Human Resources

Workforce Profile
Report
Introduction Issue 4 September 2007

If you require further copies of this report, please contact CONTENTS

Mark Gray, Executive Officer Workforce Planning &
Information on 020 7217 2004 or by email at:
Introduction 1

Mark.Gray17@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Supplementary Notes 2

Headline Figures
• On 31/12/2006 there were 24,425 staff in the NPS
(including Chief Officers) and 541 Probation Board
Members. This is an overall headcount of 24,966
staff in the Probation sector.
• Women make up 67.53% of the workforce, and
continue to outnumber men by a ratio of 2.08:1. The
proportion of men has decreased by 0.35% since last
year, and now stands at 32.47% of the staff
population. The level of representation is comparable
with the public service average of 65.2% for women
and 34.8% for men (2006 figures).
• The figures show that women joining the NPS
outnumbered men joining by a ratio of 4.17:1 over the
past year.
• Men continue to have a higher representation than
women in the more senior roles of Chief Officer
(52.50%), Deputy Chief Officer (54.55%) and
Assistant Chief Officer (54.29%), even though men
are in the minority across the NPS in general.
• The representation of black and minority ethnic
groups now stands at 12.92% of the Probation
workforce, increasing by 1.13% since 2005. The
representation continues to be well ahead of the
Home Secretary’s Race Equality Employment Target
of 8.3% by 2009 (this target still applies for the
Ministry of Justice until their own target is set in due
course), and is also higher than the representation in
the general UK population (8.4%, based on the
2003/04 Annual Local Area Labour Force Survey).
• The minority ethnic reporting target requiring 95%
complete data has been met, with just 0.30% of staff
missing ethnic category information. A further 2.47%
of staff chose not to state their ethnicity.
Gender 2
Ethnicity 7
Disability 14
Age 20
Service 27
• There remains no black and minority ethnic
representation in the Chief Officer job group but the
Deputy Chief Officer group now has a 3.90%
representation having had no representation in 2005.
black and minority ethnic representation amongst
Board Members fell by 2.16% to now stand at
12.38%.
• The underreporting of disability fell by another 3.57%
to stand at 6.41% and has now fallen by almost half
since 2004 when the figure was 12.72%. A further
7.93% chose not to state their disability status (down
from 15.69% in 2005).
• Where information is available, the proportion of staff
reporting a disability has increased again to stand at
4.62%, a rise of 0.95% over the past twelve months.
This remains well below the representation of people
with disabilities in the wider Public Service workforce
(14.2%, 2006 Figures)
• The median age for the Probation workforce has
fallen slightly to 43.54 from 43.58 in 2005 but the
proportion of the workforce that are over 35 has risen
to 70.74% from 70.67 over the same period. This is
consistent with the age profile of the broader Public
Service in which 73.9% of staff are over the age of 35
(2006 figures).

Page 1
Supplementary Notes
The information contained in this report has not
previously been published. In reading this report, you
should note the following:
• The report presents a ‘snapshot’ of the workforce at
31 December 2006 and is the first report completed
since significant changes were made to the reporting
structure. The changes were as follows:
• Three new job groups were added that had not
previously been used. They were Middle Manager,
Practice Development Assessor, and Treatment
Manager.
• The Middle Manager job group is an amalgamation of
the previous Senior Probation Officer and
Section/Function Head job groups, both of which were
deleted from use.
• There is no longer a split between operational and
support staff as there was deemed to be little practical
use in dividing staff in this way.
The changes mean that in some circumstances the data
collected is no longer directly comparable with the data
collected in previous years.
full time equivalent (FTE) figures.
• Where necessary, this report draws comparison with
relevant external statistics.
• This report covers the 42 Areas within the NPS and
Members of the Probation Boards. Probation Board
Members are included in this report, but they are not
employees of the NPS and are included for
information purposes only (please note that 4 Board
Members did not state their gender). Information
regarding PACU (formerly NPD) is no longer collected.
• Please note that for job group calculations throughout
this report, people with multiple jobs are counted once
in each separate job they do. In all other calculations
they are only counted once.
Terminology & Conventions
• Not Stated – This is used where the information on a
particular variable is unknown because the individual
concerned has declined to provide their details.
• Not Available – This is used where the information
on a particular variable is simply not available.

• The data collection date coincides with the end of
Quarter 3, and should correlate with the information in
issue 12 of the Workforce Information Report.
However there remains minor discrepancies between
the two sets of data but this has reduced compared to
the last report to now only amount to 68.14 FTE
(166.08 FTE in 2005). This is a 0.32% margin of error
between the two reports.
• This report presents headcount figures only, and not
• Zero Values – As with the ‘Not Available’ category,
there are some instances where data is not available
for some individuals on a particular variable. Where
this is the case, these individuals have been
excluded from calculations. This leads to some
variations in staff numbers.
• BME – This is an abbreviation of ‘black and minority
ethnic’ used in some tables in this report. Please note
that all Areas report ethnicity in terms of the ‘16+1’
ethnic codes used in the National Census.

Gender
GENDER BY REGION/AREA Chart 1 – Ranked Gender Representation by Region
On 31/12/2006 there were a total of 24,425
staff in the NPS (including Chief Officers) and South West 0.89%

541 Probation Board Members. This is an North West 0.61%

overall headcount of 24,966 staff in the
London 0.87%
Probation sector.
Wales 1.52%
16,856 of these staff were women (an
increase of 521 since 2005), who now North East 0.02%

account for 67.53% of the staff population. East Midlands 0.25%

Women continue to account for approximately
West Midlands 0.53%
two thirds of the Probation sector, and
outnumber their male colleagues by a ratio of East of England 0.32%
2.08:1. 0.17%
Yorkshire & Humberside
The other 8,106 staff are men (a rise of 125 South East 0.13%
since 2005) and account for the remaining
National Probation Service 0.35%
32.47% of the total population (32.82% in
2005). 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

The figures show that women joining the Men Women

NPS outnumbered men by a ratio of at 4.17:1
over the past year. Chart 1: The red indicator line represents the public service average for the
representation of men and women. The arrows at the ends of bars on the
The proportion of women in the Probation
chart show the direction of change since 31/12/2005, and the figures in
sector continues to be consistent with levels
white show the extent of the change.
recorded in the Public Service generally,

Page 2
where women account for 65.2% of the staff Table 1 – Gender Representation by Area and Region
population (2006 figures).
A rea/Region Men % Wom e n %
Hertfordshire is the Area with the greatest
difference between men and women, with; Cumbria 88 36.07% 156 63.93%

73.15% women to 26.85% men. Suffolk is the Cheshire 148 31.76% 318 68.24%

Area with the smallest difference, with; 61.61% Greater Manchester 506 34.19% 974 65.81%

women to 38.39% men. Lancashire 214 33.23% 430 66.77%

Merseyside 273 33.05% 553 66.95%

30 of the 42 Areas reported an increase in the
1229 33.58% 2431 66.42%
proportion of women compared to 2005. The Nor th We s t

largest increase coming in Dyfed Powys (up Durham 107 32.04% 227 67.96%

3.60%), followed by Bedfordshire (up 2.74%). Of Northumbria 274 33.91% 534 66.09%

the 12 Areas reporting an increase in the Teesside 123 31.30% 270 68.70%
proportion of men, Lincolnshire reported the Nor th Eas t 504 32.83% 1031 67.17%
largest (up 2.26%) followed by Thames Valley Humberside 177 32.96% 360 67.04%
(up 1.75%). North Y orkshire 110 37.04% 187 62.96%

At regional level, the South East remains the South Y orkshire 204 27.98% 525 72.02%

Region that has the largest proportion of women West Y orkshire 354 30.15% 820 69.85%

at 70.31% of the staff population, although this is Yor k s hir e & Hum be r s ide 845 30.87% 1892 69.13%
down slightly by 0.13% since 2005. Derbyshire 131 31.26% 288 68.74%

Leicestershire 172 31.91% 367 68.09%

The South West has the largest proportion of
men with 34.08%. This is also down by 0.89% on Lincolnshire 102 33.66% 201 66.34%

the figure for 2005. Northamptonshire 109 35.28% 200 64.72%

Nottinghamshire 222 32.84% 454 67.16%

GENDER BY JOB GROUP
Eas t M idlands 736 32.77% 1510 67.23%
The high proportion of women in the NPS is Dyf ed Pow ys 75 34.09% 145 65.91%
outlined further when you look at gender Gw ent 94 29.19% 228 70.81%
representation in the job groups. It shows that North Wales 103 33.23% 207 66.77%
women outnumber men in 11 of the 17 groups South Wales 244 34.61% 461 65.39%
(64.7%).
Wale s 516 33.14% 1041 66.86%

With the changes to the reporting structure Staf f ordshire 185 34.45% 352 65.55%
(outlined earlier), including; new job groups being Warw ickshire 69 32.39% 144 67.61%
added and others being deleted/amalgamated, West Mercia 153 32.97% 311 67.03%
comparisons to 2005 are not possible for the West Midlands 523 31.81% 1121 68.19%
Middle Manager, Practice Development Assessor We s t M idlands 930 32.54% 1928 67.46%
or Treatment Manager job groups. We can
Bedf ordshire 69 27.71% 180 72.29%
however see that they follow the same pattern as
Cambridgeshire 97 33.56% 192 66.44%
the NPS, with women holding the majority of
Essex 173 31.98% 368 68.02%
posts in each group with 59.23%, 67.97% and
74.07% respectively. Hertf ordshire 80 26.85% 218 73.15%

Norf olk 125 35.41% 228 64.59%

Of the remaining 14 groups, 7 have seen an Suf f olk 119 191
38.39% 61.61%
increase in men and the same number have
Eas t of England 663 32.50% 1377 67.50%
seen an increase in women when compared with
A von & Somerset 206 34.33% 394 65.67%
2005.
Devon & Cornw all 219 35.21% 403 64.79%
The greatest percentage rises for women have Dorset 113 34.66% 213 65.34%
come in the Psychologist (up 6.27%), Deputy Gloucestershire 85 34.27% 163 65.73%
Chief Officer (up 4.47%) and Other Operational
Wiltshire 62 28.97% 152 71.03%
Staff (up 4.08%) job groups.
South We s t 685 34.08% 1325 65.92%
The greatest percentage rises for men have Hampshire 208 28.45% 523 71.55%
come in the Support Staff – Other (up 3.38%), Kent 187 29.87% 439 70.13%
Trainee Probation Officer (up 1.27%) and Surrey 99 29.20% 240 70.80%
Support Staff – Administration (up 0.94%) job Sussex 192 33.51% 381 66.49%
groups.
Thames V alley 225 28.16% 574 71.84%

The trend for men to occupy more senior South Eas t 911 29.69% 2157 70.31%
positions has continued in the Chief Officer group London 1087 33.44% 2164 66.56%
at 52.50% and the Assistant Chief Officer group National Pr obation Se r vice 8106 32.47% 16856 67.53%
at 54.29%, with their percentages also increasing
this year by 0.12% and 0.87% respectively. The
number of women in Deputy Chief Officer roles
has however increased by 4.47% (following a
3.46% decrease in 2005) and they now occupy
45.45% of DCO positions.
Page 3
 Chart 2 – Ranked Gender Representation by Area

Suffolk 1.66%

North Yorkshire 0.09%

Cumbria 1.00%

Norfolk 0.95%

Northamptonshire 1.62%

Devon & Cornwall 1.38%

Dorset 0.55%

South Wales 0.40%

Staffordshire 1.76%

Avon & Somerset 0.51%

Gloucestershire 1.71%

Greater Manchester 0.07%

Dyfed Powys 3.60%

Northumbria 0.58%

Lincolnshire 2.26%

Cambridgeshire 0.52%

Sussex 1.09%

London 0.87%

Lancashire 1.33%

North Wales 2.09%

Merseyside 1.06%

West Mercia 0.43%

Humberside 0.92%

Nottinghamshire 0.06%

Warwickshire 1.25%

Durham 1.60%

Essex 0.17%

Leicestershire 0.76%

West Midlands 0.02%

Cheshire 0.75%

Teesside 0.08%

Derbyshire 0.99%

West Yorkshire 0.73%

Kent 0.20%

Surrey 0.12%

Gwent 1.99%

Wiltshire 1.91%

Hampshire 0.47%

Thames Valley 1.75%

South Yorkshire 1.18%

Bedfordshire 2.74%

Hertfordshire 0.46%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Men Women

Chart 2: The red indicator line represents the national public service average for the
representation of men and women. The arrows at the ends of bars on the chart show the
direction of change since 31/12/2005, and the figures in white show the extent of the change.

Page 4
The gap between males and females has grown Women continue to account for a large proportion of the
in the Psychologists job group where the number Support Staff - Admin group with 89.53% but this is down
of females has increased by 6.27% to now 0.94% on 2005.
account for 90.48% of the group. However, this is
Men again account for the majority of the Support Staff –
the smallest job group across the service and
Other group with 55.80% and this has increased by 3.38%
equates to 19 female and 2 male Psychologists
since 2005.
out of a total of 21.
FULL vs. PART TIME STAFF BY GENDER
There has been a reversal in the Senior
Practitioner grade where the number of women in The proportion of men and women that work full time
the group increased by 3.01% in 2006 compared versus part time continues to be consistent with the
to an 8.30% decrease in 2005. representation of men and women in the general workforce.
In the Other Staff group the proportion of women Women account for 67.33% of those working full time
has increased by 2.01%, although this group is against 32.67% of men and 68.07% of those working part
unpredictable in that it is a catch all ‘Other’ time against 31.93%.
category and the numbers and types of staff
allocated to it will vary.
The proportion of women in the TPO job group
has decreased by a further 1.27% but is still
predominately made up of women at 72.86%.

Table 2 – Gender Representation by Job Group

Area/Region Me n % W om e n %
Boa rd Me m be rs 358 66.42% 181 33.58%
Chief Office r 21 52.50% 19 47.50%
De puty Chie f Office rs 42 54.55% 35 45.45%
Assistant Chie f Office r 171 54.29% 144 45.71%
Area /District Ma na ge rs 68 37.78% 112 62.22%
Middle Ma na ge r 731 40.77% 1062 59.23%
Se nior Pra ctitione r 124 35.94% 221 64.06%
Proba tion Office r 1888 31.66% 4076 68.34%
Practice De ve lopm ent Asse ssor 41 32.03% 87 67.97%
Tra ine e Proba tion Officer 298 27.14% 800 72.86%
Tre atm e nt Ma na ge r 28 25.93% 80 74.07%
Proba tion Se rvices Office r 2714 37.45% 4533 62.55%
Psychologist 2 9.52% 19 90.48%
Othe r Ope rationa l Sta ff 793 51.39% 750 48.61%
Support Sta ff - Adm inistration 524 10.47% 4482 89.53%
Support Sta ff - Othe r 226 55.80% 179 44.20%
Othe r Sta ff 140 38.15% 227 61.85%

Table 2: Please note that for job group calculations, people with multiple jobs are counted as once in
each separate job they do. In all other calculations they are only counted once.

Page 5
 Chart 3 – Ranked Gender Representation by Job Group

Board Members 0.28%

Support Staff - Other 3.38%

Deputy Chief Officers 4.47%

Assistant Chief Officer 0.87%

Chief Officer 0.12%

Other Operational Staff 4.08%

Middle Manager

Other Staff 2.01%

Area/District Managers 2.89%

Probation Services Officer 0.71%

Senior Practitioner 3.01%

Practice Development Assessor

Probation Officer 1.17%

Trainee Probation Officer 1.27%

Treatment Manager

Support Staff - Administration 0.94%

Psychologist 6.27%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Men Women

Chart 3: The red indicator line represents the national public service average for the representation
of Men and Women.

Chart 4 – Proportion of Full vs. Part Time Staff by Gender

31.93% 32.67%
Men
68.07% W omen 67.33%

26.31% Full Time

Part Time

73.69%

Page 6
 Ethnicity
ETHNICITY BY REGION/AREA Chart 5 – Ranked Ethnic Representation by Region
The representation of black and minority ethnic
staff (BME) in the Probation sector stood at North East
12.92% on 31/12/06. This was an increase of
1.13% on the figure twelve months ago. Wales

The Probation sector is therefore well ahead of South West

the UK average for representation of black and South East
minority ethnic groups (8.4% based on the
2003/04 Annual Local Area Labour Force North West
Survey), and has already surpassed the Home East of England
Secretary’s Race Equality Employment Target
of 8.3% by 2009 by a significant amount. Yorkshire & Humberside

Charts 13 through 23 on pages 11 and 12 East Midlands

present the performance of each region against West Midlands

the relevant pro-rated targets, with appropriate
comparison to last year’s figures. London

Out of the 10 Regions in the NPS, 7 have National Probation Service

recorded an increase in their representation of 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%
black and minority ethnic staff since last year.
White Not Stated Not Available BME
London and the West Midlands have again
shown the largest increases in BME
representation over the past twelve months (as
Chart 6 – Change in Ethnic Representation by Region
they did in 2005) growing by 2.74% and 2.24%
respectively. They also share the highest overall
representation out of the Regions at 42.94%
and 19.79% respectively. London has now North East 0.11%

increased by 11.64% over the past three years. Wales 0.30%

This remains consistent with the fact that
South West 0.17%
London has by far the most diverse population
in the UK. South East 0.10%

Wales, South West and North East Regions North West 0.08%
reported a decrease in BME representation
East of England 0.18%
since 2005, falling by 0.30%, 0.17% and 0.11%
respectively. They also share the lowest overall Yorkshire & Humberside 0.52%
BME representation out of the Regions at
East Midlands 0.63%
3.02%, 3.63% and 2.48%. North East Region
also reported the lowest representation in 2005 West Midlands 2.24%
but this is also consistent with a low
London 2.74%
representation in the local community.
National Probation Service 1.13%
All Regions in the NPS are now ahead of the
projected target required to allow the NPS as a 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
whole to meet the Home Secretary’s Race
Black Asian Mixed Other
Equality Employment Target for 2009 (This
target still applies for the Ministry of Justice until
their own target is set in due course). These
targets are not official, but have been pro-rated at 1.53% of the staff population.
on the basis of population estimates, and are The ‘Other’ category remains the smallest section of
provided for monitoring purposes only. the BME staff group with 0.49%, increasing by 0.03%
Further examination of the BME categories shows that over the past year.
there has been a 0.75% increase in the number of staff Charts 9 to 12 on page 10 show the breakdown of
in the NPS who identify themselves as ‘Black’ at 7.81% ethnic origin within each of the broad ethnic categories.
of the total staff population.
The proportion of Caribbean staff within the ‘Black’
Accounting for the next largest group at 3.09% is the ethnic category is the same as the proportion in 2005,
‘Asian’ category. This represents a slight increase of accounting for 66.22% of staff in this group. However
0.30% on 2005 figures. the proportion of ‘African’ staff has increased by 1.64%
The third largest group is the ‘Mixed’ category and has to stand at 22.55% of staff in this group.
shown an increase of 0.05% since 2005 to now stand

Page 7
 Table 3 – Ethnic Representation by Area and Region

Not Available
Not Stated
White

Asian

Mixed
Black

Other
BME
Area/Region

Cumbria 95.90% 1.64% 0.41% 0.00% 0.82% 0.41% 2.46% 0.00%

Cheshire 95.71% 2.79% 0.86% 0.86% 0.86% 0.21% 1.50% 0.00%
Greater Manchester 85.47% 10.61% 5.47% 3.18% 1.55% 0.41% 3.92% 0.00%
Lancashire 91.46% 5.90% 0.62% 4.04% 0.78% 0.47% 2.64% 0.00%
Merseyside 94.92% 4.60% 2.18% 0.36% 1.45% 0.61% 0.48% 0.00%
North W e st 90.66% 6.83% 2.95% 2.19% 1.26% 0.44% 2.51% 0.00%
Durham 96.71% 2.10% 0.00% 0.90% 0.90% 0.30% 1.20% 0.00%
Northum bria 97.40% 2.10% 0.25% 0.99% 0.62% 0.25% 0.50% 0.00%
Teesside 95.42% 3.56% 1.53% 1.78% 0.25% 0.00% 0.76% 0.25%
North Ea st 96.74% 2.48% 0.52% 1.17% 0.59% 0.20% 0.72% 0.07%
Humberside 95.16% 3.91% 2.05% 1.12% 0.74% 0.00% 0.93% 0.00%
North Yorkshire 96.30% 1.01% 0.34% 0.00% 0.67% 0.00% 2.69% 0.00%
South Yorkshire 86.83% 8.09% 5.08% 1.23% 1.23% 0.55% 1.37% 3.70%
W est Yorkshire 82.62% 12.61% 3.75% 6.64% 1.45% 0.77% 4.77% 0.00%
Yorkshire & Hum be rside 87.69% 8.44% 3.40% 3.40% 1.17% 0.47% 2.89% 0.99%
Derbyshire 89.74% 9.55% 2.63% 4.77% 1.67% 0.48% 0.72% 0.00%
Leicestershire 81.08% 15.77% 4.82% 9.28% 1.30% 0.37% 3.15% 0.00%
Lincolnshire 92.74% 2.31% 0.00% 1.32% 0.66% 0.33% 4.95% 0.00%
Northamptonshire 87.06% 10.68% 4.53% 2.91% 2.91% 0.32% 2.27% 0.00%
Nottinghamshire 83.88% 14.64% 8.58% 4.59% 1.04% 0.44% 1.48% 0.00%
Ea st M idla nds 85.93% 11.75% 4.85% 5.08% 1.42% 0.40% 2.32% 0.00%
Dyfed Powys 98.18% 1.36% 0.45% 0.91% 0.00% 0.00% 0.45% 0.00%
Gwent 95.96% 2.80% 0.93% 0.62% 0.93% 0.31% 1.24% 0.00%
North W ales 95.16% 2.26% 0.00% 0.97% 0.97% 0.32% 2.58% 0.00%
South W ales 94.76% 3.97% 0.85% 0.71% 1.56% 0.85% 1.27% 0.00%
W a le s 95.57% 3.02% 0.64% 0.77% 1.09% 0.51% 1.41% 0.00%
Staffordshire 94.23% 4.84% 1.68% 1.49% 1.49% 0.19% 0.93% 0.00%
W arwickshire 87.32% 11.27% 2.82% 7.51% 0.94% 0.00% 1.41% 0.00%
W est Mercia 92.70% 6.65% 4.29% 1.93% 0.43% 0.00% 0.43% 0.21%
W est Midlands 69.28% 29.50% 17.88% 8.76% 2.25% 0.61% 1.22% 0.00%
W e st Midla nds 79.13% 19.79% 11.50% 6.19% 1.71% 0.38% 1.05% 0.03%
Bedfordshire 72.69% 23.69% 15.26% 6.02% 2.01% 0.40% 3.61% 0.00%
Cambridgeshire 94.81% 4.84% 2.42% 1.73% 0.69% 0.00% 0.35% 0.00%
Essex 93.16% 6.28% 3.70% 0.55% 1.48% 0.55% 0.55% 0.00%
Hertfordshire 88.26% 11.41% 5.70% 2.35% 2.35% 1.01% 0.34% 0.00%
Norfolk 87.82% 3.40% 0.85% 0.28% 1.70% 0.57% 6.23% 2.55%
Suffolk 94.52% 4.19% 1.94% 0.32% 1.61% 0.32% 1.29% 0.00%
Ea st of Engla nd 89.46% 8.14% 4.46% 1.57% 1.62% 0.49% 1.96% 0.44%
Avon & Somerset 89.83% 6.50% 4.50% 0.67% 1.00% 0.33% 3.67% 0.00%
Devon & Cornwall 94.37% 2.57% 0.64% 0.00% 1.45% 0.48% 0.16% 2.89%
Dorset 98.17% 0.61% 0.00% 0.00% 0.61% 0.00% 1.22% 0.00%
Gloucestershire 94.35% 4.44% 3.23% 0.40% 0.81% 0.00% 1.21% 0.00%
W iltshire 97.20% 2.34% 0.93% 0.47% 0.00% 0.93% 0.47% 0.00%
South W e st 93.93% 3.63% 2.04% 0.30% 0.94% 0.35% 1.54% 0.90%
Hampshire 92.61% 3.97% 1.37% 1.64% 0.55% 0.41% 2.60% 0.82%
Kent 93.77% 3.83% 2.24% 0.48% 0.64% 0.48% 2.40% 0.00%
Surrey 91.45% 6.49% 2.36% 1.47% 2.65% 0.00% 1.77% 0.29%
Sussex 86.04% 6.11% 2.44% 1.22% 1.57% 0.87% 7.85% 0.00%
Thames Valley 87.61% 10.64% 5.51% 3.38% 1.00% 0.75% 1.75% 0.00%
South Ea st 90.19% 6.36% 2.93% 1.76% 1.11% 0.55% 3.23% 0.23%
London 51.77% 42.94% 32.97% 5.72% 3.38% 0.86% 4.95% 0.34%
Na tiona l Proba tion Se rvice 84.31% 12.92% 7.81% 3.09% 1.53% 0.49% 2.47% 0.30%

Page 8
Chart 7 – Ranked Ethnic Representation by Area Chart 8 – Change in Ethnic Representation by Area

Dorset Dorset 0.26%

North Yorkshire North Yorkshire 0.33%

Dyfed Powys Dyfed Powys 0.86%

Cumbria Cumbria 0.08%

Durham Durham 0.66%

Northumbria Northumbria 0.12%

North Wales North Wales 0.19%

Lincolnshire Lincolnshire 0.22%

Wiltshire Wiltshire 1.09%

Devon & Cornwall Devon & Cornwall 0.04%

Cheshire Cheshire 0.13%

Gwent Gwent 0.26%

Norfolk Norfolk 0.67%

Teesside Teesside 0.39%

Kent Kent 0.79%

Humberside Humberside 0.11%

South Wales South Wales 0.63%

Hampshire Hampshire 0.21%

Suffolk Suffolk 0.53%

Gloucestershire Gloucestershire 2.26%

Merseyside Merseyside 1.59%

Staffordshire Staffordshire 0.90%

Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire 0.34%

Lancashire Lancashire 0.22%

Sussex Sussex 0.79%

Essex Essex 0.84%

Surrey Surrey 0.55%

Avon & Somerset Avon & Somerset 0.80%

West Mercia West Mercia 0.39%

South Yorkshire South Yorkshire 0.70%

Derbyshire Derbyshire 1.25%

Greater Manchester Greater Manchester 1.32%

Thames Valley Thames Valley 0.73%

Northamptonshire Northamptonshire 1.71%

Warwickshire Warwickshire 1.31%

Hertfordshire Hertfordshire 2.61%

West Yorkshire West Yorkshire 0.63%

Nottinghamshire Nottinghamshire 0.78%

Leicestershire Leicestershire 2.42%

Bedfordshire Bedfordshire 1.47%

West Midlands West Midlands 3.39%

London London 2.74%

50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

White Not Stated Not Available BME Black Asian Mixed Other

Page 9
The proportion of Bangladeshi staff in the ‘Asian’ ethnic
Chart 9 – Representation within the ‘Black’ Ethnic
category has increased significantly, by 2.62% to stand
at 6.74%. This reverses the trend from the previous Category
year, where there had been a 1.3% decrease in the
proportion of Bangladeshi staff. The percentage of
Other
‘Pakistani’ staff has however seen a decrease of 2.26%
11.23%
to now account for 28.37% of staff in the ‘Asian’ ethnic
category.
In the ‘Mixed’ ethnic category, there have been African
increases in the ‘White & Black Caribbean’ group (up 22.55%
1.34% to 37.27%) and the ‘Other’ group (up 1.48% to
34.91%). The ‘White & Asian’ and ‘White & Black
African’ groups have decreased by 1.05% and 1.77%
respectively to now stand at 17.06% and 10.76%. Caribbean
66.22%
The number of staff for whom no ethnic origin
information is available has fallen dramatically to 0.30%
from 2.00% at the end of 2005. This is again way below
the prescribed tolerance level of 5%. None of the 42
Areas now exceed this level, as the three Areas that
did in 2005 have reduced their percentage to below 5%
(Leicestershire 0.00% (from 8.57%), Devon & Cornwall
2.89% (from 6.07%) and Hampshire 0.82% (from Chart 10 – Representation within the ‘Asian’ Ethnic
9.46%)). Category

The number of staff in the ‘Not Stated’ category has

also fallen to 2.47% since 2005 (down 0.28% from
Other
2.75%). 11.53%
This means that the number of staff in the NPS with no Bangladeshi
6.74%
known ethnicity stands at an overall 2.77%. This is
down by 1.98% on the 4.75% from 12 months ago.

Indian
53.37%
Pakistani
28.37%

Chart 11 – Representation within the ‘Other’ Ethnic Chart 12 – Representation within the ‘Mixed’ Ethnic
Category Category

White & Asian

Chinese 17.06%
25.41%
Other
34.91% White & Black
African
10.76%

Other
74.59%
White & Black
Caribbean
37.27%

Page 10
Chart 13 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional Chart 14 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional
Targets (North West) Targets (North East)

4% 5% 4% 5%
3% 6% 3% 6%

2% 7% 2% 7%

1% 8% 1% 8%

0% 9% 0% 9%

Chart 15 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional Chart 16 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional
Targets (Yorkshire & Humberside) Targets (East Midlands)

4% 5% 8% 10%
3% 6% 6% 12%

2% 7% 4% 14%

1% 8% 2% 16%

0% 9% 0% 18%

Chart 17 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional Chart 18 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional
Targets (Wales) Targets (West Midlands)

4% 5% 12% 15%
3% 6% 9% 18%

2% 7% 6% 21%

1% 8% 3% 24%

0% 9% 0% 27%

Chart 19 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional Chart 20 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional
Targets (East of England) Targets (South West)
4% 5% 4% 5%
3% 6% 3% 6%

2% 7% 2% 7%

1% 8% 1% 8%

0% 9% 0% 9%

Chart 13 through 23: The upper limit of the red zone represents the minimum level of representation (proportionate to
representation in the local population) required by each Region in order for the NPS to achieve the Home Secretary’s
Race Equality Employment Target of 8.3% by 2009. The blue marker indicates the representation of black and ethnic
minorities in the local community. The dashed indicator line shows the representation figure from last year’s census, while
the solid line shows the representation figure as at 31/12/2006.

Page 11
Chart 21 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional Chart 22 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional
Targets (South East) Targets (London)
4% 5% 20% 25%
3% 6% 15% 30%

2% 7% 10% 35%

1% 8% 5% 40%

0% 9% 0% 45%

Chart 23 – Ethnic Representation Against Regional

Targets (National Probation Service)
8% 10%
6% 12%

4% 14%

2% 16%

0% 18%

Table 4 – Ethnic Representation by Job Group

Not Available
Not Stated
White

Asian

Mixed
Black

Other
BME

Area/Region

Boa rd Me m be rs 75.79% 12.38% 4.62% 7.02% 0.18% 0.55% 11.83% 0.00%

Chie f Office rs 88.10% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.90% 0.00%
De puty Chie f Office rs 93.51% 3.90% 1.30% 2.60% 0.00% 0.00% 2.60% 0.00%
Assista nt Chie f Office r 88.89% 10.48% 5.40% 2.54% 1.59% 0.95% 0.63% 0.00%
Are a /District Ma na ge rs 91.11% 8.89% 5.00% 3.33% 0.00% 0.56% 0.00% 0.00%
Middle Ma na ge r 85.22% 13.16% 8.20% 2.51% 1.84% 0.61% 1.45% 0.17%
Se nior Pra ctitione r 92.46% 5.80% 3.48% 1.45% 0.87% 0.00% 1.45% 0.29%
Proba tion Office r 84.99% 12.09% 6.87% 2.85% 1.91% 0.45% 2.68% 0.23%
Pra ctice De ve lopm e nt Asse ssor 67.19% 31.25% 23.44% 3.91% 1.56% 2.34% 0.78% 0.78%
Tra ine e Proba tion Office r 81.15% 15.30% 8.93% 3.37% 2.37% 0.64% 3.19% 0.36%
Tre a tm e nt Ma na ge r 90.74% 7.41% 4.63% 1.85% 0.00% 0.93% 1.85% 0.00%
Proba tion Se rvice s Office r 82.74% 14.20% 9.01% 3.10% 1.61% 0.47% 2.73% 0.33%
Psychologist 95.24% 4.76% 4.76% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Othe r Ope ra tiona l Sta ff 78.94% 17.95% 14.00% 2.27% 1.43% 0.26% 3.05% 0.06%
Support Sta ff - Adm inistra tion 87.06% 11.51% 6.31% 3.62% 1.14% 0.44% 1.24% 0.20%
Support Sta ff - Othe r 89.14% 6.42% 2.96% 2.47% 0.49% 0.49% 1.98% 2.47%
Othe r Sta ff 89.65% 7.63% 3.27% 3.00% 0.27% 1.09% 1.09% 1.63%

Table 4: Please note that for job group calculations, people with multiple jobs are counted as once
in each separate job they do. In all other calculations they are only counted once.

Page 12
 ETHNICITY BY JOB GROUP
Following the job group changes outlined on page 2, There has been a noticeable decrease in the BME
some of the figures for the representation of ‘Black and representation in the ‘Support Staff – Other’ job group
Minority Ethnic’ amongst job groups will not be directly down 14.75% to 6.42% from 21.17%. This can be
comparable to the figures given in 2005. However explained by the re-classification of the job groups,
amongst the groups that did not change: where several staff are now classified as ‘Support Staff
– Administration’ or ‘Middle Manager’ rather than
There were increases in BME representation in the
‘Support Staff – Other’.
Assistant Chief Officer and Area/District Manager
groups (up 0.85% and 0.89% respectively). They now The proportion of BME staff amongst Board Members
account for 10.48% and 8.89% of each group. has decreased by 2.16% to now account for 12.38%.
However a significant recruitment exercise occurred at
There were also increases in the Probation Officer (up
the end of the financial year which will impact
0.57% to 12.09%), Probation Services Officer (up 2.1%
significantly on this group in the next report.
to 14.20%) and Trainee Probation Officer (up 0.80% to
15.30%) job groups. As stated in the last report, the The greatest BME representation amongst the new job
ever growing BME representation in the TPO group is a groups comes in the Practice Development Assessor
positive sign for continuing growth in the numbers of group with a healthy 31.25%. The two other new
BME staff taking up Probation Officer posts in the groups are not so highly represented with 13.16% in
future. This has proved to be true with the the Middle Manager group (an amalgamation of the
enhancement of BME staff in the Probation Officer previous Senior Probation Officer and Section/Function
group during 2006. Head job groups) and the Treatment Manager group
The greatest increase came in the Deputy Chief Officer with 7.41%.
group. In 2005 there was no BME representation in the
group, however this changed in 2006 to now stand at ETHNICITY BY GENDER
3.90%. This increase is encouraging as there had not Charts 26 and 27 on page 14 show that there continues
been any BME representation in the two highest levels to be no significant differences between men and
of the organisation in 2005. However there was no women in terms of the representation of black and
change in the Chief Officer group with no BME minority ethnic groups.
representation in the group.
The representation amongst men is roughly equal to
There was a fall in the Senior Practitioner job group that amongst women and this is consistent with the
from 7.74% to 5.80% (down 1.95%), falling for the level of representation as a whole.
second year in a row having been 10.42% in 2004.

Chart 24 – Ethnic Representation by Job Group Chart 25 – Change in Ethnic Representation by Job Group

Chief Officers Chief Officers 0.00%

Deputy Chief Officers Deputy Chief Officers 3.90%

Psychologist Psychologist 5.76%

Senior Practitioner Senior Practitioner 1.95%

Support Staff - Other Support Staff - Other 14.75%

Treatment Manager Treatment Manager

Other Staff Other Staff 1.58%

Area/District Managers
Area/District Managers 0.89%

Assistant Chief Officer

Assistant Chief Officer 0.85%

Support Staff - Administration

Support Staff - Administration 1.37%

Probation Officer
Probation Officer 0.57%

Board Members
Board Members 2.16%

Middle Manager
Middle Manager
Probation Services Officer
Probation Services Officer 2.10%
Trainee Probation Officer
Trainee Probation Officer 0.80%
Other Operational Staff
Other Operational Staff 2.89%
Practice Development Assessor
Practice Development Assessor
50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%
0.0% 2.5% 5.0% 7.5% 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 22.5 25.0 27.5 30.0 32.5 35.0
White Not Stated Not Available BME % % % % % % % % % % %

Black Asian Mixed Other

Page 13
Chart 26 – Ethnic Representation by Gender (Men) Chart 27 – Ethnic Representation by Gender (Women)

Asian Mixed Asian Mixed

Other Other
3.62% 1.37% 2.97% 1.66%
Black 0.68% Black 0.42%
8.53% 7.80%

White White
85.80% 87.14%

Disability
DISABILITY BY REGION/AREA
There has been another significant reduction in the
number of staff for whom disability information is
missing or not recorded. At the end of 2006 information
was not available on the disability status of 6.41% of
staff. This is a 3.57% decrease on the 2005 figure of
9.98% but is still above the desired 5% tolerance level.
The figure is however down almost half since 2004
when the figure was 12.72%.
The number of Areas with missing information over the
tolerance level has remained at 7 and are highlighted in
red in Table 5 on page 15. This is a particular problem
in Essex and Northumbria who have over 90% missing
data on disability.
There has also been a considerable fall in the
proportion of staff who did not state their disability
status. The figure at the end of 2005 was 15.69%; this
had fallen to 7.93% by the end of 2006.
On 31/12/2006 4.62% of the staff population in the NPS
were recorded as having a disability as defined by the
Disability Discrimination Act. This figure has continued
to improve since data was first collected and has
increased by 0.95% over the past 12 months.
The only Region not reporting an
increase in the proportion of staff Chart 28 – Reported Disability by Region
with a disability is the North East
Region where the proportion fell
from 1.43% in 2005 to now stand North West
proportion of staff with a disability with 6.75% and
6.71% respectively. The North East and London again
reported the lowest proportion (as in 2005), with 1.37%
and 1.66% respectively.
Even allowing for the significant improvement in the
number of staff reporting a disability, the figure is still
much lower than the 14.2% of staff in the Public
Service as a whole that have a reported disability (2006
figures). Charts 30 through 40 on Pages 17 and 18 plot
the performance of each Region against the overall
Public Service figure.
The proportion of staff who state that they have ‘no
disability’ has increased by 10.37% to now stand at
81.03% (from 70.66%).
As discussed in the last report, the generally low levels
of reported disability may be in some part attributable to
a lack of understanding by staff about what is defined
as a disability. A person’s disability status relies on self
reporting, and there may be a number of staff that are
not aware that they have a condition that meets the
current legal definition of a disability, which tends to be
more inclusive than many are aware.
0.03%

at 1.37%. The most significant South East 1.92%

increases in the remaining Regions South West 1.17%
came in the South East, up 1.92%
East of England 1.70%
to 6.71%, the East Midlands, up
1.85% to 4.99% and the East of East Midlands 1.85%

England, up 1.70% to 5.15%. Yorkshire & Humberside 0.61%

Having reported a decrease in the Wales 1.52%

proportion of staff with a disability a West Midlands 1.39%

year ago, Wales reversed this London 0.28%
trend with an increase of 1.52% (to
4.43%) in 2006. North East 0.06%

National Probation Service 0.95%

The North West and South East
Regions reported the highest 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9%

Staff with a Disability

Page 14
Table 5 – Reported Disability by Area and Region

No Disability

Not Available
Not Stated
Disability
Area/Region

Cumbria 2.46% 96.31% 1.23% 0.00%

Cheshire 4.72% 94.64% 0.64% 0.00%
Greater Manchester 5.54% 94.05% 0.41% 0.00%
Lancashire 13.04% 86.65% 0.31% 0.00%
Merseyside 6.42% 93.10% 0.48% 0.00%
North W e st 6.75% 92.76% 0.49% 0.00%
Durham 3.59% 96.11% 0.30% 0.00%
Northumbria 0.12% 8.17% 0.50% 91.21%
Teesside 2.04% 97.20% 0.76% 0.00%
North Ea st 1.37% 50.10% 0.52% 48.01%
Humberside 4.28% 92.92% 2.61% 0.19%
North Yorkshire 12.46% 83.50% 1.01% 3.03%
South Yorkshire 2.61% 89.16% 1.37% 6.86%
W est Yorkshire 4.43% 11.16% 84.41% 0.00%
Yorkshire & Hum be rside 4.79% 55.83% 37.19% 2.19%
Derbyshire 4.53% 94.75% 0.72% 0.00%
Leicestershire 7.42% 84.23% 1.11% 7.24%
Lincolnshire 7.26% 90.76% 1.98% 0.00%
Northamptonshire 2.91% 94.82% 2.27% 0.00%
Nottinghamshire 3.25% 72.49% 0.74% 23.52%
Ea st Midla nds 4.99% 85.00% 1.20% 8.82%
Dyfed Powys 0.91% 98.64% 0.45% 0.00%
Gwent 1.86% 96.58% 1.55% 0.00%
North W ales 3.87% 95.48% 0.65% 0.00%
South W ales 6.94% 92.78% 0.28% 0.00%
W a le s 4.43% 94.93% 0.64% 0.00%
Staffordshire 7.82% 91.99% 0.19% 0.00%
W arwickshire 1.41% 98.12% 0.47% 0.00%
W est Mercia 0.21% 2.58% 97.21% 0.00%
W est Midlands 3.47% 75.61% 20.92% 0.00%
W e st Midla nds 3.60% 68.46% 27.94% 0.00%
Bedfordshire 2.41% 96.39% 1.20% 0.00%
Cambridgeshire 4.50% 92.39% 2.77% 0.35%
Essex 0.00% 1.66% 0.92% 97.41%
Hertfordshire 10.40% 88.59% 1.01% 0.00%
Norfolk 5.67% 94.33% 0.00% 0.00%
Suffolk 11.29% 87.74% 0.97% 0.00%
Ea st of Engla nd 5.15% 67.89% 1.08% 25.88%
Avon & Somerset 6.33% 93.33% 0.33% 0.00%
Devon & Cornwall 6.59% 86.98% 0.80% 5.63%
Dorset 1.83% 97.25% 0.92% 0.00%
Gloucestershire 4.84% 81.45% 13.71% 0.00%
W iltshire 3.74% 92.52% 3.74% 0.00%
South W e st 5.22% 90.45% 2.59% 1.74%
Hampshire 11.08% 85.91% 1.64% 1.37%
Kent 3.51% 96.01% 0.48% 0.00%
Surrey 6.49% 83.19% 0.59% 9.73%
Sussex 5.93% 93.54% 0.52% 0.00%
Thames Valley 5.88% 93.87% 0.25% 0.00%
South Ea st 6.71% 91.17% 0.72% 1.40%
London 1.66% 98.19% 0.15% 0.00%
Na tiona l Proba tion Se rvice 4.62% 81.03% 7.93% 6.41%

Page 15
 Chart 29 – Reported Disability by Area

Lancashire 2.03%

North Yorkshire 6.70%

Suffolk 4.02%

Hampshire 4.13%

Hertfordshire 3.02%

Staffordshire 6.51%

Leicestershire 5.23%

Lincolnshire 1.85%

South Wales 3.07%

Devon & Cornwall 0.86%

Surrey 2.68%

Merseyside 0.71%

Avon & Somerset 0.97%

Sussex 1.56%

Thames Valley 1.70%

Norfolk 2.94%

Greater Manchester 0.18%

Gloucestershire 4.42%

Cheshire 0.66%

Derbyshire 0.30%

Cambridgeshire 0.00%

West Yorkshire 1.98%

Humberside 2.65%

North Wales 0.37%

Wiltshire 2.27%

Durham 0.23%

Kent 0.37%

West Midlands 0.16%

Nottinghamshire 0.64%

Northamptonshire 1.53%

South Yorkshire 5.59%

Cumbria 0.30%

Bedfordshire 0.06%

Teesside 0.61%

Gwent 0.17%

Dorset 1.08%

London 0.28%

Warwickshire 0.93%

Dyfed Powys 0.41%

West Mercia 0.01%

Northumbria 0.12%

Essex 0.00%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%

Staff with a Disability

Page 16
Chart 30 – Disability Representation Against Public Chart 31 – Disability Representation Against Public
Service Average (North West) Service Average (North East)

8% 10% 8% 10%
6% 12% 6% 12%

4% 14% 4% 14%

2% 16% 2% 16%

0% 18% 0% 18%

Chart 32 – Disability Representation Against Public Chart 33 – Disability Representation Against Public
Service Average (Yorkshire & Humberside) Service Average (East Midlands)

8% 10% 8% 10%
6% 12% 6% 12%

4% 14% 4% 14%

2% 16% 2% 16%

0% 18%
0% 18%

Chart 34 – Disability Representation Against Public Chart 35 – Disability Representation Against Public
Service Average (Wales) Service Average (West Midlands)

8% 10% 8% 10%
6% 12% 6% 12%

4% 14% 4% 14%

2% 16% 2% 16%

0% 18% 0% 18%

Chart 36 – Disability Representation Against Public Chart 37 – Disability Representation Against Public
Service Average (East of England) Service Average (South West)
8% 10% 8% 10%
6% 12% 6% 12%

4% 14% 4% 14%

2% 16% 2% 16%

0% 18% 0% 18%

Page 17
Chart 38 – Disability Representation Against Public Chart 39 – Disability Representation Against Public
Service Average (South East) Service Average (London)
8% 10% 8% 10%
6% 12% 6% 12%

4% 14% 4% 14%

2% 16% 2% 16%

0% 18% 0% 18%

Chart 40 – Disability Representation Against Public

Service Average (National Probation Service)

8% 10%
6% 12%

4% 14%

2% 16%

0% 18%

Chart 30 through 40: The upper limit of the red zone on the scale represents the average representation of people with a
disability in the Public Service population (2004 Figures). The dashed indicator line shows the representation figure from
last year’s census, while the solid line shows the representation figure as at 31/12/2006.

Table 6 – Reported Disability by Job Group

No Disability

Not Available
Not Stated
Disability

Area/Region

Boa rd Me m be rs 3.14% 73.57% 23.29% 0.00%

Chie f Office rs 2.38% 50.00% 47.62% 0.00%
De puty Chie f Office rs 2.60% 81.82% 9.09% 6.49%
Assista nt Chie f Office r 2.22% 83.81% 6.98% 6.98%
Are a /District Ma na ge rs 4.44% 80.56% 8.89% 6.11%
Middle Ma na ge r 5.86% 80.65% 7.19% 6.30%
Se nior Pra ctitione r 7.83% 67.25% 15.94% 8.99%
Proba tion Office r 5.21% 80.73% 7.48% 6.57%
Pra ctice De ve lopm e nt Asse ssor 4.69% 87.50% 7.81% 0.00%
Tra ine e Proba tion Office r 4.46% 87.80% 3.73% 4.01%
Tre a tm e nt Ma na ge r 3.70% 96.30% 0.00% 0.00%
Proba tion Se rvice s Office r 4.86% 80.71% 7.95% 6.49%
Psychologist 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Othe r Ope ra tiona l Sta ff 3.69% 81.92% 5.51% 8.88%
Support Sta ff - Adm inistra tion 3.78% 80.22% 9.23% 6.77%
Support Sta ff - Othe r 3.95% 93.58% 1.48% 0.99%
Othe r Sta ff 3.54% 85.56% 1.36% 9.54%

Table 6: Please note that for job group calculations, people with multiple jobs
are counted as once in each separate job they do. In all other calculations
they are only counted once.

Page 18
DISABILITY BY JOB GROUP Chart 41 – Change in Disability Representation by Job Group

Following the job group changes outlined

on page 2, some of the figures for the
proportion of staff who were recorded as Senior Practitioner 3.95%

having a disability, amongst job groups, will

Middle Manager
not be directly comparable to the figures
given in 2005. Probation Officer 0.70%

Of the three new job groups the Middle

Probation Services Officer 1.17%
Manager group has the greatest
representation with 5.86%, followed by Practice Development Assessor
Practice Development Assessors at 4.69%.
The Treatment Manager group has the Trainee Probation Officer 1.26%
lowest representation of the three at
3.70%. Area/District Managers 0.22%

Across all of the job groups, those that Support Staff - Other 1.93%
have the largest representation of staff with
a disability is the Senior Practitioner group Support Staff - Administration 0.91%
with 7.83%, the Middle Manager group with
Treatment Manager
5.86% and the Probation Officer group with
5.21%. Those with the smallest Other Operational Staff 0.58%
representation are the Psychologist group
with no representation (from a particularly Other Staff 0.47%
small job group), the Assistant Chief Officer
group with 2.22% and the Chief Officer Board Members 0.24%
group with just 2.38%.
Deputy Chief Officers 2.60%
Of the 17 job groups 10 showed an
increase in the proportion of staff who Chief Officers 0.00%
stated that they had a disability and two
showed a decrease. Assistant Chief Officer 0.36%

The groups with the greatest increase were Psychologist 0.00%

the Senior Practitioner group, up 3.95% to

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10%
7.83%, the Deputy Chief Officer group, up
2.60% (from 0.00%) and the Support Staff Staff with a Disability
– Other group, up 1.93% to 3.95%. The
two groups reported as having decreased
their proportion were the Area/District
Manager group, down 0.22% to 4.44% and
Board Members, down 0.24% to 3.14%.
In previous reports there had been concern
at the low representation of staff with a
disability in the TPO group. This concern
has been alleviated as the group has now
shown increases in the last two years to
now stand at 4.46%.
Chart 42 – Reported Disability by Gender Chart 43 – Reported Disability by Ethnicity

Asian Mixed
1.60% 1.15% Other
Black
0.53%
5.24%

Men
37.99%

Wom en
62.01%
White
91.48%

Page 19
DISABILITY BY GENDER/ETHNICITY
Charts 42 and 43 on page 19 show the gender and
ethnic make up of the population of staff in the NPS
reported as having a disability.
Women continue to be the most likely to report a
disability with 62.01% compared to men at 37.99%,
with this gap increasing by 2.44% over the past year.
This is again broadly consistent with the gender profile
of the NPS in general where women make up 67.53%
and men 32.47% of the staff population.
The situation remains the same when you look at
disability by ethnicity where staff reporting a disability
are more likely to be white, although this has fallen by
0.46% to 91.48% (from 91.94%).
Next most likely are staff who are black with 5.24%,
which is an increase of 0.92% since last year. This is
again broadly consistent with the ethnic profile of the
NPS in general where white staff make up 84.31% and
black staff make up 7.81%.

Age

AGE BY REGION/AREA Chart 44 – Average Age by Region

The average age of staff in the NPS at

31/12/2006 was 43.22 years. This is a slight
South West 0.08
increase of 0.04 years on the figure in 2005.
West Midlands 0.46
The median age for the Probation workforce
has decreased by the same amount to now South East 0.01
stand at 43.54 years (from 43.58) and East of England 0.30
70.74% of the workforce are over the age of
North East 0.29
35. This is consistent with the age profile of
0.02
the broader Public Service in which 73.9% of North West
staff are over the age of 35 (2006 figures). Yorkshire & Humberside 0.16

London 0.65
Last year’s report showed that the average
age was decreasing in the majority of the Wales 0.13
Regions in the NPS (6). This trend reversed East Midlands 0.19
in 2006 with 7 Regions now reporting an
National Probation Service 0.04
increase in the average age of their
workforce. 40.0 40.5 41.0 41.5 42.0 42.5 43.0 43.5 44.0 44.5 45.0 45.5 46.0

Three Regions who reported an increase in

the average age of their workforce in 2005
did the same in 2006. They were the North East (up
0.29 to 43.17 years), Yorkshire & Humberside (up 0.16
to 42.72) and the East Midlands (up 0.19 to 42.22).
Conversely London and Wales Regions reported
another decrease in the average age of their workforce
this year, decreasing by 0.65 and 0.13 respectively (to
42.63 and 42.27 years).
Four of the Regions reversed a decrease in average
age last year to now show an increase. They were the
South West (up 0.08 to 44.97 years), the West
Midlands (up 0.46 to 44.15), the South East (up 0.01 to
43.58) and the East of England (up 0.30 to 43.38).
North West Region went the opposite way from an
increase in 2005 to now show a 0.02 decrease (to
43.07 years).
The largest increases came in the West Midlands with
a rise of 0.46 years and the East of England with a rise
of 0.30. The largest decreases came in London and
Wales (as above).
The Regions with the oldest and youngest staff
population on average are the same Regions as in
2005. The South West have the oldest at 44.97 years
and the South East have the youngest at 42.22 years.
The difference between the oldest and youngest on
average is therefore 2.75 years. This gap is closing, as
it was 2.85 years in 2005.
The rise in the average age of the NPS workforce
(albeit a small one) had been expected due to the
generally ageing population in England and Wales over
the past few years.
Chart 51 on Page 26 presents a cumulative distribution
showing the relative proportions of staff above and
below various age points.
AGE BY JOB GROUP
Following the job group changes outlined on page 2,
some of the figures on average age by job group will
not be directly comparable to the figures given in 2005.
The highest average age in the job groups continue to
be amongst the more senior groups, with Board
Members (59.87 years), Chief Officers (54.83 years)
and Assistant Chief Officers (50.08 years).
The two job groups with the lowest average age come
in the Trainee Probation Officer group at 31.52 years
and the Psychologist group at 33.17 years. The
consistent low average age in the TPO group will
continue to have a knock on effect on the average age

Page 20
Table 7 – Average Age by Area and Region

No Disability
Disability
Women

Overall
White

BME
Men
Area/Region

Cumbria 49.70 41.88 44.60 42.71 41.27 44.67 44.60

Cheshire 48.48 41.70 44.05 42.21 47.36 43.66 43.84
Greater Manchester 46.01 40.39 42.32 40.57 45.89 42.07 42.30
Lancashire 47.38 42.26 44.33 36.57 47.12 43.45 43.94
Merseyside 46.53 41.17 42.86 44.17 50.15 42.42 42.94
North W e st 46.91 41.16 43.19 40.64 47.27 42.76 43.07
Durham 46.03 41.06 42.74 36.19 49.49 42.36 42.62
Northumbria 46.76 42.16 43.75 41.12 58.36 40.18 43.73
Teesside 47.83 40.12 42.74 35.88 47.14 42.39 42.49
North Ea st 46.86 41.39 43.28 38.41 49.02 42.18 43.17
Humberside 47.75 40.83 43.12 41.09 48.08 42.79 43.10
North Yorkshire 47.33 42.85 44.50 39.45 47.29 44.00 44.46
South Yorkshire 47.95 42.00 44.02 43.31 46.99 43.38 43.67
W est Yorkshire 44.16 40.42 42.14 38.39 43.85 35.01 41.54
Yorkshire & Hum be rside 46.22 41.17 43.12 39.90 46.03 42.58 42.72
Derbyshire 46.17 39.69 42.17 36.69 46.01 41.43 41.67
Leicestershire 47.22 39.11 42.72 37.46 44.09 41.48 41.65
Lincolnshire 48.10 41.94 43.88 44.82 47.66 43.64 43.94
Northamptonshire 49.39 39.38 42.84 41.54 43.51 42.67 42.84
Nottinghamshire 45.34 40.37 42.32 39.81 41.41 44.01 41.98
Ea st Midla nds 46.87 40.02 42.67 38.96 44.49 42.64 42.22
Dyfed Powys 48.56 42.91 44.90 37.49 30.86 44.93 44.80
Gwent 49.19 38.31 41.65 31.85 55.30 41.10 41.37
North W ales 47.96 40.17 42.56 46.21 49.25 42.40 42.71
South W ales 46.03 39.44 41.85 38.79 44.55 41.50 41.71
W a le s 47.34 39.82 42.39 38.49 45.91 42.09 42.27
Staffordshire 49.94 43.61 45.92 45.13 50.07 45.40 45.79
W arwickshire 47.65 43.91 45.93 38.01 38.63 45.18 45.09
W est Mercia 47.53 42.18 43.97 43.34 38.83 59.40 43.93
W est Midlands 46.39 42.22 44.85 40.30 46.48 43.24 43.55
W e st Midla nds 47.38 42.60 45.02 40.59 47.64 44.08 44.15
Bedfordshire 47.71 39.85 42.76 39.16 42.21 41.94 41.92
Cambridgeshire 48.24 42.73 44.76 40.05 48.43 44.28 44.52
Essex 46.04 41.88 43.22 41.68 0.00 62.53 43.18
Hertfordshire 45.58 40.95 42.32 40.98 44.23 41.84 42.16
Norfolk 47.46 40.85 43.23 42.33 48.14 42.85 43.17
Suffolk 49.51 42.39 45.37 41.06 45.13 45.12 45.08
Ea st of Engla nd 47.41 41.49 43.65 40.51 45.69 43.34 43.38
Avon & Somerset 46.64 41.44 43.41 41.99 48.17 42.89 43.22
Devon & Cornwall 49.04 42.23 44.72 41.31 45.39 44.43 44.73
Dorset 52.45 45.86 48.23 32.69 47.37 48.17 48.15
Gloucestershire 51.52 44.43 46.89 43.28 52.03 45.16 46.83
W iltshire 49.09 41.10 43.03 56.23 48.83 43.13 43.35
South W e st 49.20 42.73 45.04 42.76 47.51 44.57 44.97
Hampshire 48.61 41.44 43.51 41.07 45.75 42.99 43.45
Kent 48.41 44.30 45.46 43.03 49.21 45.36 45.50
Surrey 47.67 41.32 43.23 38.29 47.13 42.28 43.12
Sussex 48.13 40.52 43.15 39.71 48.76 42.62 43.07
Thames Valley 45.79 41.36 42.82 39.76 43.93 42.46 42.59
South Ea st 47.68 41.88 43.69 40.23 46.37 43.27 43.58
London 44.92 41.48 44.09 40.52 47.84 42.52 42.63
Na tiona l Proba tion Se rvice 46.97 41.44 43.63 40.35 46.58 43.03 43.22

Page 21
 Chart 45 – Average Age by Area

Dorset 0.43

Gloucestershire 0.18

Staffordshire 0.04

Kent 0.12

Warwickshire 0.90

Suffolk 0.34

Dyfed Powys 1.03

Devon & Cornwall 0.08

Cumbria 0.15

Cambridgeshire 0.25

North Yorkshire 0.56

Lancashire 0.41

Lincolnshire 0.06

West Mercia 0.30

Cheshire 0.01

Northumbria 0.33

South Yorkshire 0.41

West Midlands 0.63

Hampshire 0.21

Wiltshire 0.95

Avon & Somerset 0.38

Essex 0.57

Norfolk 0.05

Surrey 0.51

Humberside 0.33

Sussex 0.07

Merseyside 0.15

Northamptonshire 0.24

North Wales 0.21

London 0.65

Durham 0.35

Thames Valley 0.20

Teesside 0.09

Greater Manchester 0.36

Hertfordshire 0.05

Nottinghamshire 0.14

Bedfordshire 0.17

South Wales 0.08

Derbyshire 0.91

Leicestershire 0.01

West Yorkshire 0.12

Gwent 0.11

40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

Page 22
 Table 8– Average Age by Job Group

No Disability
Disability
Women

Overall
White

BME
Men
Area/Region

Boa rd Me m be rs 60.49 58.64 60.51 55.92 43.42 60.42 59.87

Chie f Office rs 55.06 54.55 54.65 0.00 55.65 54.88 54.83
De puty Chie f Office rs 50.47 48.72 49.45 48.57 50.93 50.05 49.67
Assista nt Chie f Office r 50.92 49.08 50.66 44.79 49.56 49.80 50.08
Are a /District Ma na ge rs 49.73 47.19 48.61 43.38 51.18 47.66 48.15
Middle Ma na ge r 50.26 46.89 48.73 45.26 50.22 48.03 48.26
Se nior Pra ctitione r 47.59 44.45 45.79 41.06 47.77 44.92 45.57
Proba tion Office r 46.82 40.54 42.62 41.05 46.21 42.38 42.53
Pra ctice De ve lopm e nt Asse ssor 48.50 45.38 47.31 44.76 49.66 46.15 46.38
Tra ine e Proba tion Office r 33.69 30.72 31.09 33.98 34.76 31.27 31.52
Tre a tm e nt Ma na ge r 48.39 43.61 45.27 38.74 47.51 44.72 44.82
Proba tion Se rvice s Office r 47.38 40.16 43.38 39.40 46.77 42.51 42.88
Psychologist 37.18 32.74 33.36 29.26 0.00 33.17 33.17
Othe r Ope ra tiona l Sta ff 47.69 42.21 45.44 43.10 49.98 45.45 45.00
Support Sta ff - Adm inistra tion 37.73 42.77 42.95 37.29 46.35 42.08 42.24
Support Sta ff - Othe r 51.41 44.07 48.27 46.14 49.56 47.89 48.15
Othe r Sta ff 44.75 41.76 43.10 39.82 43.05 42.91 42.89

Table 8: Please note that for job group calculations, people with multiple jobs are counted as
once in each separate job they do. In all other calculations they are only counted once.

of the Probation Officer group once TPOs graduate into
PO roles. This was proven over the past year as the
average age in the PO group decreased by 0.65 years.
The ‘Middle Manager’ group has the oldest average
age out of the three new job groups at 48.36 years.
They are followed by Practice Development Assessors
at 46.38 years and Treatment Managers at 44.82
years.
The largest increase in average age amongst the job
groups came in the ‘Other Staff’ group with a rise of
1.69 years (to 42.89).
The average age of Board Members and Chief Officers
continue to rise with the groups showing increases of
0.50 and 1.08 years respectively to now stand at 59.87
and 54.83 years.
The ‘Other Operational Staff’ group saw the greatest
decrease in average age, falling by 1.12 years (to
45.00 years. This was followed by the Senior
Practitioner group, which fell by 1.06 years (to 45.57).
Chart 50 on Page 25 maps the average age of each job
group (X axis) against the Region in which they are
based (Y axis). The higher the average age, the more
red the display on the chart for the particular
combination of job group and Region.
AGE BY GENDER
The age gap between men and women has continued
to widen in the NPS (5.53 years), with male employees
being older on average.
There has been a marginal increase in the average age
of both men and women since 2005 with men now
averaging 46.97 years (from 46.84) and women 41.44
years (from 41.41).
Men are older in all but one of the job groups, with the
greatest age gap in the ‘Support Staff – Other’ job
group, where the average age of men is 51.41 years
against 44.07 years for women (a gap of 7.34 years).
The smallest gap occurs in the Chief Officer group
where the difference is only 0.51 years, in favour of
men.
There are other significant gaps in the average age of
men and women in the Probation Services Officer job
group (7.22 years) and the Probation Officer group
(6.28 years).
The job group where women are older on average than
the men is the ‘Support Staff – Administration’ job
group, where their average age is 42.77 years against
37.73 years for men (a gap of 5.04 years).

Page 23
 Chart 46 – Average Age by Job Group

Board Members 0.50

Chief Officers 1.07

Assistant Chief Officer 0.21

Deputy Chief Officers 0.11

Middle Manager

Support Staff - Other 1.05

Area/District Managers 0.30

Practice Development Assessor

Senior Practitioner 1.06

Other Operational Staff 1.12

Treatment Manager

Other Staff 1.69

Probation Services Officer 0.58

Probation Officer 0.65

Support Staff - Administration 0.30

Psychologist 0.78

Trainee Probation Officer 0.44

30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62

Chart 52 on Page 26 shows the cumulative age The largest rise in the average age for staff who are
distribution of men and women across the entire staff Black and Minority Ethnic came in North East Region
population. This emphasises the general pattern (up 1.09 years). The average age for White staff in the
discussed above. It also shows the difference between Region also rose by 0.27 years.
the two groups in terms of median age. The current
The cumulative age distribution by ethnicity chart on
data shows that 50% of men are over the age of 47.90
page 26 shows that there has been another fall in the
years, compared to 41.4 years for women.
gap in the median ages of the two groups this year.
AGE BY ETHNICITY The gap is now 3.7 years compared to a gap of 3.9
years twelve months ago.
When the information is grouped by broad ethnic
category and age, it shows that staff in the white ethnic AGE BY DISABILITY
category are older on average at 43.63 years than
The average age of staff with a disability in the NPS in
colleagues from black and minority ethnic backgrounds
2006 was 46.58 years compared to 43.03 years for
at 40.35 years. The gap has reduced however to 3.28
those without. Both figures have however fallen this
years from 3.32 years in 2005.
year by 0.48 and 0.06 years respectively.
There were five Regions each showing an increase and
The largest increase in the average age of staff with a
decrease in the average age of their staff who are
disability in the Regions is in London, with a rise of 3.05
White. Seven Regions showed an increase in the
years. London also shows the largest decrease in the
average age of their staff who were from Black and
average age of those without a disability, falling
Minority Ethnic backgrounds with the remaining three
substantially from 52.59 years to 42.52 years (down
Regions reporting a decrease.
10.07 years).
The greatest rise in the average age for staff who are
There were minimal changes in the median average
White came in the West Midlands (up 0.33 years). This
ages of those with or without a disability when
coincided with a rise in the average age of staff that are
compared to 2005. Those with a disability fell by 0.28 to
from a Black and Minority Ethnic background in the
48.47 years and those without fell by 0.22 years to
Region (up 1.03 years).
43.29 years.

Page 24
 Chart 47 – Average Age by Region and Gender Chart 48 – Average Age by Region and Ethnicity

0.80 0.01
South West South West
0.20 1.03

0.00 0.33
South East West Midlands
0.02 1.03

0.46 0.58
East of England London
0.26 0.49

0.37 0.08
West Midlands South East
0.55 0.54

0.39 0.25
Wales East of England
0.21 0.32

0.19 0.27
North West North East
0.07 1.09

0.33 0.26
East Midlands North West
0.17 0.21

0.48 Yorkshire & 0.21

North East
0.16 Humberside 0.22

Yorkshire & 0.01 0.31

East Midlands
Humberside 0.24 0.12

0.85 0.05
London Wales
0.59 1.45

National 0.13 National 0.03

Probation Service 0.03 Probation Service 0.07

38 40 42 44 46 48 50 38 40 42 44 46 48 50

Men Women White BME

Chart 49 – Average Age by Region and Disability Chart 50 – Average Age in Years Mapped by Job Group and Region

3.01 London
North East 60-65
0.31
South East 55-60

3.05 50-55
London South West
10.07 45-50
East of England 40-45
0.45
West Midlands 35-40
0.37 West Midlands
30-35

0.98 Wales 25-30

South West 20-25
0.01
East Midlands 15-20
0.36
North West Yorkshire & Humberside
0.01

North East
1.70
South East
0.35 North West
Practice Development
Middle Manager
Board Members
Psychologist

Other
Senior Practitioner

Trainee Probation Officer

Treatment Officer
Area/District Managers
Other Operational Staff
Probation Officer

Probation Services Officer

Deputy Chief Officer

Chief Officer

Support Staff - Other

Support Staff - Administration
Assistant Chief Officer

Yorkshire & 1.05

Assessor

Humberside 0.02

0.41
Wales
0.25

0.52
East of England
0.61

2.75
East Midlands
0.70

National 0.47
Probation Service 0.06

40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56

Disability No Disability

Page 25
Chart 51 – Cumulative Age Distribution Chart 52 – Cumulative Age Distribution by Gender

100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 43.54 50% 41.4 47.9

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0%
0%
<20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 >65
<20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

Women Men

Chart 53 – Cumulative Age Distribution by Ethnicity Chart 54 – Cumulative Age Distribution by Disability

100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 40.6 44.3 50% 43.29 48.47

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
<20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 <20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

BME White No Disability Disability

Charts 51 through 54: The solid red vertical indicator line marks the median age for the light blue distribution
on each chart, and the solid green line indicates the same figure for the dark blue distribution (except for
Chart 51 where only one distribution is shown). The red dotted line plots the cumulative age distribution for
the light blue series based on the 2005/06 census results, while the green dotted line plots the same for the
dark blue series.

Page 26
Service

LENGTH OF SERVICE BY REGION/AREA average. Staff in the Assistant Chief Officer group hold
the longest length of service on average at 14.30 years.
The average length of service has risen again for the
They are followed by Area/District Managers at 13.52
NPS staff population at 31/12/2006 to now stand at
years.
7.35 years. This is a small increase of 0.06 years on
the figure in 2005. The Trainee Probation Officer group holds the shortest
average length of service amongst the job groups at
The Regions are equal with regards to the number that
1.75 years. This is expected due to the nature of the
reported an increase or decrease in the average length
group, with the incumbents’ routine graduation into
of service of their staff (5 each).
main Probation Officer roles.
Yorkshire and Humberside is again the Region with the
Of the three new job groups Middle Managers have the
longest serving staff (as in 2005) at 8.70 years and also
longest length of service with an average of 13.45
report the largest increase of 0.51 years on the figure
years, followed by Practice Development Assessors
from last year’s report. South West Region has the next
with 11.69 years. Treatment Managers have the
largest increase at 0.47 years, with an average length
shortest length of service out of the three at 9.97 years.
of service of 7.12 years.
Five job groups saw an increase in the average length
South East Region is the Region with the shortest
of service of their staff. Area/District Managers
average time served by their staff at 5.72 years,
increased by the greatest amount at 0.51 years to
although this is an improvement on last year of 0.09
13.52 years. Probation Services Officers and Assistant
years. London Region saw the biggest decrease in the
Chief Officers also grew by 0.38 years (to 6.31 years)
length of service of their staff, falling by 0.44 years.
and 0.32 years (to 14.30 years) respectively.
Out of the 42 Areas, South Yorkshire’s staff have
Seven of the job groups have seen a decrease in the
served the longest on average with 10.48 years,
average length of service of their staff. The largest
increasing by 1.63 years over the past year. They are
decrease coming in the Senior Practitioner group, down
followed by Staffordshire with 10.20 years, also
by 0.55 years to 10.50 years. The Support Staff –
increasing, by 0.21 years since 2005.
Administration and Probation Officer groups also fell by
Thames Valley’s staff have served the shortest amount 0.37 years (to 6.64 years) and 0.24 years (to 8.40
of time on average at just 3.73 years. This figure has years) respectively.
however improved by 0.16 years over the past 12
LENGTH OF SERVICE BY GENDER
months. Wiltshire is next with an average of 5.00 years,
but the average length of service of their staff is moving Men have maintained their position as having a greater
in the opposite direction with a decrease of 0.15 years overall length of service in the NPS than women. They
since 2005. have been in the service for an average of 7.97 years
compared to 7.05 years for women. The average age
LENGTH OF SERVICE BY JOB GROUP
for men has increased by 0.05 years since 2005, while
Following the job group changes outlined on page 2, it has increased by 0.07 years for women. This means
some of the figures on average length of service by job the age gap has closed slightly this year.
group will not be directly comparable to the figures
The fact that men spend longer in the NPS on average
given in 2005.
could be due to the fact that women outnumber men in
The trend has continued for staff in the more senior job the NPS by approx 2 to 1. There would therefore be a
groups to spend the longest length of time in service on higher turnover of women than of men, which would in

Chart 55 – Average Length of Service by Region

Yorkshire & Humberside 0.51

West Midlands 0.28

North West 0.01

North East 0.08

London 0.44

South West 0.47

Wales 0.27

East Midlands 0.16

East of England 0.20

South East 0.09

National Probation Service 0.06

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Page 27
 Table 9 – Average Length of Service by Area and Region

No Disability
Disability
Women

Overall
White

BME
Men
Area/Region

Cumbria 8.28 6.36 6.97 5.12 3.78 7.18 7.05

Cheshire 6.52 6.33 6.50 5.33 7.89 6.33 6.39
Greater Manchester 8.81 7.15 7.65 7.52 9.53 7.64 7.72
Lancashire 9.86 8.32 9.07 6.48 10.58 8.58 8.83
Merseyside 10.77 7.98 8.97 7.94 13.80 8.60 8.91
North W e st 9.11 7.39 8.01 7.28 10.51 7.81 7.97
Durham 7.81 6.99 7.26 8.17 12.34 7.07 7.25
Northumbria 8.73 8.04 8.34 6.16 0.11 2.07 8.27
Teesside 7.90 6.84 7.34 3.67 4.99 7.24 7.17
North Ea st 8.33 7.50 7.85 5.61 8.96 6.73 7.77
Humberside 9.13 7.05 7.86 5.25 9.02 7.69 7.74
North Yorkshire 6.28 5.60 5.81 6.96 8.36 5.53 5.85
South Yorkshire 11.88 9.94 11.01 8.64 12.58 10.28 10.48
W est Yorkshire 9.27 8.58 9.17 8.12 9.63 2.99 8.79
Yorkshire & Hum be rside 9.47 8.35 8.95 7.98 9.59 8.01 8.70
Derbyshire 7.10 7.27 7.39 5.42 8.08 7.20 7.21
Leicestershire 8.50 6.52 7.48 5.67 7.55 7.32 7.15
Lincolnshire 5.70 6.50 6.17 4.77 9.56 6.04 6.23
Northamptonshire 5.42 4.93 5.21 4.76 6.13 5.13 5.10
Nottinghamshire 8.18 6.35 7.19 5.46 8.50 8.72 6.94
Ea st Midla nds 7.33 6.39 6.87 5.42 8.11 7.16 6.70
Dyfed Powys 7.91 5.90 6.64 2.73 0.70 6.64 6.58
Gwent 8.27 6.45 7.18 2.68 6.73 7.06 6.98
North W ales 7.86 6.27 6.71 6.58 10.89 6.64 6.80
South W ales 7.87 7.15 7.50 4.56 7.83 7.37 7.39
W a le s 7.95 6.65 7.15 4.39 8.06 7.05 7.07
Staffordshire 11.10 9.72 10.33 9.05 13.42 9.95 10.20
W arwickshire 7.60 8.60 8.49 5.78 7.95 8.30 8.28
W est Mercia 8.21 6.59 7.23 5.83 1.32 5.25 7.11
W est Midlands 8.22 7.91 8.49 6.76 12.22 7.87 8.01
W e st Midla nds 8.77 8.09 8.68 6.77 12.48 8.44 8.30
Bedfordshire 7.04 6.20 6.89 5.00 7.07 6.47 6.43
Cambridgeshire 6.36 6.29 6.50 2.84 6.95 6.37 6.31
Essex 5.94 6.67 6.52 4.95 0.00 4.42 6.44
Hertfordshire 5.65 5.00 5.39 3.57 7.27 4.93 5.18
Norfolk 7.00 5.24 6.13 3.27 10.50 5.58 5.87
Suffolk 7.43 6.67 7.19 4.17 7.36 6.96 6.97
Ea st of Engla nd 6.57 6.06 6.45 4.32 7.88 6.05 6.23
Avon & Somerset 7.19 7.16 7.36 5.23 9.47 7.02 7.17
Devon & Cornwall 7.68 6.44 6.82 7.73 7.02 6.75 6.89
Dorset 11.22 7.79 9.04 7.48 4.89 9.10 8.97
Gloucestershire 7.22 6.74 6.96 6.48 8.65 5.86 6.90
W iltshire 5.46 4.82 4.92 8.20 6.67 5.06 5.00
South W e st 7.88 6.72 7.16 6.26 7.94 6.97 7.12
Hampshire 7.58 6.50 6.81 5.72 8.18 6.60 6.81
Kent 7.07 7.12 7.21 4.13 8.91 7.05 7.11
Surrey 6.86 6.02 6.23 5.58 7.08 6.16 6.23
Sussex 5.60 4.93 5.20 3.43 7.32 5.02 5.16
Thames Valley 4.54 3.42 3.75 3.11 4.31 3.69 3.73
South Ea st 6.24 5.51 5.80 3.96 7.11 5.61 5.72
London 7.47 7.44 8.54 6.09 10.56 7.40 7.45
Na tiona l Proba tion Se rvice 7.97 7.05 7.55 6.14 9.09 7.16 7.35

Page 28
Chart 56 – Average Length of Service by Area

South Yorkshire 1.63

Staffordshire 0.21

Dorset 2.05

Merseyside 0.29

Lancashire 0.53

West Yorkshire 0.09

Warwickshire 2.18

Northumbria 0.48

West Midlands 0.15

Humberside 0.74

Greater Manchester 0.06

London 0.44

South Wales 0.16

Durham 0.53

Derbyshire 0.67

Teesside 0.14

Avon & Somerset 0.34

Leicestershire 0.30

West Mercia 0.10

Kent 0.06

Cumbria 0.25

Gwent 1.02

Suffolk 0.34

Nottinghamshire 1.12

Gloucestershire 0.20

Devon & Cornwall 0.11

Hampshire 0.15

North Wales 0.21

Dyfed Powys 0.25

Essex 0.05

Bedfordshire 0.17

Cheshire 1.15

Cambridgeshire 0.36

Surrey 0.50

Lincolnshire 0.14

Norfolk 1.42

North Yorkshire 0.89

Hertfordshire 0.08

Sussex 0.07

Northamptonshire 0.06

Wiltshire 0.15

Thames Valley 0.16

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Page 29
 Table 10 – Average Length of Service by Job Group

No Disability
Disability
Women

Overall
White

BME
Men
Area/Region

De puty Chie f Office rs 13.96 9.67 12.10 5.75 22.82 11.05 12.01
Assista nt Chie f Office r 14.96 13.51 14.74 10.86 13.27 13.75 14.30
Are a /District Ma na ge rs 13.50 13.54 13.98 8.80 16.08 12.86 13.52
Middle Ma na ge r 14.77 12.53 13.81 11.37 13.01 13.12 13.45
Se nior Pra ctitione r 12.34 9.47 10.54 8.64 10.43 9.88 10.50
Proba tion Office r 10.56 7.40 8.44 7.77 10.32 8.19 8.40
Pra ctice De ve lopm e nt Asse ssor 12.30 11.41 12.50 10.50 13.16 11.54 11.69
Tra ine e Proba tion Office r 1.60 1.81 1.59 2.56 1.72 1.74 1.75
Tre a tm e nt Ma na ge r 11.22 9.54 10.15 7.56 10.30 9.96 9.97
Proba tion Se rvice s Office r 6.28 6.33 6.53 5.02 8.44 6.08 6.31
Psychologist 4.71 3.82 3.88 4.22 0.00 3.90 3.90
Othe r Ope ra tiona l Sta ff 5.89 5.34 5.70 5.00 7.87 5.99 5.62
Support Sta ff - Adm inistra tion 4.11 6.94 6.87 5.07 8.15 6.45 6.64
Support Sta ff - Othe r 5.61 5.20 5.57 4.29 6.74 5.36 5.43
Othe r Sta ff 5.47 7.55 6.93 5.41 8.00 6.68 6.76

Table 10: Please note that for job group calculations, people with multiple jobs are counted as once
in each separate job they do. In all other calculations they are only counted once.

turn lead to a shorter overall average length of service
for women.
Male employees have an average length of service of
over 10 years in 8 of the job groups, against 4 for
females.
The job group that has the largest average length of
service for males is the Assistant Chief Officer group at
14.96 years (down 0.17 years on 2005); with the
Area/District Manager group being the largest for
females at 13.54 years (up 0.68 years since 2005).
The job group with the shortest average length of
service for both male and female staff is the Trainee
Probation Officer group at 1.60 years and 1.81 years
respectively. This is only to be expected due to the
routine turnover of TPO’s who graduate after their
qualifying period.
The next shortest length of service for men is the
Support Staff – Administration job group with an
average of 4.11 years. For females the next shortest
length of service is in the Psychologist group with 3.82
years.
LENGTH OF SERVICE BY ETHNICITY
The average length of service of white employees and
black and minority ethnic employees has increased by
0.03 and 0.04 years respectively but white employees
continue on average to have a greater length of service
at 7.55 years compared to 6.14 years for black and
minority ethnic staff. This is a difference of 1.41 years.
The Assistant Chief Officer job group is the group with
the longest length of service on average for white staff
with 14.74 years. The longest on average for black and
minority ethnic staff is the Middle Manager group with
11.37 years.
The Trainee Probation Officer job group is the group
with the shortest length of service on average for both
white and Black and Minority Ethnic employees, at 1.59
and 2.56 years respectively. This is again due to the
routine turnover of TPO’s explained earlier.
The Psychologist job group is the group with the next
shortest length of service on average for both White
employees and Black and Minority Ethnic employees
who have served 3.88 and 4.22 years respectively.
As discussed in previous Workforce Profile Reports,
the fact that black and minority ethnic staff are shorter
serving on average is likely to be a result of the fact
that the recruitment pool from which staff have been
drawn over the years has changed along with the
ethnic make up of British society.
Black and minority ethnic communities have grown in
the UK over the last decade, and the likelihood of a
black or minority ethnic person being selected for a
position in the NPS has increased approximately in
proportion.
LENGTH OF SERVICE BY DISABILITY
As with previous years, across the NPS in general a
staff member with a reported disability is on average
longer serving than a colleague without a disability.
Those with a disability stay in the service for an
average of 9.09 years compared to 7.16 years for those
without. This has changed slightly since 2005 when the
figures were 9.19 years (down 0.10 years) and 7.19
years (up 0.03 years).

Page 30
 Chart 57 – Average Length of Service by Job Group

Assistant Chief Officer 0.32

Area/District Managers 0.51

Middle Manager

Deputy Chief Officers 0.15

Practice Development Assessor

0.55
Senior Practitioner

Treatment Manager

Probation Officer 0.24

Other Staff 0.07

Support Staff - Administration 0.37

Probation Services Officer 0.38

Other Operational Staff 0.09

Support Staff - Other 0.11

Psychologist 0.01

Trainee Probation Officer

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Chart 58 – Average Length of Service by Region and Chart 59 – Average Length of Service by Region and
Gender Ethnicity

Yorkshire & 0.49 Yorkshire & 0.61

Humberside 0.52 Humberside 0.61

0.28 0.20
West Midlands West Midlands
0.29 0.45

0.46 0.42
Wales London
0.21 0.39

0.77 0.13
South West North West
0.33 0.25

0.05 0.12
South East North East
0.15 0.38

0.18 0.47
North West South West
0.09 0.60

0.25 0.32
North East Wales
0.00 0.04

0.52 0.20
London East Midlands
0.40 0.28

0.52 0.31
East of England East of England
0.05 0.38

0.15 0.06
East Midlands South East
0.15 0.47

National 0.05 National 0.03

Probation Service 0.07 Probation Service 0.04

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Men Women White BME

Page 31
This trend is particularly true amongst staff Chart 60 – Average Length of Service by Region and
in the Deputy Chief Officer job group where Disability
the average length of service for those with
a disability is over double that of those
1.14
without, at 22.82 years against 11.05 West Midlands
0.22
years.
1.37
London
The average length of service for all staff 3.02
working in the Psychologist job group is
0.55
3.90 years as no staff in the group have a North West
0.03
reported disability.
Yorkshire & 2.04
Staff without a disability have a longer Humberside 0.24

average length of service in only three job 0.95

groups against those with a reported North East
0.12
disability. The groups being the Assistant
0.53
Chief Officer (by 0.48 years), the Middle East Midlands
0.20
Manager (by 0.11 years) and the Trainee
Probation Officer (by 0.02 years). Wales
0.46

0.21

REFERENCES 0.71
South West
0.55
Workforce demographics for the Public
0.54
Service used for comparison purposes in East of England
0.84
this report are drawn from the report
‘Characteristics of Public Sector Workers’ South East
0.72
0.11
published by the Office for National
Statistics in May 2007. National 0.10
Probation Service 0.03
In addition this report makes reference to
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
population estimates drawn from the
2003/4 Annual Local Area Labour Force
Survey also published by the Office for Disability No Disability

National Statistics.

Page 32