence and notoriety, applied to those offenders serving life and Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences. Under the previous policy, anyone serving a life sentence for the murder of an adult or for some other serious offences, had to serve a minimum of four continuous years on licence in the community before becoming eligible for consideration for the supervision requirements in the licence to be suspended. The change in policy brought such individuals into line with all others serving a life sentence, in that they must now spend 10 continuous years on licence in the community before becoming eligible for supervision to be suspended, unless exceptional circumstances apply. This change was necessary both to enhance public protection and to ensure public confidence with respect to offenders who had committed murder.
The data requested is not something that HMPPS records. In England, the Department for Education is responsible for Child Safeguarding; some children covered by this policy will have a mother in prison. The Welsh Government is responsible for delivery of the service in Wales. Some children affected by parental imprisonment will be supported by Children’s Social Care departments in Local Authorities.
In practice, it is Local Authorities overseen by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) who are responsible for delivering operational support to families on child safeguarding, including for children affected by parental imprisonment. Individual Local Authorities monitor data on any interventions that have been put in place, including foster care or adoption placements.
The MoJ acknowledges that parental separation due to imprisonment disproportionately affects women. Individual women’s prisons collect information on caring responsibilities at the point of reception, but this is not always reliable as some women choose not to disclose their circumstances. Further, the collection does not specify the care arrangement for those children, which is the responsibility of Local Authorities.
Prisons and Local Authorities work in partnership to safeguard children affected by parental imprisonment as appropriate, including through the sharing of data.
The policy on the suspension of the supervision requirements of the licence for those serving life and Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences was amended in November 2020. The changes made were to ensure consistency and enhance public protection, having regard to the fact that those serving such sentences had committed serious offences – including those serving a mandatory life sentence for murder. The changes to the policy ensure that, unless there are exceptional circumstances, all those serving a life sentence must have spent a period of 10 continuous years on licence in the community before suspension of supervision can be considered. For those subject to IPP, a period of five continuous years is required before suspension of supervision can be considered. Previously, for both life and IPP sentenced offenders, this was either four years or 10 years depending on certain factors relating to the offence and notoriety.
The information needed to provide a comprehensive answer to each question could be acquired only at disproportionate cost as central records are not kept in a way that they can be filtered by the required fields to obtain the information.
The Probation Serious Further Offence (SFO) Review Procedures under Probation Instruction 2018 06 (amended November 2020) requires a rigorous review to be produced in every case where an offender under current statutory probation supervision is charged with a qualifying SFO. The Probation Instruction does allow for Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) to review cases on a discretionary basis, including where an offender serving an indeterminate sentence has had the supervision requirements of the life licence suspended. I can, however, confirm that the National SFO Team in HMPPS has not been notified of any cases which have resulted in an offender being convicted of a qualifying SFO in the period between the suspension of their supervision and the 10 year point following release for life sentences, or the 5 year point following release for IPP sentences, in any of the past five years.
The policy on the suspension of the supervision requirements of the licence for those serving life and Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences was amended in November 2020. The changes made were to ensure consistency and enhance public protection, having regard to the fact that those serving such sentences had committed serious offences – including those serving a mandatory life sentence for murder. The changes to the policy ensure that, unless there are exceptional circumstances, all those serving a life sentence must have spent a period of 10 continuous years on licence in the community before suspension of supervision can be considered. For those subject to IPP, a period of five continuous years is required before suspension of supervision can be considered. Previously, for both life and IPP sentenced offenders, this was either four years or 10 years depending on certain factors relating to the offence and notoriety.
The information needed to provide a comprehensive answer to each question could be acquired only at disproportionate cost as central records are not kept in a way that they can be filtered by the required fields to obtain the information.
The Probation Serious Further Offence (SFO) Review Procedures under Probation Instruction 2018 06 (amended November 2020) requires a rigorous review to be produced in every case where an offender under current statutory probation supervision is charged with a qualifying SFO. The Probation Instruction does allow for Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) to review cases on a discretionary basis, including where an offender serving an indeterminate sentence has had the supervision requirements of the life licence suspended. I can, however, confirm that the National SFO Team in HMPPS has not been notified of any cases which have resulted in an offender being convicted of a qualifying SFO in the period between the suspension of their supervision and the 10 year point following release for life sentences, or the 5 year point following release for IPP sentences, in any of the past five years.
Any foreign national who comes to our country and abuses our hospitality by breaking the law should be in no doubt of our determination to punish and deport them.
We continue to remove foreign national offenders where routes are available.
Since January 2019, we have removed 6,450 foreign national offenders from our prisons, immigration removal centres and the community, with 4,771 removed in 2019/20.
We are absolutely committed to removing foreign national offenders from the UK and continue to work closely with international governments to maximise the removal of serious and persistent offenders. We are constantly reviewing progress to ensure that all options are being pursued and that our early removal mechanisms are working as effectively as possible.
The table attached provides the information on the nationalities and offence types for foreign national prisoners.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
Data on the total prison population as at 30 September 2020, broken down by sex, specified age group and associated offence group, can be viewed in the attached table.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The information requested is provided on the attached document.
The total prison population also includes those held on remand or under sentence, immigration detainees and those convicted of civil offences.
Figures of five and fewer have been suppressed in order to protect the potential identification of individuals.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The tariff-expired unreleased lifer prisoner population, broken down by original tariff length and time over tariff as of 30 September 2020, is shown in the following table:
| Original Tariff Length | |||
Time over tariff | Less than or equal to 10 years | Greater than 10 years to less than or equal to 20 years | More than 20 years | Total |
Less than 1 year | 46 | 135 | 6 | 187 |
From 1 year to less than 2 years | 43 | 96 | 5 | 144 |
From 2 years to less than 3 years | 25 | 68 | 8 | 101 |
From 3 years to less than 4 years | 27 | 50 | 2 | 79 |
From 4 years to less than 5 years | 22 | 51 | 3 | 76 |
From 5 years to less than 6 years | 29 | 37 | 4 | 70 |
From 6 years to less than 7 years | 37 | 45 | 3 | 85 |
From 7 years to less than 8 years | 31 | 39 | 1 | 71 |
From 8 years to less than 9 years | 41 | 33 | 2 | 76 |
From 9 years to less than 10 years | 62 | 31 | 2 | 95 |
From 10 years to less than 11 years | 47 | 27 | 3 | 77 |
From 11 years to less than 12 years | 64 | 13 | 3 | 80 |
From 12 years to less than 13 years | 54 | 14 | 1 | 69 |
From 13 years to less than 14 years | 54 | 14 | 0 | 68 |
From 14 years to less than 15 years | 48 | 19 | 2 | 69 |
From 15 years to less than 16 years | 47 | 13 | 1 | 61 |
From 16 years to less than 17 years | 25 | 9 | 0 | 34 |
From 17 years to less than 18 years | 24 | 18 | 0 | 42 |
From 18 years to less than 19 years | 21 | 10 | 0 | 31 |
From 19 years to less than 20 years | 14 | 7 | 0 | 21 |
20 years or more | 80 | 55 | 3 | 138 |
Total | 841 | 784 | 49 | 1,674 |
These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. As with any large scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
It may be useful to note that statistics on the indeterminate population in prisons are routinely published as part of the Offender Management Statistics Quarterly on Gov.uk - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly .
I would like to be clear that our primary responsibility is to protect the public. We do not want to keep indeterminate sentenced prisoners in custody any longer than is necessary, but we have a duty to ensure that they are progressed in a safe manner. It remains the case that prisoners serving life and other indeterminate sentences will be released only when the independent Parole Board concludes that the risk to the public is capable of being safely managed in the community under probation supervision.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
As of 30th September 2020, data on offenders serving extended determinate sentences broken down into the categories requested is as follows:
Sentence length bands | Male | Female |
Total | 5,764 | 74 |
12 months to 2 years | 16 | * |
2 years to 4 years | 111 | 0 |
4 years to 5 years | 584 | 23 |
5 years to 7 years | 862 | 12 |
7 years to 10 years | 1,547 | 21 |
10 years to 14 years | 1,335 | 14 |
More than 14 years | 1,303 | * |
Sentence length other/ unrecorded | 6 | 0 |
The data above shows the custodial term imposed under the extended determinate sentence and therefore the maximum time offenders serving the sentence could spend in custody. Such prisoners may be released after having served two thirds of this custodial term at the discretion of the parole board.
The figures in these tables have been drawn from large scale administrative data systems - as such there may be errors in data entry and processing. Small values have been suppressed in the above table to protect the identity of individuals.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The number and proportion of women remanded in custody at each court who did not receive a custodial sentence in each of the last 5 years can be found in the attached table.
The Ministry of Justice publishes information on remands and sentencing outcomes by sex and court, currently up to December 2019:
Magistrates’ court remands:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/888658/remands-magistrates-court-tool-2019.xlsx
Crown Court remands:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/888657/remands-crown-court-tool-2019.xlsx
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork (ACCT) is used in prisons to support people at risk of suicide and self-harm. Due to a current technical issue with extracting previous ACCT data from the system we are unable to provide figures on how many ACCT documents were opened in each of the last five years. We are working to resolve this issue and will write to you once we have the data available.
The number of people managed by ACCT fluctuates daily, but data for 2020 has shown that an average of around 2,000 prisoners have been assessed as being at risk and are being supported through ACCT on any given day.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The Prison Estate Transformation Programme (PETP) was set up in 2016 and intended to build 10,000 ‘new for old’ prison places, by addressing systematic challenges in the right supply and drivers of poor decency and safety across the prison estate, through reconfiguring the estate and providing state of the art, fit for purpose places that would have enabled closure of our oldest and least efficient prisons.
Due to pressures on the Ministry of Justice’s resource budget in March 2018, Ministers made a clear and conscious prioritisation decision not to deliver the PETP in full, removing c.6,500 places from the programme. The landscape is very different now. The Prime Minister has made clear his focus on tackling crime and delivering this is a major part of that reform. In Summer 2019, the PETP was retired and superseded by a new investment of up to £2.5 billion in a programme to create 10,000 additional prison places.
The PETP delivered a range of good outcomes, many of which have been influential in supporting the delivery of the new 10,000 additional prison place programme. The PETP:
- Demolished two prisons that were not-fit for purpose and began construction of two 1,680 place resettlement prisons in their place, namely the former HMP Wellingborough (now HMP Five Wells) in Northamptonshire and the former HMYOI Glen Parva in Leicestershire. The new houseblock at HMP Stocken opened in June 2019 and the construction of the new prisons at HMP Five Wells and at Glen Parva are due to complete in late 2021 and early 2023 respectively. The PETP also secured outline planning permission for a third prison, the first prison to be built as part of the 10,000 additional prison places, at Full Sutton in Yorkshire.
- Developed an innovative design for a Cat C resettlement prison following consultation with a multitude of experts in the criminal justice system, which is the baseline for our new prisons.
- Created the Prison Operator Services Framework, increasing the diversity and resilience of the custodial services market in England and Wales, by creating a pool of prison operators who can provide high quality, value for money, custodial and maintenance services and enable us to effectively and efficiently manage a pipeline of competition for the potential operation of new prisons and private prisons whose PFI contract is soon to expire. The first mini-competition for the operation of HMP Five Wells has been successful and we are beginning mobilisation with the successful framework operator.
- Commenced a programme for the reconfiguration of 24 prisons in the male prison estate (in the North East, South West and Wales) which have gone live introducing the new offender flows which underpin the offender management in custody model. Changed the function of three Local prisons to provide approx. 1,200 much needed Cat C trainer and resettlement places (Holme House), and approx. 1,300 Cat B trainer places (Woodhill and Manchester).
- Closed the former HMP and YOI Holloway site and sold it with a receipt of £81.5m. The total income from all PETP sales was £104 million.
- Created three Models for Operational Delivery (MODs) which provided best practice tool kits to support Governors in creating purposeful regimes for Reception, Trainer and Resettlement prisoners. Four specialist MODs (for men convicted of sexual offences, foreign national offenders, older prisoners and young adults) were also published.
- Seven video conferencing centres (VCCs) were installed in prisons.
Lessons learned from the PETP are at the heart of our new 10,000 additional prison place programme. These places will be delivered through a combination of four new prison builds, and the expansion and refurbishment of the current estate. The 10,000 places are additional to the c.3,500 places we have previously committed to at HMP Five Wells, Glen Parva, and at HMP Stocken.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
As at 30th September 2020, there were 311 male prisoners and 4 female prisoners aged 80 or over in England and Wales.
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
Everyone leaving prison should have somewhere safe and secure to live; accommodation enables offenders to hold down a job and reduces the likelihood of them reoffending.
The Homeless Reduction Act (HRA) is helping more people to get help earlier, particularly single people who often would not have received help in the past and would have been at risk of sleeping on our streets, including individuals leaving prison. The most recent HRA Experimental Statutory Homelessness Statistics, published by MHCLG in October, show that the National Probation Services made the largest number of homelessness referrals which resulted in an assessment. This was 27% of the total and an increase of almost 118% from April to June 2019. 95% of these resulted in a homelessness duty, which shows the duty to refer is working better for this cohort in the last quarter. In preparation for the new unified probation model, we are developing a policy framework, which will mandate necessary actions to be taken by prisons and probation staff in supporting the duty to refer and strengthen the process.
As part of its response to the Covid-19 pandemic, the Ministry of Justice secured £8.5 million to support individuals at risk of homelessness on their release from prison and help them to move on to permanent accommodation. The scheme initially ran between 18th May and 31st August and provided up to 56 nights’ accommodation per individual. In light of the recent introduction of national restrictions across England from Thursday 5th November and the Welsh Government’s introduction of a ‘firebreak’, the Government has reinstated this accommodation support. This started from 22nd October 2020 and will be subject to monthly reviews. As part of its initial response, The Ministry of Justice, through Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS), set up seven Homelessness Prevention Taskforces (HPTs) to work with local authorities and other partners to find accommodation for offenders released from prison; these taskforces continue to be active.
In addition, our accommodation pilots, in Leeds, Pentonville and Bristol, have been operating since August 2019. By the end of the enrolment period, the 31st July, we had enrolled 323 individuals onto the scheme. Subject to evaluation, we will use the lessons from the pilot to inform future provision of accommodation for all offenders, through the new Probation model.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
Everyone leaving prison should have somewhere safe and secure to live; accommodation enables offenders to hold down a job and reduces the likelihood of them reoffending.
The Homeless Reduction Act (HRA) is helping more people to get help earlier, particularly single people who often would not have received help in the past and would have been at risk of sleeping on our streets, including individuals leaving prison. The most recent HRA Experimental Statutory Homelessness Statistics, published by MHCLG in October, show that the National Probation Services made the largest number of homelessness referrals which resulted in an assessment. This was 27% of the total and an increase of almost 118% from April to June 2019. 95% of these resulted in a homelessness duty, which shows the duty to refer is working better for this cohort in the last quarter. In preparation for the new unified probation model, we are developing a policy framework, which will mandate necessary actions to be taken by prisons and probation staff in supporting the duty to refer and strengthen the process.
As part of its response to the Covid-19 pandemic, the Ministry of Justice secured £8.5 million to support individuals at risk of homelessness on their release from prison and help them to move on to permanent accommodation. The scheme initially ran between 18th May and 31st August and provided up to 56 nights’ accommodation per individual. In light of the recent introduction of national restrictions across England from Thursday 5th November and the Welsh Government’s introduction of a ‘firebreak’, the Government has reinstated this accommodation support. This started from 22nd October 2020 and will be subject to monthly reviews. As part of its initial response, The Ministry of Justice, through Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS), set up seven Homelessness Prevention Taskforces (HPTs) to work with local authorities and other partners to find accommodation for offenders released from prison; these taskforces continue to be active.
In addition, our accommodation pilots, in Leeds, Pentonville and Bristol, have been operating since August 2019. By the end of the enrolment period, the 31st July, we had enrolled 323 individuals onto the scheme. Subject to evaluation, we will use the lessons from the pilot to inform future provision of accommodation for all offenders, through the new Probation model.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The numbers of prisoners who were granted permanent early release on compassionate grounds due to ill-health in each of the last five calendar years is shown in the following tables. The data is split between prisoners serving determinate and indeterminate sentences, as there are separate policies involved.
Determinate Sentenced Prisoners |
| Indeterminate Sentenced Prisoners | ||
Year | Number released |
| Year | Number released |
2015 | 9 |
| 2015 | 0 |
2016 | 10 |
| 2016 | 2 |
2017 | 3 |
| 2017 | 2 |
2018 | 15 |
| 2018 | 1 |
2019 | 10 |
| 2019 | 1 |
Total | 47 |
| Total | 6 |
Under either policy, release is granted only in exceptional circumstances, the primary consideration being that it will not put the public at risk.
These figures have been drawn from the Public Protection Unit Database held by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. As with any large scale recording systems, the figures are subject to possible errors with data migration and processing.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The information requested is shown in the tables below.
Please note that the figures for offenders serving extended determinate sentences have been excluded. Figures of five and fewer have been suppressed in order to protect the potential identification of individuals.
Prisoners serving a standard determinate sentence of 20 years or more, by age in England and Wales as of 30 September 2020.
All | 894 |
|
|
15 – 17 | * |
18 – 20 | * |
21 – 24 | 13 |
25 – 29 | 49 |
30 – 39 | 206 |
40 – 49 | 182 |
50 – 59 | 181 |
60 – 69 | 146 |
70 and over | 116 |
Prisoners serving a standard determinate sentence of 20 years or more, by sex in England and Wales as of 30 September 2020.
All | 894 |
|
|
Male | 883 |
Female | 11 |
|
|
Total number of individuals sentenced to custody for 10 years or more 2009 to 2019.
Year | Individuals |
2009 | 2111 |
2010 | 2119 |
2011 | 2141 |
2012 | 2097 |
2013 | 1681 |
2014 | 1724 |
2015 | 1857 |
2016 | 1856 |
2017 | 1811 |
2019 | 1839 |
2019 | 1805 |
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The information requested is shown in the tables below.
Please note that the figures for offenders serving extended determinate sentences have been excluded. Figures of five and fewer have been suppressed in order to protect the potential identification of individuals.
Prisoners serving a standard determinate sentence of 20 years or more, by age in England and Wales as of 30 September 2020.
All | 894 |
|
|
15 – 17 | * |
18 – 20 | * |
21 – 24 | 13 |
25 – 29 | 49 |
30 – 39 | 206 |
40 – 49 | 182 |
50 – 59 | 181 |
60 – 69 | 146 |
70 and over | 116 |
Prisoners serving a standard determinate sentence of 20 years or more, by sex in England and Wales as of 30 September 2020.
All | 894 |
|
|
Male | 883 |
Female | 11 |
|
|
Total number of individuals sentenced to custody for 10 years or more 2009 to 2019.
Year | Individuals |
2009 | 2111 |
2010 | 2119 |
2011 | 2141 |
2012 | 2097 |
2013 | 1681 |
2014 | 1724 |
2015 | 1857 |
2016 | 1856 |
2017 | 1811 |
2019 | 1839 |
2019 | 1805 |
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The attached table shows the number of incidents the National Tactical Response Group (NTRG) has responded to each prison in 2019 and this year up to, and including, the 5th of November. In 2019 NTRG responded to 720 prison incidents and in 2020 to date they have responded to 392 incidents.
The NTRG provides additional resources and support staff to help prisons deal with a variety of incidents, the vast majority of which relate to protesting behaviour, predominantly incidents at height. It follows that most call outs relate to non-violent incidents, including cases where NTRG attend as a precaution to assist local resolution.
We will not tolerate violent or disruptive behaviour in our prisons. Last year we announced £100 million to bolster prison security and crackdown on crime behind bars. This is funding new measures including X-ray body scanners which help to keep drugs and the other illicit items which fuel violence, out of jails.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork (ACCT) is used in prisons to support people at risk of suicide and self-harm. We cannot provide live data on the number of people managed by the ACCT process as quality assured data is only available up to March this year. The number of people managed by ACCT fluctuates daily, but data for 2020 has shown that on average of around 2,000 prisoners have been assessed as being at risk and are being supported through ACCT on any given day.
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
In recognition of the importance of maintaining family ties, since 24 March the Government has rolled out 1297 secure mobile phones across the prison estate in England and Wales. This is in addition to existing wing phones and in-cell telephones. As of the 21 July 2020, 153,918 minutes of calls have taken place from secure mobile PIN phones since 2nd April when this service was deployed.
We do not routinely record the number of calls that take place over long periods of time, however our most recent data shows that on 21 July, 2803 calls took place across all mobile phones. This equates to 14,783 minutes across the estate. For comparison, 222,889 minutes of calls took place across the non-mobile based PIN network. There has been a 52% increase in calls across pin phone calls from the average call number in February, we do not currently have the equivalent data for just mobile phones.
We do not record figures for minutes that prisoners have spent on calls by prison across the time period mentioned.. We have access to daily call figures across the entire secure mobile network and also individual prison figures on a given day. We are working with our supplier to identify whether we can report on cumulative figures for individual prisons.
The internal review of the HMPPS Covid-19 Special Payment Scheme is ongoing. When concluded, any changes will be implemented and communicated to staff in the usual way.
HM Treasury have approved the scheme and we anticipate a budget allocation to be agreed in Autumn 2020 which will cover payments made to date.
The internal review of the HMPPS Covid-19 Special Payment Scheme is ongoing. When concluded, any changes will be implemented and communicated to staff in the usual way.
HM Treasury have approved the scheme and we anticipate a budget allocation to be agreed in Autumn 2020 which will cover payments made to date.
Payment Plus is funded through Her Majesty’s Prisons and Probation Service’s staff pay budget from savings arising from any staff vacancies, which are then re-invested by each prison to fund the Payment Plus (PP) needed to cover operational staff vacancies.
Prison governors have always had the authority to use PP to allow for additional staff time to cover vacancies. They are given an annual budget for staff costs based on agreed staffing levels and are expected to manage PP within this.
In the first quarter of this financial year, the total spend on PP was £20.4m, which includes additional overtime cover in response to the impact of COVID-19.
At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a high risk of increased staff absence and to mitigate this, staff were asked to volunteer for additional PP hours in advance of need. Since the start of the scheme in mid-March, to end June, about 60% of the total extra PP hours volunteers had committed to work were used and the remainder are being used as prisons move into recovery.
Payment Plus is funded through Her Majesty’s Prisons and Probation Service’s staff pay budget from savings arising from any staff vacancies, which are then re-invested by each prison to fund the Payment Plus (PP) needed to cover operational staff vacancies.
Prison governors have always had the authority to use PP to allow for additional staff time to cover vacancies. They are given an annual budget for staff costs based on agreed staffing levels and are expected to manage PP within this.
In the first quarter of this financial year, the total spend on PP was £20.4m, which includes additional overtime cover in response to the impact of COVID-19.
At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a high risk of increased staff absence and to mitigate this, staff were asked to volunteer for additional PP hours in advance of need. Since the start of the scheme in mid-March, to end June, about 60% of the total extra PP hours volunteers had committed to work were used and the remainder are being used as prisons move into recovery.
As of the 14th July 132,266 connections through secure mobile PIN phones have been made. This number includes phone calls to approved telephone numbers, account check balances, failed calls and calls where they were connected to an engaged number and therefore disconnected. This number also excludes those calls made through existing in-cell telephones and secure PIN phones on prison landings.
Secure mobile phones were allocated on a region by region basis with operational decisions made as to where deployment of these phones was most effective. These decisions were made considering:
- whether in-cell telephones were already in place and so secure mobiles were not needed
- if the potential site had suitable mobile phone signal. Some sites, due to location and build of prison did not enable effective coverage to support mobile calls.
The following numbers of phones were initially deployed to each region across 65 sites:
Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Cheshire & Lancashire, Cumbria | 120 |
Yorkshire | 25 |
Tees & Wear | 25 |
North Midlands | 35 |
East Midlands | 65 |
West Midlands | 70 |
Avon & South Dorset | 40 |
South Central | 40 |
Devon & North Dorset | 30 |
Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Norfolk & Hertfordshire, Essex and Suffolk | 100 |
London | 35 |
Kent, Surrey & Sussex | 55 |
Long Term High Security | 170 |
HMPPS Wales | 90 |
Although all phone calls are monitored, we do not create reports on the number of calls on a person-by-person basis. Similarly, we do not routinely record how many times an individual makes a phone call. We have since increased the number of secure mobiles to nearly 1300.
A budget has not been yet allocated to HM Prisons and Probation Service for the COVID-19 Special Payment Scheme.
HMT have approved the scheme and the current costs for the COVID-19 Special Payment Scheme as needed to ensure a safe regime. We anticipate budget cover to be finalised in Autumn 2020, and will cover the full financial year.
As of the 14th July 132,266 connections through secure mobile PIN phones have been made. This number includes phone calls to approved telephone numbers, account check balances, failed calls and calls where they were connected to an engaged number and therefore disconnected. This number also excludes those calls made through existing in-cell telephones and secure PIN phones on prison landings.
Secure mobile phones were allocated on a region by region basis with operational decisions made as to where deployment of these phones was most effective. These decisions were made considering:
- whether in-cell telephones were already in place and so secure mobiles were not needed
- if the potential site had suitable mobile phone signal. Some sites, due to location and build of prison did not enable effective coverage to support mobile calls.
The following numbers of phones were initially deployed to each region across 65 sites:
Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Cheshire & Lancashire, Cumbria | 120 |
Yorkshire | 25 |
Tees & Wear | 25 |
North Midlands | 35 |
East Midlands | 65 |
West Midlands | 70 |
Avon & South Dorset | 40 |
South Central | 40 |
Devon & North Dorset | 30 |
Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Norfolk & Hertfordshire, Essex and Suffolk | 100 |
London | 35 |
Kent, Surrey & Sussex | 55 |
Long Term High Security | 170 |
HMPPS Wales | 90 |
Although all phone calls are monitored, we do not create reports on the number of calls on a person-by-person basis. Similarly, we do not routinely record how many times an individual makes a phone call. We have since increased the number of secure mobiles to nearly 1300.
A budget has not been yet allocated to HM Prisons and Probation Service for the COVID-19 Special Payment Scheme.
HMT have approved the scheme and the current costs for the COVID-19 Special Payment Scheme as needed to ensure a safe regime. We anticipate budget cover to be finalised in Autumn 2020, and will cover the full financial year.
The government welcomes the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s report, Inclusive Justice, the interim findings of which were published on 22 April, and the full report on 11 June 2020. The recommendations made in the report are being carefully considered.
Keeping everyone in our prisons safe is paramount and remains the organisation’s biggest priority. PAVA is only used as a last resort and is used safely and appropriately to best protect both staff and prisoners from serious harm.
It is important to recognise that this is just one element in a package of tools already in place to improve physical safety in prisons. It sits alongside Body Worn Video Cameras, Five Minute Intervention (FMI) training to enhance interpersonal interactions, a new personal safety training package, and the deployment of rigid bar handcuffs. All of these measures aim to help improve safety in prisons. We know that one of the most effective tools in managing people safely is the interpersonal skills of our staff. Therefore the introduction of PAVA will not happen in any establishment until all the staff there have had their FMI training and the new key worker role for our band 3 officers has been implemented.
HMPPS is committed and duty bound to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not and to foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
In response to the Lammy Review, we are updating national training packages to raise awareness among all staff of the role of a range of biases in decision making, and strategies to combat these.
Quality assurance and scrutiny of incidents is vital to ensuring that force is used legally and appropriately. Governors will be expected to ensure that scrutiny takes place after any drawing and/or use of PAVA. We have developed a toolkit of resources to assist prisons in maintaining effective scrutiny.
PAVA mainly effects the eyes, but it also effects the respiratory system. The PAVA policy states that staff must take the health of a prisoner into consideration before deploying PAVA. The policy state that it must not be used on a prisoner in respiratory distress or showing other signs of immediate symptoms of acute ill health which are likely to be significantly exacerbated by PAVA deployment. This would include any prisoner that is suspected of having COVID19.
Staff are also reminded that PAVA will only be used when exceptional circumstances apply and in accordance with training. The legitimate use of PAVA will only be considered reasonable as a means of defence when:
- It is necessary for an officer to defend themselves or a third party from an attack, or an impending attack, where they perceive a threat of immediate serious harm; and
- There is no other reasonable option open to the member of staff to protect themselves or another person and reduce the risk of immediate serious harm but to employ this defensive technique.
We will always have enough capacity to accommodate those committed to custody by the courts. As of 29 May, we have reduced useable operational capacity by around 2,600 places in order to ensure prisons can implement a compartmentalisation strategy to isolate the symptomatic, shield the vulnerable and quarantine new arrivals to reduce risk. Further reductions in useable capacity will depend on further population reductions and we will continue to monitor the situation closely.
In March, temporary restrictions were put in place to minimise movements between jails and reduce face-to-face probation meetings to avoid thousands of prisoners and staff becoming infected with COVID-19. Since then, strong further measures have been implemented, including the early release of low-risk offenders, temporary expansion of the prison estate, and work to reduce the number of those held on remand. These measures have helped to contain the spread of the virus so far and limit deaths.
This action has helped to reduce the prison population, allowing jails to implement ‘compartmentalisation’.
Inter-prison transfers are currently limited, however, as normal measures return across the estate, we will be able to undertake routine inter-prison transfers safely.
The baseline certified normal accommodation (CNA) of the prison estate will not change over the next 12 months (as there are no plans to open new prison places or permanently close any prisons). However, in-use CNA and operational capacity will fluctuate over the next 12 months as places come in and out of use for a range of reasons at selected prisons (mainly as a result of large-scale maintenance projects and/or as part of our response to managing the Covid-19 pandemic).
The number of prisoners held in shared accommodation over the next 12 months will be based on the size of the current and the projected prison population. As at 1 May, 36% of the prison population are sharing cells holding two or more people.
To mitigate the spread of infection in the existing estate, we have been creating space in prisons to remove and reduce cell sharing, provide access to in-cell sanitation, and protect the sick and shield the vulnerable.
Over 850 temporary cells have already been delivered to 25 prisons and 217 are in use. We continue to deliver and install these units to provide single occupancy cells at priority sites to support the successful compartmentalisation of prisoners to prevent the spread of COVID-19. We have also opened an Annex at HMP/YOI Rochester to hold up to 70 men.
Extra headroom is being created as a result of population falls and our support for early release schemes and expediting of remand cases.
The Parole Board take a detailed and sophisticated approach to assessing whether the statutory release test, set by Parliament, is met to ensure the protection of the public. In the temporary absence of face-to-face hearings, the Board has introduced measures to ensure as many parole hearings continue through the use of an intensive paper review process and by telephone and video technology to determine whether it is safe for the protection of the public for an offender to be released. Through these measures, the Board reports it is successfully managing to progress and make decisions without compromising the quality or integrity of the risk assessment process. If that is sustained, the Board does not envisage any significant impact on the number of release decisions it makes.
Prison population projections bulletins are released annually by the Ministry of Justice. The next projections are due in August this year.
The most recent bulletin, from 29 August 2019, forecasts that the adult male population will be 76,900 in June 2021, and the female adult population will be 3,700 in June 2021.
As they were published in August last year, these projections do not factor in the impact of measures to contain COVID-19, although we do not expect COVID-19 to significantly affect the underlying drivers of the longer-term population.
In order to ensure we have sufficient space for those sentenced to custody, we are investing up to £2.5 billion to provide 10,000 additional prison places over the next 6 years. Further construction already taking place, for example at Wellingborough and Glen Parva, will deliver another 3,500 places by 2023.
Data on refusals to release under the Home Detention Curfew (HDC) and End of Custody Temporary Release (ECTR) schemes are not collated centrally and it would exceed cost limits to establish the number of prisoners who are not released under each scheme because they do not have suitable accommodation to go to.
Where low-risk offenders are assessed as eligible for release under HDC or ECTR but do not have suitable accommodation to return to, HMPPS will work with the offender and with other agencies, including the Bail Accommodation Support Service (BASS) run by Nacro, in order to identify a suitable address if possible.
We will always have enough capacity to accommodate those committed to custody by the courts. As of 29 May, we have reduced useable operational capacity by around 2,600 places in order to ensure prisons can implement a compartmentalisation strategy to isolate the symptomatic, shield the vulnerable and quarantine new arrivals to reduce risk. Further reductions in useable capacity will depend on further population reductions and we will continue to monitor the situation closely.
In March, temporary restrictions were put in place to minimise movements between jails and reduce face-to-face probation meetings to avoid thousands of prisoners and staff becoming infected with COVID-19. Since then, strong further measures have been implemented, including the early release of low-risk offenders, temporary expansion of the prison estate, and work to reduce the number of those held on remand. These measures have helped to contain the spread of the virus so far and limit deaths.
This action has helped to reduce the prison population, allowing jails to implement ‘compartmentalisation’.
Inter-prison transfers are currently limited, however, as normal measures return across the estate, we will be able to undertake routine inter-prison transfers safely.
The baseline certified normal accommodation (CNA) of the prison estate will not change over the next 12 months (as there are no plans to open new prison places or permanently close any prisons). However, in-use CNA and operational capacity will fluctuate over the next 12 months as places come in and out of use for a range of reasons at selected prisons (mainly as a result of large-scale maintenance projects and/or as part of our response to managing the Covid-19 pandemic).
The number of prisoners held in shared accommodation over the next 12 months will be based on the size of the current and the projected prison population. As at 1 May, 36% of the prison population are sharing cells holding two or more people.
To mitigate the spread of infection in the existing estate, we have been creating space in prisons to remove and reduce cell sharing, provide access to in-cell sanitation, and protect the sick and shield the vulnerable.
Over 850 temporary cells have already been delivered to 25 prisons and 217 are in use. We continue to deliver and install these units to provide single occupancy cells at priority sites to support the successful compartmentalisation of prisoners to prevent the spread of COVID-19. We have also opened an Annex at HMP/YOI Rochester to hold up to 70 men.
Extra headroom is being created as a result of population falls and our support for early release schemes and expediting of remand cases.
We will always have enough capacity to accommodate those committed to custody by the courts. As of 29 May, we have reduced useable operational capacity by around 2,600 places in order to ensure prisons can implement a compartmentalisation strategy to isolate the symptomatic, shield the vulnerable and quarantine new arrivals to reduce risk. Further reductions in useable capacity will depend on further population reductions and we will continue to monitor the situation closely.
In March, temporary restrictions were put in place to minimise movements between jails and reduce face-to-face probation meetings to avoid thousands of prisoners and staff becoming infected with COVID-19. Since then, strong further measures have been implemented, including the early release of low-risk offenders, temporary expansion of the prison estate, and work to reduce the number of those held on remand. These measures have helped to contain the spread of the virus so far and limit deaths.
This action has helped to reduce the prison population, allowing jails to implement ‘compartmentalisation’.
Inter-prison transfers are currently limited, however, as normal measures return across the estate, we will be able to undertake routine inter-prison transfers safely.
The baseline certified normal accommodation (CNA) of the prison estate will not change over the next 12 months (as there are no plans to open new prison places or permanently close any prisons). However, in-use CNA and operational capacity will fluctuate over the next 12 months as places come in and out of use for a range of reasons at selected prisons (mainly as a result of large-scale maintenance projects and/or as part of our response to managing the Covid-19 pandemic).
The number of prisoners held in shared accommodation over the next 12 months will be based on the size of the current and the projected prison population. As at 1 May, 36% of the prison population are sharing cells holding two or more people.
To mitigate the spread of infection in the existing estate, we have been creating space in prisons to remove and reduce cell sharing, provide access to in-cell sanitation, and protect the sick and shield the vulnerable.
Over 850 temporary cells have already been delivered to 25 prisons and 217 are in use. We continue to deliver and install these units to provide single occupancy cells at priority sites to support the successful compartmentalisation of prisoners to prevent the spread of COVID-19. We have also opened an Annex at HMP/YOI Rochester to hold up to 70 men.
Extra headroom is being created as a result of population falls and our support for early release schemes and expediting of remand cases.
We will always have enough capacity to accommodate those committed to custody by the courts. As of 29 May, we have reduced useable operational capacity by around 2,600 places in order to ensure prisons can implement a compartmentalisation strategy to isolate the symptomatic, shield the vulnerable and quarantine new arrivals to reduce risk. Further reductions in useable capacity will depend on further population reductions and we will continue to monitor the situation closely.
In March, temporary restrictions were put in place to minimise movements between jails and reduce face-to-face probation meetings to avoid thousands of prisoners and staff becoming infected with COVID-19. Since then, strong further measures have been implemented, including the early release of low-risk offenders, temporary expansion of the prison estate, and work to reduce the number of those held on remand. These measures have helped to contain the spread of the virus so far and limit deaths.
This action has helped to reduce the prison population, allowing jails to implement ‘compartmentalisation’.
Inter-prison transfers are currently limited, however, as normal measures return across the estate, we will be able to undertake routine inter-prison transfers safely.
The baseline certified normal accommodation (CNA) of the prison estate will not change over the next 12 months (as there are no plans to open new prison places or permanently close any prisons). However, in-use CNA and operational capacity will fluctuate over the next 12 months as places come in and out of use for a range of reasons at selected prisons (mainly as a result of large-scale maintenance projects and/or as part of our response to managing the Covid-19 pandemic).
The number of prisoners held in shared accommodation over the next 12 months will be based on the size of the current and the projected prison population. As at 1 May, 36% of the prison population are sharing cells holding two or more people.
To mitigate the spread of infection in the existing estate, we have been creating space in prisons to remove and reduce cell sharing, provide access to in-cell sanitation, and protect the sick and shield the vulnerable.
Over 850 temporary cells have already been delivered to 25 prisons and 217 are in use. We continue to deliver and install these units to provide single occupancy cells at priority sites to support the successful compartmentalisation of prisoners to prevent the spread of COVID-19. We have also opened an Annex at HMP/YOI Rochester to hold up to 70 men.
Extra headroom is being created as a result of population falls and our support for early release schemes and expediting of remand cases.
As an independent statutory body with court-like functions, the Parole Board is responsible for deciding on appropriate training requirements for its members. Mental health considerations are incorporated into its learning and development events, including compulsory induction training for members. A number of members already have backgrounds in mental health and some also sit on First Tier Tribunal (Mental Health) and Mental Health Review Tribunal Wales.
In cases where capacity of the offender may be an issue the Parole Board would normally appoint one of its specialist members (either a psychologist or psychiatrist) onto the panel. In the alternative, the panel can consult a specialist member on a specific issue. Panels can direct a capacity assessment be carried out in such cases, and, where a prisoner is found to lack capacity, the Parole Board rules provide a person to be appointed to act on their behalf.
On 31 March, we announced that pregnant women and prisoners with their babies in custody will be considered for Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) on compassionate grounds during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Prisoners identified as ‘extremely vulnerable’ as defined in the NHS guidelines will also merit consideration for ROTL on compassionate grounds during the COVID-19 pandemic.
On 4 April, we announced the End of Custody Temporary Release scheme. This scheme enables risk-assessed prisoners, who are within two months of their release date, to be temporarily released from custody, as part of the national approach to managing public services during this challenging period.
Alongside the careful release of low-risk offenders, we are taking steps to temporarily expand the prison estate, shield the most vulnerable, and reduce the number of prisoners on remand. This is to strike a balance between limiting the spread of COVID-19 in jails while ensuring the public is protected.
The tables below provide the number of prisoners released from prison under the End of Custody Temporary Release scheme and the number of prisoners released on temporary licence on compassionate grounds. The data in these tables is correct as of Friday 15 May.
W/C | Compassionate release- Male | End of Custody Temporary Release- Male | Total |
w/c Mon 30 Mar | 0 | 0 | 0 |
w/c Mon 06 Apr | 0 | 1 | 1 |
w/c Mon 13 Apr | 0 | 9 | 9 |
w/c Mon 20 Apr | 0 | 3 | 3 |
w/c Mon 27 Apr | 0 | 15 | 15 |
w/c Mon 04 May | 5 | 21 | 26 |
w/c Mon 11 May | 0 | 12 | 12 |
Grand Total | 5 | 61 | 66 |
W/C | Compassionate Release- Female | End of Custody Temporary Release-Female | Total |
w/c Mon 30 Mar | 3 | 0 | 3 |
w/c Mon 06 Apr | 11 | 0 | 11 |
w/c Mon 13 Apr | 4 | 1 | 5 |
w/c Mon 20 Apr | 3 | 1 | 4 |
w/c Mon 27 Apr | 0 | 0 | 0 |
w/c Mon 04 May | 0 | 1 | 1 |
w/c Mon 11 May | 0 | 2 | 2 |
Grand Total | 21 | 5 | 26 |
The requested data is not available at this time. Court data up to the year ending December 2019 is due to be published on 21 May 2020, and data for the year ending December 2020 is planned for publication in May 2021. Prison receptions data covering January to March 2020 is planned for publication in July 2020 and data covering April to June 2020 is planned for publication in October 2020.
Services within HMCTS are adjusting to Covid-19 at an agile pace. We’re doing everything possible to ensure any potential negative impacts are identified and mitigated for vulnerable users, by putting the right support in place for them.
Levels of compliance with social distancing by criminal courts are high. HMCTS are following Public Health guidance to ensure that our courts and tribunals support proper social distancing measures for everyone who uses and works in them.
Working with the judiciary, we have agreed how to prioritise the most urgent cases and moved to hear many more cases remotely by telephone or video wherever possible and appropriate. We are clear that audio and video hearings provide an additional channel for conducting a hearing and should be as accessible as possible. The decision to hold a hearing by telephone or video is for the judge, panel or magistrate, taking into account the needs of the parties, including any disability or difficulties with access.
We work with the advice sector to fully understand the impacts on vulnerable people, reasonable adjustments, and reflecting up to date advice from the sector in our processes for court users to join hearings and related staff guidance. We are also planning an evaluation of the use of remote hearings during the Covid-19 outbreak. This includes exploring how remote hearing processes were implemented and worked in practice, and how experiences varied for different user groups.
Hearings in the mental health tribunal are taking place by audio and video, and the President and Deputy President of the Health, Education and Social Care chamber have issued guidance on these hearings.
All prisoners are assessed by healthcare practitioners on reception into prison custody. Every establishment has been required to develop a local healthcare delivery plan for the COVID-19 period which will outline provisions for prisoners with the full range of healthcare needs and how these will be met locally. Arrangements vary between sites however reporting commitments will be managed in conjunction with local courts.
We are implementing a range of measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 in prisons. We have restricted prison regimes to support prisoners and staff adhere to social distancing and we have minimised inter prison transfers. We are also implementing a strategy of compartmentalisation: isolating the symptomatic, shielding the vulnerable and quarantining new arrivals in reverse cohorting units.
Those on remand are subject to the same compartmentalisation measures as the regular population, with new arrivals from the courts being located in reverse cohorting units.
This strategy is in line with Public Health England guidance and has shown early signs of success in limiting the transmission of COVID-19.