National Probation Service Performance Report 21 and Weighted Scorecard Q1 2006/07

August 2006
ROGER HILL DIRECTOR OF PROBATION

1

Contents

Foreword Introduction Enforcement, Contact and Compliance High/Very High Risk of Harm and Prolific & other Priority Offenders (PPOs) Accredited Programmes Unpaid Work Drug Rehabilitation Requirements (DRRs) Skills for Life Race and Ethnic Monitoring Sickness Absence Victim Contact Court Report Timeliness Employment Weighted Scorecard

3 5 8 12 15 17 19 23 25 27 29 31 33 35

2

Foreword

This report presents the performance of the National Probation Service over the first quarter of 2006-07. The first quarter data in any new performance year should be read with some caution, given it only represents three months. Overall, it has been a

reasonable start to the year but there is room for improvement, particularly on some of the interventions targets.

We cannot be complacent about enforcement after last year’s success in exceeding the target for the first time. Performance dipped below the 90% target in April for the first time since December 2004 and whilst the 90% achieved in May and June has been encouraging and enables us to show 89% performance against the 90% target, we need to begin to exceed the target in the coming months in order to stay ahead and ensure we build on last year’s success.

Though this is not a target we are solely responsible for, I have included information on the LCJB-owned end-to-end enforcement targets in this report because although performance against the 50% target has seen steady improvement, the more challenging, average day target has remained virtually static. I want these targets to improve and I want the NPS to drive progress and make this happen across the agencies.

I am pleased that the progress made on our risk of harm assessments towards the end of last year has been maintained but again, I must emphasise that we cannot be complacent in this, the most important area of our work. We have met the target over the first quarter but I want to be exceeding it consistently and I want every area to be exceeding it. Whilst I appreciate that the small numbers involved in some areas can have an impact on performance, there are areas that can do much better and I and regional managers will be asking questions of those areas that are failing to meet the target.

We changed the definition of the target to measure compliance this year and used the first quarter as a baseline to set the target. I have set it at 85% and included it in the weighted scorecard at that level. I expect areas to be meeting or exceeding this target by the end of the year. We have also changed the way we measure PSR timeliness and this too shows that there is much room for improvement.

3

The weighted scorecard shows the overall performance, grouped by the four functions that describe our work; public protection, offender management, interventions, and organisational efficiency and effectiveness. We have removed the family groups

component so that it s solely about performance against target. We have not compared the positions with last year’s rankings as the changes to targets, weightings and methodology make that comparison unwieldy. However, the chart at the end of this report highlights the gap in performance between areas. The largest, and most worrying gap, is between 45th (last place) and 44th. I expect this gap to reduce and more areas to be scoring above zero by the end of 2006-07.

Roger Hill Director, National Probation Service

4

Introduction
Overall Performance on all targets

Performance indicator

2005-06

2006-07 (April-June)

Percentage change
-2% -+9% +9% -33% 0% +5% -7% -14% N/A -2% -1.1 days --

Enforcement within 10 days Compliance (proportion of arranged appointments which are attended) Assessment of high risk cases Assessment of PPOs Offending Behaviour Programmes Unpaid Work completions DTTO/DRR starts DTTO/DRR completions Skills for Life Starts Skills for Life Awards Accurate and timely ethnicity data Sickness absence (average. days) Victim Contact Court Report timeliness Employment

91% 81% 82% 17,127 (114%) 51,026 (102%) 14,001 (88%) 3,977 (99%) 44,972 (112%) 14,930 (149%) 97% 12.3 92% ---

89% 81% 90% 91% 3,538 (81%) 12,806 (102%) 3,716 (93%) 1,152 (92%) 11,803 (98%) 3,219 95% 11.2

74% 98%

---

It should be noted that for 2006/07 the target for: • DTTO/DRRs completions has increased from 4,000 to 5,000 • Skills for life starts increased from 40,000 to 48,000 • Offending behaviour programme completions have increased from 15,000 to 17,500.

5

Enforcement 89% of relevant cases were enforced within 10 days in accordance with National Standards during the first quarter overall. Although performance has dipped below the 90% target for the first time since December 2004, the monthly performance has touched 90% in May and June.

Compliance A new compliance target has been introduced for 2006-07, which measures the proportion of arranged appointments that the offender attends in the first 26 weeks of the order or licence. During April to June 81% was achieved. Using this as a baseline the target for the remainder of the year has been set at 85%.

High / Very High Risk of harm cases The target is to complete 90% of risk of harm analyses, risk management plans and OASys sentence plans on high risk offenders within five working days of the commencement of the order or release into the community. This target is now being met, with 90% achieved for the period April-June 2006 compared to 81% from the beginning of monitoring in August 2005 to March 2006.

Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPOs) The target is to complete 90% of risk of harm OASys sentence plans on Prolific and other commencement of the order or release into the nationally with 91% of cases meeting the target period August 2005 to March 2006. screenings / full analyses (as appropriate) and Priority Offenders within five working days of community. This target is also being exceeded for April to June 2006 compared to 82% for the

Accredited Offending Behaviour Programmes There were 3,538 completions of offending behaviour programmes between April and June 2006. That represents 81% of the profiled target but only slightly fewer than the 3,557 achieved during the same period in 2005.

Unpaid Work 12,820 successful completions have been achieved in the first quarter. That is 3% above the target and a slight improvement on the 12,653 achieved during the first quarter of last year.

Drug Treatment and Testing Orders / Drug Rehabilitation Requirements There were 3,716 commencements of DRRs and DTTOs between April and June 2006 (93% of the profiled target). This is an 18% increase on the 3,137 starts during April to June 2005. There were 1,152 successful completions of DTTOs and DRRs in the period April to June 2006 (92% of target), an increase of 31% on the 877 achieved during the equivalent period in 2005.

6

Skills for Life 11,803 offenders commenced skills for life courses during the first quarter of 2006-07, 2% below the target for the period. This is down by 892 (7%) on the 12,695 achieved a year earlier. There are no awards targets for probation areas in 2006-07. Data for the first quarter shows that 3,219 awards were delivered between April and June 2006, a reduction of 20% on the 4,035 awards achieved in the same period last year.

Accurate and Timely Race & Ethnic Monitoring Data 96% of data on offenders starting community orders was timely and accurate with respect to ethnicity, as was 94% of data on offenders starting supervision under licence. The total across both types of supervision was 95%.

Sickness Absence The average days lost per employee per staff year during the first quarter of 2006-07 was 11.2, an improvement on the average of 12.3 for 2005-06.

Victim Contact End-of-year figures for 2005-06 for victim contact are now available. These show that 92% of victims were contacted within the 8-week standard. This exceeds the 85% target.

Court Report Timeliness New targets were introduced for 2006-07 and this report provides the first set of results. These show that 74% of reports were delivered on time against the target of 90%.

Contact for Enquiries For enquiries about any issues relating to this report please contact Roger McGarva, Head of Regions & Performance, Tel: 020 7217 8244; E-mail: Roger.McGarva2@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk. For enquiries about the data please contact Paris Mikkides, Head of Performance Standards & Risk, Tel: 020 7217 8812; E-mail: Paris.Mikkides@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk.

7

1.

Enforcement and Compliance – April to June 2006

Enforcement NPS Performance Target 6 is that the National Probation Service takes enforcement action in accordance with the National Standard in 90% of cases where the offender has breached his/her order. To fully meet the standard, three things must be achieved: breach action taken on or before a second failure assessed as unacceptable (third failure in licence cases) the court contacted for a hearing date all of this achieved within 10 days. National Standards monitoring on enforcement uses a sample of cases commenced six months previously, so the sample for the reporting period April to June 2006 will contain cases that commenced between October and December 2005. The enforcement rate remains considerably better than in 2001-02, as illustrated by the following table. Period 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 (April – June) Enforced within 10 days in accordance with National Standards 53% 64% 77% 87% 91% 89% All cases enforced 69% 77% 87% 93% 96% 94%

However, the rate has dipped below 90% for the first time since December 2004. The detailed data for the first quarter of 2006-7 shows that: • • • 31 areas met or exceeded the 90% for breach action within 10 days. 10 areas were within 10% of the target. 4 areas were more than 10% below the target.

End-to-End Enforcement We have decided to publish end-to-end enforcement performance from COMet data for the first time in this Performance Report. The LCJB target is: • • An average of 35 working days from the relevant failure to comply to resolution of the case, and 50% of cases to be resolved with 25 working days.

The target was introduced in October last year. There are still some concerns about the quality of the data but work is on-going to improve this. Performance against the 50% target has seen steady improvement from 37% in October to 48% in July. The average day target presents more of challenge and performance has been virtually static: 40 days October 05, July 43 Days. We expect the performance targets to be achieved this year.
8

There is wide range of performance too. As this is a joint agency target responsibility for improvement rests with NPS, HMCS, YOTs, EM contractors and warrant execution agencies which could be HMCS, Police or private contractors. This makes for a complex performance framework. A recent series of effective practice workshops have been evaluated positively by participants and we hope that by publishing this data it will also promote performance improvement. The Home Secretary announced a proposal in “Rebalancing the Criminal Justice System in Favour of the Law Abiding Majority” for a target on the time taken to return an offender to custody following revocation of their licence. There will be consultation on the target with LCJBs and enforcement agencies.

Compliance A new performance target for compliance has been introduced for 2006-07, measuring the proportion of arranged appointments which the offender attends during the first 26 weeks. A rate of 81% compliance was achieved in the first quarter. The target is supported by three additional measures of compliance: • PM 2: the proportion of orders and licences which reach the 6 months stage without requiring breach action • PM 3: the average number of acceptable failures to attend during the first 26 weeks • PM 4: the proportion of orders and licences that terminate successfully The first quarter area breakdown for all of these is shown overleaf. The figures shown for PM 4 are based on terminations between April and June 2006 of the following types: CRO, CPO, CPRO (Rehab. & Punishment), DTTO, Community Order, SSO; Young Offender under 12m; Adult & Young Parole; Adult Custody 12m Plus; Young Offender 12m and above; Adult Pre & Post Over 12m).

9

Enforcement and Compliance - April to June 2006
Area/Region Enforcement Enforcement: Compliance Compliance Compliance (PT 6): breach breach action (PT 7): the (PM 2): the (PM 3): the action taken taken whether proportion of proportion of average within 10 or not within 10 arranged cases reaching number of working days working days appointments the 6 months acceptable (Target = 90%) that are kept stage without failures to requiring attend in the breach action first 26 weeks 100% 100% 95% 92% 95% 89% 96% 87% 92% 96% 94% 93% 77% 92% 100% 91% 98% 92% 84% 88% 91% 88% 99% 86% 96% 70% 95% 92% 91% 88% 78% 81% 83% 90% 91% 91% 93% 76% 88% 94% 93% 96% 96% 100% 95% 92% 88% 88% 87% 89% 100% 93% 92% 95% 95% 89% 100% 100% 98% 93% 96% 95% 98% 89% 95% 100% 94% 97% 82% 100% 100% 95% 100% 92% 92% 92% 94% 93% 99% 89% 96% 97% 98% 96% 94% 95% 81% 88% 88% 93% 97% 91% 97% 83% 92% 100% 97% 96% 100% 100% 99% 97% 93% 97% 96% 96% 100% 98% 96% 100% 99% 94% 88% 81% 80% 78% 81% 87% 76% 81% 80% 88% 79% 84% 86% 68% 81% 81% 81% 83% 85% 79% 80% 83% 85% 83% 83% 80% 76% 81% 83% 79% 77% 74% 77% 85% 81% 82% 87% 85% 84% 83% 79% 90% 78% 80% 81% 81% 84% 83% 77% 81% 87% 82% 85% 81% 83% 81% 82% 66% 71% 71% 73% 81% 68% 71% 71% 73% 68% 73% 73% 55% 76% 70% 73% 76% 68% 67% 69% 69% 65% 72% 64% 70% 61% 66% 72% 67% 68% 63% 66% 68% 61% 65% 66% 68% 66% 68% 59% 70% 71% 70% 67% 80% 77% 78% 83% 79% 79% 61% 77% 74% 73% 70% 2.8 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3 2.6 4.2 3.0 3.6 4.1 2.3 2.7 1.7 5.3 3.8 3.2 3.4 2.8 2.5 2.8 3.2 2.8 3.2 5.7 2.9 2.8 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.2 3.0 3.3 1.9 2.8 3.1 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.1 3.3 1.8 3.4 3.1 2.7 3.3 2.4 2.8 3.6 3.0 2.4 2.3 1.6 2.7 2.4 3.0 Compliance (PM 4): the proportion of orders and licences that terminate successfully

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West of Midlands County Durham Northumbria Teesside North East Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk East of England Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside North West Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire East Midlands Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Yorkshire & Humberside Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley South East Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire South West London East London North London South London West London Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Wales ENGLAND & WALES

71% 70% 66% 71% 70% 68% 68% 69% 69% 74% 69% 70% 66% 67% 66% 69% 74% 77% 64% 66% 71% 67% 73% 68% 67% 73% 64% 68% 72% 68% 65% 67% 67% 73% 71% 72% 68% 76% 72% 65% 64% 70% 71% 67% 66%

78% 69% 63% 74% 77% 73% 70%

10

End to End Enforcement Performance April to June 2006

Performance - % Proportion resolved within resolved in 25 days 25 working days Target is 50% Area Avon and Somerset Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Cheshire Cleveland Cumbria Derbyshire Devon Cornwall Dorset Durham Dyfed Powys Essex Gloucestershire Greater Manchester Gwent Hampshire and Isle of Wight Hertfordshire Humberside Kent Lancashire Leicestershire Lincolnshire London Merseyside Norfolk North Wales North Yorkshire Northamptonshire Northumbria Nottinghamshire South Wales South Yorkshire Staffordshire Suffolk Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West Yorkshire Wiltshire Regions London Midlands North East North West South East South West Wales and Cheshire England & Wales 50% 26% 67% 51% 39% 60% 45% 61% 20% 49% 56% 60% 45% 42% 42% 42% 32% 70% 38% 14% 46% 39% 13% 36% 47% 31% 33% 47% 54% 61% 52% 48% 39% 71% 61% 33% 21% 66% 46% 76% 45% 52% 13% 63% 51% 37% 45% 48% 49% Met Not Met Met Met Not Met Met Near Miss Met Not Met Near Miss Met Met Near Miss Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met Met Not Met Not Met Near Miss Not Met Not Met Not Met Near Miss Not Met Not Met Near Miss Met Met Met Near Miss Not Met Met Met Not Met Not Met Met Near Miss Met Near Miss Met Not Met Met Met Not Met Near Miss Near Miss Near Miss

Average working Performance - average days to resolution of 35 days to resolution of the case Target is 35 days 38 57 29 38 50 31 46 34 54 40 35 34 39 45 47 45 49 30 49 61 38 50 76 48 53 51 40 41 43 31 45 42 49 30 32 52 61 35 43 26 38 42 76 33 39 48 45 41 44 Near Miss Not Met Met Near Miss Not Met Met Not Met Met Not Met Not Met Met Met Near Miss Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met Met Not Met Not Met Near Miss Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met Met Not Met Not Met Not Met Met Met Not Met Not Met Met Not Met Met Near Miss Not Met Not Met Met Near Miss Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met

48% Near Miss

43 Not Met

11

2.

Performance on High / Very High Risk of Harm and Prolific & other Priority Offenders (PPOs)

There are two performance targets relating to protecting the public from harm and protecting the public from prolific and other priority offenders: • Performance Target (PT) 1: 90% of risk of harm assessments, risk management plans and OASys sentence plans on high risk offenders are completed within five working days of the commencement of the order or release into the community; and Performance Target (PT) 3: 90% of risk of harm screenings / full analysis (as appropriate) and OASys sentence plans are completed on Prolific and other Priority Offenders within five working days of commencement of the order or release into the community.

The results for the first three months of the performance year show an improvement on both measures compared to 2005-06. For the target on high/very high risk of harm offenders performance has improved from 81% to 90%. For PPOs the improvement was from 82% to 91%. This is broken down at area level in the following pages. It is important to note that in some areas the percentages are derived from (very) small numbers. The area-level detail once again demonstrates improvement since 2005-06. For the target for high/very high risk cases there are now 29 areas on or above target (up from 14 in 2005-06), with a further 12 within 10% and only 4 areas more than 10% below target. For the PPO target, 28 areas are on or above target (up from 16), 12 are within 10% and 5 are more than 10% below.

12

High/Very High Risk of Harm Offenders: Timeliness of Risk of Harm Analysis, Risk Management Plan & Sentence Plan at Commencement/Release (Performance Target 1) - April to June 2006
Region Area Number of High/Very Number in which 5-day High Risk timeliness target was commencements & met releases 36 20 26 130 212 3 42 53 98 25 10 46 13 11 9 114 46 12 90 188 58 394 61 24 16 17 34 152 108 24 57 116 305 25 47 10 16 50 148 41 10 5 21 4 81 36 27 18 34 115 30 10 20 69 129 33 18 23 114 188 2 39 48 89 24 9 40 11 10 6 100 43 12 82 173 56 366 55 22 16 16 34 143 107 21 51 94 273 22 35 9 15 46 127 33 10 5 21 4 73 35 24 18 28 105 27 8 14 67 116 % Met Performance (Target = 90%)

West of Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional sub-total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional sub-total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional sub-total Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Greater Manchester Merseyside Regional sub-total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional sub-total

92% 90% 88% 88% 89%

Above Above Near miss Near miss

North East

67% Below 93% Above 91% Above 91% 96% 90% 87% 85% 91% 67% 88% 93% 100% 91% 92% 97% 93% 90% 92% 100% 94% 100% 94% 99% 88% 89% 81% 90% 88% 74% 90% 94% 92% 86% 80% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90% 97% 89% 100% 82% 91% 90% 80% 70% 97% 90% Above Above Near miss Near miss Above Below Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Near miss Near miss Near miss Near miss Below Above Above Above Near miss Above Above Above Above Above Near miss Above Near miss Above Near miss Below Above

East of England

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional sub-total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional sub-total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional sub-total London East London North London South London West Regional sub-total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional sub-total

South West

London

Wales

England & Wales Total

1748

1580

90% Above

13

Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPOs): Timeliness of Risk of Harm Screening/Analysis & Sentence Plan at Commencement/Release (Performance Target 3) - April to June 2006
Region Area Number of PPO commencements & releases 18 14 14 108 154 10 37 23 70 19 23 14 21 15 13 105 23 15 38 95 44 215 39 61 24 36 52 212 37 8 34 38 117 21 44 13 44 30 152 20 47 9 12 9 97 18 25 18 8 69 19 12 11 28 70 1261 Number in which 5day timeliness target was met 17 12 13 99 141 7 35 21 63 17 18 9 17 11 12 84 20 14 33 80 44 191 37 58 24 35 50 204 37 7 32 35 111 19 34 11 43 28 135 17 42 9 12 9 89 18 20 18 7 63 18 11 11 27 67 1148 % Met Performance (Target = 90%) 94% 86% 93% 92% 92% Above Near miss Above Above

West of Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional sub-total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional sub-total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional sub-total Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Greater Manchester Merseyside Regional sub-total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional sub-total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional sub-total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional sub-total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional sub-total London East London North London South London West Regional sub-total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional sub-total

North East

70% Below 95% Above 91% Above 90% 89% 78% 64% 81% 73% 92% 80% 87% 93% 87% 84% 100% 89% 95% 95% 100% 97% 96% 96% 100% 88% 94% 92% 95% 90% 77% 85% 98% 93% 89% 85% 89% 100% 100% 100% 92% 100% 80% 100% 88% 91% 95% 92% 100% 96% 96% Near miss Below Below Near miss Below Above Near miss Above Near miss Near miss Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Near miss Above Above Above Below Near miss Above Above Near miss Near miss Above Above Above Above Near miss Above Near miss Above Above Above Above

East of England

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London

Wales

England & Wales Total

91% Above

14

3.

Accredited Programmes - April to June 2006

The national target for accredited programme completions has increased by 17% to 17,500 for 2006-07. At the end of the first quarter 3,538 completions had been achieved against a profiled target of 4,375 (81%).
Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 1131 2167 3538 1458 2917 4375 5833 7292 8750 10208 11667 13125 14583 16042 17500 78% 74% 81%
Accredited Programme Completions, Cumulative, 2006/7

Actual Profile Percent

20000 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Apr-06 May-06

Actual Profile

Jun-06

Jul-06

Aug-06

Sep-06

Oct-06

Nov-06

Dec-06

Jan-07

Feb-07

Mar-07

Year 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 (April – June)

Target 6,267 12,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 4,375

Completions 3,431 7,716 13,136 15,595 17,127 3,538

% Achieved 55% 64% 88% 104% 114% 81%

The detailed data show that: • • • 10 areas exceeded their target. 6 areas were within 10% of the target. 26 areas were more than 10% below target. The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • Cambridgeshire (24%) Sussex (36%) Suffolk (37%) Surrey (39%)
15

The best performing areas were: • • • • Cheshire (202%) Nottinghamshire (192%) Lancashire (160%) Leicestershire & Rutland (152%)

Accredited Programmes Completions April - June 2006

Region West Midlands

Area name Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total

Percent of Completion Actual completions completion target (profile) achieved target 90 38 86 266 479 59 172 61 292 43 46 104 48 59 47 346 59 39 358 147 172 774 80 90 71 48 65 354 76 55 138 218 486 124 93 51 95 113 476 110 115 47 42 27 341 541 541 32 51 70 135 288 4375 71 38 42 212 363 54 185 31 270 46 11 67 67 37 17 245 119 21 265 235 163 803 50 136 49 33 125 393 69 47 120 184 420 98 66 20 34 119 337 73 60 46 40 17 236 252 252 13 56 28 122 219 3538 79% 101% 49% 80% 76%

Performance

Below Above Below Below

North East

92% Near miss 108% Above 51% Below 93% 108% 24% 64% 140% 63% 37% 71% 202% 54% 74% 160% 95% 104% 63% 152% 69% 69% 192% 111% 91% 86% 87% 85% 86% 79% 71% 39% 36% 105% 71% 67% 52% 98% 96% 62% 69% Above Below Below Above Below Below Above Below Below Above Near miss Below Above Below Below Above Near miss Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Above Below Below Near miss Near miss Below

East

North West Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total

Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total

South West Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London Wales London Regional Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total

47% Below 47% 40% 111% 40% 91% 76% 81% Below Above Below Near miss

ENGLAND & WALES

16

4.

Unpaid Work, April to June 2006

Last year’s target of 50,000 completions was exceeded by 2%. This rate of performance has been continued during the first quarter of 2006-07, with 103% of the profiled target achieved.

Unpaid Work Completions against Profiled Target
Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 3848 8152 12820 4167 8333 12500 16667 20833 25000 29167 33333 37500 41667 45833 50000 92% 98% 103%
Unpaid Work Completions, Cumulative, 2006/7

Actual Profile Percent

60000

50000 Actual Profile 40000

30000

20000

10000

0 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07

Year 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 (Apr-June)

Target 30,000 50,000 12,820

Completions 38,473 51,026 12,500

Percent of target 128% 102% 103%

The area breakdown shows: • • • 28 areas exceeded their profiled target 10 areas were within 10% of their target 7 areas were more than 10% below target

The best performing areas were: • • • London North (125%) Bedfordshire (124%) Northants (124%)

The most serious under-achievers were: • • • Norfolk (74%) Hertfordshire (75%) Teesside (79%)

17

Unpaid Work Completions April - June 2006

Region

Area name

Profiled ECP /Unpaid Target Work Completions 239 92 230 745 1306 132 333 180 644 120 170 304 165 187 138 1083 209 139 895 343 407 1992 254 274 127 131 329 1115 255 162 361 613 1391 437 355 142 262 370 1565 269 284 119 96 104 871 423 387 420 527 1757 93 150 168 366 776 12500 207 92 230 706 1235 124 301 141 566 149 152 325 124 139 144 1033 206 152 938 352 401 2049 284 262 151 162 385 1244 215 165 346 614 1340 435 408 154 309 376 1682 237 307 137 95 118 894 530 434 481 577 2022 76 149 153 377 755 12820

Target Achieved 87% 100% 100% 95% 95%

Performance

West Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub-Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub-Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub-Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub-Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub-Total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub-Total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub-Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub-Total London North London West London East London South London Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub-Total

Below Above Above Near miss

North East

94% Near miss 90% Near miss 79% Below 88% 124% 90% 107% 75% 74% 104% 95% 99% 110% 105% 103% 99% 103% 112% 96% 119% 124% 117% 112% 84% 102% 96% 100% 96% 100% 115% 108% 118% 102% 107% 88% 108% 115% 99% 114% 103% 125% 112% 114% 109% 115% 82% 100% 91% 103% 97% 103% Above Near miss Above Below Below Above Near miss Above Above Above Near miss Above Near miss Above Above Above Below Above Near miss Above Above Above Above Above Above Below Above Above Near miss Above Above Above Above Above Below Above Near miss Above

East

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London

Wales

England & Wales Total

18

5.

DTTOs /DRRs – April to June 2006

The national target of 4,000 successful completions was narrowly missed in 2005-06. This target has been increased by 25% to 5,000 for 2006-07. In light of this, the 1,152 completions achieved in the first quarter of the current performance year is encouraging: it represents 92% of the profiled target and is an increase of 31% on the 877 achieved during the equivalent period in 2005.
DTTO/DRR Completions against Profiled Target
Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 368 768 1152 417 833 1250 1667 2083 2500 2917 3333 3750 4167 4583 5000 88% 92% 92%
DTTO/DRR, Completions Cumulative, 2006/7

Actual Profile Percent

6000

5000 Actual Profile 4000

3000

2000

1000

0 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07

Year 2005/06 2006/07 (April-June)

Target 4,000 1,250

Completions 3,977 1,152

Percent of target 99% 92%

The area breakdown shows that: • • • 16 areas met or exceeded their profiled target. A further 5 were within 10% of meeting the profiled target 24 areas were below target The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • Lincolnshire (41%) Hertfordshire (43%) Suffolk (46%) Warwickshire and Co. Durham (47%)

The best performing areas were: • • • • Dyfed-Powys (158%) Humberside (149%) Lancashire (141%) South Wales (134%)

19

DTTO/DRR Completions April 2006 - June 2006

Region

Area name

Profiled Completions Target target Achieved 24 9 21 82 136 13 33 20 66 12 13 26 16 12 9 88 14 9 86 41 49 199 19 22 15 16 36 108 28 17 36 61 141 25 31 13 25 41 135 32 28 12 10 13 95 51 47 51 55 203 12 17 15 36 80 1250 14 4 13 62 93 6 43 12 61 12 8 28 7 14 4 73 7 10 81 58 42 198 16 25 6 13 34 94 41 9 31 50 131 29 19 15 13 41 117 29 30 6 12 12 89 56 39 49 59 203 19 15 11 48 93 1152 58% 47% 61% 76% 69%

Performance Below Below Below Below

West Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total North East County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London North London West London East London South Regional Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total ENGLAND & WALES

47% Below 129% Above 59% Below 92% 98% 60% 110% 43% 117% 46% 83% 52% 114% 94% 141% 85% 100% 84% 112% 41% 84% 94% 87% 149% 54% 86% 82% 93% 117% 61% 113% 52% 100% 87% 90% 107% 50% 126% 91% 94% 110% 84% 96% 108% 100% 158% 88% 75% 134% 117% 92% Near miss Below Above Below Above Below Below Above Near miss Above Below Below Above Below Below Near miss Above Below Below Below Above Below Above Below Above Near miss Above Below Above Near miss Above Below Near miss Above Above Below Below Above

East

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London

Wales

20

The key target relating to DTTO/DRRs for 2006-07 is the number of successful completions, but it is important that areas do all they can to maximise commencements. The table and chart below show the number of commencements during the first quarter of 2006-07.
DTTO/DRR Commencements against Profiled Target
Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 1090 2424 3716 1333 2667 4000 5333 6667 8000 9333 10667 12000 13333 14667 16000 82% 91% 93%
DTTO/DRR, Commencements Cumulative, 2006/7

Actual Profile Percent

18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06

Actual Profile

Jul-06

Aug-06

Sep-06

Oct-06

Nov-06

Dec-06

Jan-07

Feb-07

Mar-07

Year 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 (April – June)

Target 6,000 6,000 9,000 13,000 16,000 4,000

Commencements 4,842 6,140 8,519 10,322 14,001 3,716

Percent of target 81% 102% 95% 79% 88% 93%

The area breakdown shows that: • • • 12 areas exceeded their profiled target. A further 6 were within 10% of meeting the target Leaving 27 areas, below target The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • Gloucestershire (27%) North Wales (32%) County Durham (39%) Cumbria (40%)

The best performing areas were: • • • • Greater Manchester (142%) Leicestershire & Rutland (137%) London West (136%) Staffordshire (134%)

21

DTTO/DRR Commencements April 2006 - June 2006

Region

Area name

Profiled Starts Target target Achieved 78 30 73 266 448 54 129 63 247 40 45 94 54 54 41 327 67 37 240 119 145 608 71 70 42 44 92 320 79 44 120 196 439 115 103 43 84 110 454 94 98 38 33 36 300 151 139 153 163 606 35 53 50 113 251 4000 105 26 57 210 398 21 109 46 176 27 30 70 29 41 23 220 55 15 341 134 135 680 69 96 49 45 108 367 96 38 100 179 413 96 84 34 61 87 362 79 75 21 9 44 228 175 188 156 157 676 33 41 16 106 196 3716 134% 85% 79% 79% 89%

Performance Above Below Below Below

West Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total North East County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London North London West London East London South Regional Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total ENGLAND & WALES

39% Below 84% Below 73% Below 71% 68% 67% 75% 54% 76% 56% 67% 82% 40% 142% 113% 93% 112% 97% 137% 115% 101% 118% 115% 121% 86% 83% 91% 94% 84% 82% 80% 72% 79% 80% 84% 76% 55% 27% 121% 76% 116% 136% 102% 96% 111% 94% 78% 32% 94% 78% 93% Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Above Above Near miss Near miss Above Above Above Above Above Below Below Near miss Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Below Above Above Above Above Near miss Near miss Below Below Near miss

East

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London

Wales

22

6. Skills for Life - April to June 2006 Skills for Life: Starts The number of starts achieved in the first quarter of 2006-07 is narrowly below target at 98%.

Skills for Life: Starts against Profiled target
Actual Profile Percent Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 3366 7617 11803 4000 8000 12000 16000 20000 24000 28000 32000 36000 40000 44000 48000 84% 95% 98%
Skills for Life: Cumulative Starts, 2006/7

60000

50000 Actual Profile 40000

30000

20000

10000

0 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07

Year 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 (April-June)

Target 6,000 16,000 32,000 40,000 12,000

Commencements 5,983 14,971 34,199 44,972 11,803

Percent of target 100% 94% 107% 112% 98%

The area breakdown on the next page shows that: • 20 areas exceeded their target. • A further 5 areas were within 10% of the target. • 20 areas were more than 10% below their target. The best performing areas were: • • • • North Wales (189%) Wiltshire (185%) Lancashire (175%) Gloucestershire (169%) The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • West Yorkshire (31%) Surrey and Suffolk (45%) Dyfed-Powys (50%) West Mercia (53%)

No awards targets have been set for 2006-07. The number of awards is still monitored, however, and is shown overleaf for the first quarter in comparison with the equivalent period in 2005-06.
23

Skills for Life, April - June 2006
Region Area Profiled Starts Target 235 92 218 799 1343 163 388 189 740 120 134 282 161 162 124 982 202 111 721 356 434 1825 213 211 128 133 275 959 237 133 360 587 1317 344 309 128 253 329 1362 284 294 115 98 109 900 491 400 382 546 1820 105 158 150 340 753 12000 Starts % Profiled Performance Target against Achieved starts 96% 129% 53% 103% 95% Near miss Above Below Above Awards Awards Difference Q1 05/06 76 13 62 217 368 87 54 74 215 28 5 74 80 45 94 326 52 55 319 173 125 724 50 123 50 70 74 367 123 47 90 129 389 43 162 20 66 140 431 180 134 49 24 21 408 87 196 198 123 604 11 38 29 125 203 4035 -32 15 -1 90 72 -29 -6 23 -12 -14 10 27 -13 -8 -62 -60 -8 -43 -122 -117 -38 -328 -14 -60 -14 -44 -8 -140 -52 -37 33 -96 -152 42 -90 -4 39 -38 -51 -21 -33 -23 17 38 -22 3 -68 -41 -26 -132 14 46 24 -75 9 -816

West Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total

225 118 116 822 1281 175 589 210 974 95 98 276 88 189 56 802 208 80 628 622 376 1914 180 205 113 91 314 903 175 209 197 180 761 408 467 57 157 336 1425 438 279 142 166 201 1226 407 425 433 471 1736 52 109 284 336 781 11803

44 28 61 307 440 58 48 97 203 14 15 101 67 37 32 266 44 12 197 56 87 396 36 63 36 26 66 227 71 10 123 33 237 85 72 16 105 102 380 159 101 26 41 59 386 90 128 157 97 472 25 84 53 50 212 3219

North East

108% Above 152% Above 111% Above 132% 79% 73% 98% 55% 117% 45% 82% 103% 72% 87% 175% 87% 105% 85% 97% 89% 68% 114% 94% 74% 157% 55% 31% 58% 119% 151% 45% 62% 102% 105% 154% 95% 124% 169% 185% 136% 83% 106% 113% 86% 95% 50% 69% 189% 99% 104% Below Below Near miss Below Above Below Above Below Below Above Below Below Near miss Below Below Above Below Above Below Below Above Above Below Below Above Above Near miss Above Above Above Below Above Above Below Below Below Above Near miss

East

North West Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total

Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total

South West Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London London North London West London East London South London Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total

Wales

ENGLAND & WALES

98% Near miss

24

7.

Race and Ethnic Monitoring

Home Secretary’s Race Equality Targets – Monitoring at December 2005 At the end of December 2005, 12.1% of NPS staff were from minority ethnic backgrounds, up from 10.9% a year earlier and 9.8% in 2000. This is against a target of 8.4% set for 2009. All regional targets have been exceeded. The breakdown by region is set out below.
NPS Staff: Minority Ethnic Representation Region West Midlands North East East of England North West East Midlands Yorks & Humberside South East South West London Wales England & Wales Target set Actual 31/12/04 Actual 31/12/05 11.6% 1.4% 4.9% 5.4% 7.2% 5.1% 3.6% 2.6% 26.5% 1.7% 8.4% 16.0% 2.5% 7.1% 6.7% 12.2% 7.6% 6.0% 3.7% 35.5% 3.1% 10.9% 17.6% 2.6% 8.0% 6.8% 11.1% 7.9% 6.3% 3.8% 40.2% 3.3% 11.9% Above/Below Target Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above

Completeness of Ethnic Monitoring Data
The 16+1 census classification of race and ethnicity became mandatory in April 2003. In Performance Report 13, we published data from RDS (from Areas’ quarterly listings, formerly Form 20 returns) showing the proportion of new orders and licences made between January and April 2004 that did not have a correctly entered race and ethnic classification. We have updated and published that information in subsequent Performance Reports. The target for the NPS is that 95% of race and ethnic monitoring data on staff and offenders is returned on time and using the correct (Census 2001) classifications. The results for completeness of data on offenders (from order and licence commencements during April to June 2006) are shown on the next page. (All returns had been received by the time this report was prepared so have been treated as timely). Data on staffing for 2006-07 will be added when the results of the next staff census are known early next year.

25

Offenders starting orders and licences, April - June 2006

Region/Area

Orders % with valid ethnic code 98% 98% 95% 97% 98% 97% 96% 95% 96% 96% 100% 98% 94% 97% 97% 95% 99% 100% 99% 97% 98% 97% 99% 98% 94% 96% 96% 99% 99% 80% 94% 96% 94% 90% 99% 100% 97% 97% 97% 98% 95% 99% 96% 99% 100% 98% 98% 98% 89% 95% 95% 96%

Licences % with valid No ethnic ethnic code code 1 6 6 13 6 1 39 64 9 119 2 7 16 17 42 9 7 1 4 8 29 6 1 9 86 102 12 3 6 23 6 0 50 135 47 5 13 9 14 86 15 2 4 3 1 25 0 5 12 15 32 636 98% 97% 96% 97% 97% 99% 93% 92% 98% 94% 99% 94% 95% 97% 96% 94% 96% 99% 96% 96% 96% 96% 98% 97% 94% 95% 88% 98% 97% 74% 94% 100% 93% 91% 90% 98% 87% 96% 94% 92% 90% 98% 96% 96% 98% 95% 100% 95% 91% 96% 95% 94%

Total starts County Durham Northumbria Teesside North East Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Greater Manchester Merseyside North West Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Yorkshire & Humberside Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire East Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West of Midlands Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk East of England London Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley South East Avon & Somerset Devon & Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire South West Dyfed-Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Wales England & Wales 386 1,498 762 2,646 804 483 1,575 3,307 1,341 7,510 885 650 1,437 2,580 5,552 926 934 524 482 1,243 4,109 909 400 849 2,685 4,843 412 584 1,099 674 593 429 3,791 5,482 1,449 1,200 469 962 1,175 4,837 822 716 442 407 399 2,786 368 544 536 1,283 2,731 44,705

No ethnic code 6 30 39 75 15 15 63 165 55 313 3 12 89 88 192 43 6 1 3 38 91 29 4 18 156 207 15 4 14 138 34 16 221 532 17 0 14 26 34 90 37 10 17 3 0 67 8 13 57 65 143 1,932

Total starts 50 229 153 432 238 76 545 756 430 2,045 239 113 297 493 1,142 149 177 73 106 216 721 170 60 345 1,382 1,957 103 128 192 88 97 90 698 1,425 475 224 101 204 254 1,146 154 125 91 85 57 512 32 103 136 342 613 10,804

Performance: All Orders & Licences (Target = 95%) 98% 98% 95% 97% 98% 97% 95% 94% 96% 95% 100% 98% 94% 97% 97% 95% 99% 100% 99% 97% 98% 97% 99% 98% 94% 95% 95% 99% 98% 79% 94% 97% 94% 90% 97% 100% 95% 97% 97% 97% 95% 99% 96% 99% 100% 97% 98% 97% 90% 95% 95% 95%

26

8.

Sickness Absence - April to June 2006

From 1st July 2001, local areas were required to monitor sickness absence using a standard format and provide quarterly monitoring returns to the NPD. Reporting was increased to monthly in July 2002. The target for 2002/03 was 10 days sickness absence or fewer per employee per year. This was reduced to an average of 9 days per employee for 2003/04 and has remained at 9 days since. For the period April to June 2006, 12 areas achieved the target by having fewer than nine days sickness per staff year, compared with only 5 for 2005-06. A further 5 areas are achieving the old target by having fewer than 10 days. Twenty-eight areas exceeded 10 days.

The best performing areas were: • • • • Teesside and Lincolnshire (7.6) Suffolk (8) Sussex and West Mercia (8.2) Humberside (8.4)

The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • • London West (16.2) Hampshire (15.9) London East (13.8) Gloucestershire (13.7) (London South 13.2)

Details of area and regional performance are shown on the next page.

27

Sickness Absence, April - June 2006
Region Area Total DDA Long Short days related term term sickness sickness sickness lost 575 277 580 2555 3987 331 806 239 1375 320 384 624 287 452 339 2406 730 254 1403 744 624 3755 378 638 324 256 792 2387 594 269 854 1046 2762 1250 387 333 525 957 3451 1067 584 211 170 181 2212 506 639 761 657 2563 384 439 283 590 1696 26595 363 275 169 1658 2465 469 696 389 1554 323 248 345 552 247 83 1798 634 301 3007 962 1349 6252 489 329 109 235 856 2018 401 285 823 1014 2524 1078 747 246 306 769 3146 326 469 305 378 355 1833 1556 1758 1719 2111 7143 402 332 263 1143 2140 30872 83 0 63 24 170 6 266 0 272 4 42 0 0 19 19 83 73 17 0 62 103 255 66 43 10 204 0 323 0 0 66 135 201 0 3 121 0 19 143 122 102 55 0 35 314 0 0 0 64 64 0 0 0 54 54 1878 1020 552 812 4238 6622 806 1767 628 3201 647 674 969 839 717 441 4287 1437 572 4410 1768 2076 10262 933 1010 443 695 1648 4728 995 554 1743 2195 5487 2328 1137 700 831 1744 6740 1515 1155 571 548 571 4359 2062 2397 2480 2832 9770 786 771 546 1787 3889 59345 Average Performance Ave Ave Total Ave (Target = 9 days days staff days days days or years Short Long DDA - absence fewer) term term related 102 62 99 348 611 74 155 83 312 58 61 111 67 73 55 425 110 44 356 145 184 839 91 116 58 56 140 461 118 56 168 260 602 147 121 64 102 161 594 146 123 68 40 44 421 150 185 188 175 698 73 66 64 154 357 5319 5.6 4.5 5.9 7.3 6.5 4.5 5.2 2.9 4.4 5.5 6.3 5.6 4.3 6.2 6.2 5.7 6.7 5.8 3.9 5.1 3.4 4.5 4.2 5.5 5.5 4.6 5.7 5.2 5.0 4.8 5.1 4.0 4.6 8.5 3.2 5.2 5.2 6.0 5.8 7.3 4.8 3.1 4.2 4.1 5.3 3.4 3.4 4.1 3.8 3.7 5.3 6.6 4.4 3.8 4.7 5.0 3.5 4.4 1.7 4.8 4.0 6.4 4.5 4.7 5.0 5.6 4.1 3.1 8.3 3.4 1.5 4.2 5.8 6.8 8.4 6.6 7.3 7.4 5.4 2.8 1.9 4.2 6.1 4.4 3.4 5.1 4.9 3.9 4.2 7.3 6.2 3.8 3.0 4.8 5.3 2.2 3.8 4.5 9.4 8.0 4.4 10.4 9.5 9.2 12.1 10.2 5.5 5.0 4.1 7.4 6.0 5.8 0.8 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.2 3.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.4 10.0 8.9 8.2 12.2 10.8 Near miss Below Below Above

West Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub Total

North East

10.9 Above 11.4 Above 7.6 Below 10.3 11.2 11.1 8.7 12.6 9.8 8.0 10.1 13.1 13.0 12.4 12.2 11.3 12.2 10.3 8.7 7.6 12.5 11.8 10.3 8.4 9.9 10.4 8.4 9.1 15.9 9.4 10.9 8.2 10.9 11.4 10.4 9.4 8.4 13.7 12.9 10.4 13.8 12.9 13.2 16.2 14.0 10.8 11.7 8.5 11.6 10.9 11.2 Above Above Below Above Near miss Below Above Above Above Above Above Above Below Below Above Above Below Near miss Above Below Above Near miss Above Below Above Above Near miss Below Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Above Below Above

East

North West Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub Total East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub Total

Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub Total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub Total

South West Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub Total London London East London North London South London West London Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub Total ENGLAND & WALES

London Wales

28

9.

Victim Contact – April 2005 to March 2006

The NPS Business Plan makes it clear that the National Probation Service delivers services to victims as well as offenders. The National Standard for victim contact work is that probation areas should offer face-to-face contact between the victim (or family) and a member of the probation service (or agent) within 8 weeks of the offender being sentenced. The NPS target is to make initial contact within that timescale in 85% of all eligible cases. This was exceeded for the first time in 2003/04 and performance continued to improve during 2004/05 with 93% of victims contacted in accordance with the national standard. That high level of performance has almost been maintained in the end-of-year figure of 92% for 2005/06.

Period covered

Number of named victims

April 2001 to March 2002 April 2002 to March 2003 April 2003 to March 2004 April 2004 to March 2005 April 2005 to March 2006

15,041 15,904 15,647 15,539 15,715

Number of victims contacted within 8 weeks 9,523 12,949 14,276 14,504 14,474

Percentage of victims contacted 63% 81% 91% 93% 92%

Further analysis of the figures shows that: • • • 35 areas met or exceeded the 85% target Three areas were within 5% of the target Four areas fell short of the target by 10% or more

29

Victim Contact
All Cases, April 2005 - March 2006 Region Area Number of No. contacted Target Performance named within 8 weeks achieved (Target = victims 85%) 376 339 90% On or Above 217 211 97% On or Above 295 271 92% On or Above 1308 1287 98% On or Above 2196 2108 96% 490 267 113 870 293 182 240 182 236 140 1273 541 146 450 528 1102 2767 317 316 103 154 441 1331 300 216 560 665 1741 398 339 104 333 418 1592 301 114 99 157 328 999 2182 132 169 450 13 764 481 199 110 790 264 177 211 106 225 118 1101 527 136 413 472 1015 2563 289 312 100 147 424 1272 277 182 543 612 1614 319 319 95 318 319 1370 272 112 61 153 313 911 2043 130 161 399 12 702 98% On or Above 75% Below 97% On or Above 91% 90% 97% 88% 58% 95% 84% 86% 97% 93% 92% 89% 92% 93% 91% 99% 97% 95% 96% 96% 92% 84% 97% 92% 93% 80% 94% 91% 95% 76% 86% 90% 98% 62% 97% 95% 91% On or Above On or Above On or Above Below On or Above Near miss On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above Near miss On or Above On or Above Near miss On or Above On or Above On or Above Below On or Above On or Above Below On or Above On or Above

West Midlands Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands West of Midlands North East Northumbria Teesside County Durham North East Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk East of England Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Merseyside Greater Manchester North West

East

North West

East Midlands Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire East Midlands Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Yorkshire & Humberside Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley South East Avon & Somerset Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Devon/Cornwall South West London Wales Gwent North Wales South Wales Dyfed/Powys Wales

South East

South West

94% On or Above 98% 95% 89% 92% 92% On or Above On or Above On or Above On or Above

England & Wales Total

15715

14474

92%
30

10.

Court Report Timeliness – April to June 2006

The following new target for court report timeliness has been introduced for 2006-07: 90% of PSRs to be completed within the required time, i.e.: o o o on the day requested for fast delivery PSRs to magistrates’ courts; within 15 working days for standard delivery PSRs to magistrates’ courts, except where the offender is remanded in custody in which case the timescale is 10 working days; by the date set by the commissioning court for Crown Courts

The table overleaf shows by area the number of reports that were on target/not on target against the relevant timescales. These are aggregated in the final two columns to show overall performance. Based on the new method of measurement, the NPS completed 74% of court reports within the relevant timescale. For the Weighted Scorecard, performance against the 1-day target for FDRs is excluded. This is the first year that this approach has been used, so comparison with other years is not possible. The table below shows performance against the previous 15-day standard for completing PreSentence Reports (PSRs). Performance peaked in 2001-02 when this was a cash performancelinked measure and fell sharply in 2003-04. Performance for 2004/05 improved to 73%. 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 55% 58% 63% 68% 75% 79% 78% 65% 73%

Year

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05

No. provided in response to request 119,875 110,712 107,172

No. provided within 15 working days of request 93,322 72,141 78,754

% meeting standard 78% 65% 73%

31

Court Report Timeliness, April to June 2006
FDR - 1 day Region Area name SDR - 15 days SDR - RiC - 10 Crown - met days crt deadline On Not On Not On Not on On Not on Target on Target on Target Target Target Target Target Target

Total Total Total % On PerformOn Not on Reports Target ance Target Target (Target = 90%) 782 243 574 2156 3755 507 1365 743 2615 213 254 759 448 410 289 2373 549 324 2076 1139 1695 5783 653 750 388 356 1049 3196 662 432 949 1967 4010 933 681 307 526 470 2917 746 756 194 223 287 2206 2947 274 441 354 1106 2175 175 111 194 1106 1586 113 314 111 538 98 229 240 162 156 71 956 192 119 999 274 278 1862 156 45 93 91 169 554 176 108 309 301 894 457 328 156 273 507 1721 227 141 218 120 49 755 1688 57 58 196 216 527 957 354 768 3262 5341 620 1679 854 3153 311 483 999 610 566 360 3329 741 443 3075 1413 1973 7645 809 795 481 447 1218 3750 838 540 1258 2268 4904 1390 1009 463 799 977 4638 973 897 412 343 336 2961 4635 331 499 550 1322 2702 43058 82% 69% 75% 66% 70% Near miss Below Below Below

West of Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub-Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub-Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub-Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub-Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub-Total

177 71 108 205 561 114 519 204 837 72 40 114 144 161 21 552 131 83 822 390 379 1805 145 182 86 67 248 728 169 179 213 552 1113 376 78 17 128 63 662 34 236 7 49 65 391 1019 27 62 137 288 514 8182

7 0 17 731 755 23 197 13 233 6 6 8 41 116 6 183 3 18 764 50 54 889 10 10 4 35 15 74 77 58 29 2 166 168 85 83 73 162 571 55 32 31 76 20 214 1213 6 8 19 31 64

383 106 288 1127 1904 238 502 374 1114 87 103 419 240 126 180 1155 239 159 404 365 752 1919 307 406 205 206 533 1657 269 152 454 986 1861 265 389 194 246 232 1326 459 314 83 80 162 1098 949 176 239 106 463 984

138 99 98 252 587 51 81 52 184 78 199 204 105 26 54 666 163 86 178 199 217 843 128 25 69 48 93 363 55 33 209 249 546 221 195 57 180 308 961 112 73 174 32 20 411 290 39 45 158 114 356 5207

9 4 20 96 129 5 38 34 77 4 2 4 3 2 1 16 1 4 13 22 0 40 13 16 9 1 28 67 11 4 37 51 103 10 22 3 6 9 50 37 15 1 10 6 69 38 15 21 3 37 76 665

28 4 39 84 155 14 32 7 53 11 22 27 6 11 10 87 17 12 33 10 0 72 15 6 17 6 47 91 36 15 57 29 137 33 35 8 18 23 117 20 26 5 8 4 63 126 2 2 11 34 49 950

213 62 158 728 1161 150 306 131 587 50 109 222 61 121 87 650 178 78 837 362 564 2019 188 146 88 82 240 744 213 97 245 378 933 282 192 93 146 166 879 216 191 103 84 54 648 941 56 119 108 318 601 9163

2 8 40 39 89 25 4 39 68 3 2 1 10 3 1 20 9 3 24 15 7 58 3 4 3 2 14 26 8 2 14 21 45 35 13 8 2 14 72 40 10 8 4 5 67 59 10 3 8 37 58 562

North East

82% Near miss 81% Near miss 87% Near miss 83% 68% 53% 76% 73% 72% 80% 71% 74% 73% 68% 81% 86% 76% 81% 94% 81% 80% 86% 85% 79% 80% 75% 87% 82% 67% 67% 66% 66% 48% 63% 77% 84% 47% 65% 85% 75% Below Below Below Below Below Near miss

East of England

North West

Below Below Below Near miss Near miss

East Midlands

Near miss Above Near miss Near miss Near miss

Yorkshire & Humberside Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub-Total South East Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub-Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub-Total London Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub-Total

Below Near miss Below Near miss

Below Below Below Below Below Below Near miss Below Below Near miss

South West

London Wales

64% Below 83% 88% 64% 84% 80% Near miss Near miss Below Near miss

England & Wales Total

4362 13967

31977 11081

74% Below

32

11.

Employment – April to June 2006

In 2005-06 a shadow target was introduced for 15,000 unemployed offenders to find and keep employment or vocational training for four weeks during the course of their supervision. NPS areas encountered difficulties in reporting against this target, but based on the data available at year-end, a total of 9,126 offenders achieved the target outcome. For 2006-07 the single target has been replaced with: o o A Performance Target of 15,000 offenders placed into employment A Performance Measure of 12,000 offenders who are placed into employment and retain it for four weeks

After a slow start in April, performance against the Target has picked up to the point where the number of offenders placed into employment is running at 98% of the profiled target for the quarter.

Offenders into Employment against Profiled Target
Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 839 2104 3657 1250 2500 3750 5000 6250 7500 8750 10000 11250 12500 13750 15000 67% 84% 98%
Offenders into Employment, Cumulative, 2006/7

Actual Profile Percent

16000 14000

Actual 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 Profile

The best performing areas were: • • • • Avon & Somerset (217%) West Mercia (207%) Northamptonshire (182%) Dorset (182%)

The most serious under-achievers were: • • • • North Wales (6%) Hertfordshire (20%) South Yorkshire (31%) Greater Manchester (44%

Over the same period performance against the Measure (the number of offenders placed into employment which is retained for 4 weeks) is running at 78% of profile.

33

Offender Employment - April to June 2006

Region

Area name

Profiled Offenders Target into Employment

Target Achieved

Performance

Profiled Offenders Target Target into Achieved Employment Retained for 4 weeks 59 23 54 200 336 41 97 47 185 30 34 70 40 40 31 246 51 28 180 89 109 456 53 53 32 33 69 240 59 33 90 147 329 86 77 32 63 82 341 71 74 29 25 27 225 123 100 96 137 455 26 40 38 85 188 3000 73 12 19 184 288 56 79 47 182 17 18 111 0 54 26 226 57 30 39 41 0 167 35 89 19 24 82 249 22 65 22 48 157 180 11 8 34 71 304 131 62 24 13 33 263 93 68 90 73 324 43 37 22 83 185 2345 124% 52% 35% 92% 86%

Performance

West Midlands

Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Regional Sub-Total County Durham Northumbria Teesside Regional Sub-Total Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Norfolk Suffolk Regional Sub-Total Cheshire Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Regional Sub-Total Derbyshire Leicestershire & Rutland Lincolnshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire Regional Sub-Total Humberside North Yorkshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Regional Sub-Total Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Regional Sub-Total Avon & Somerset Devon/Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Wiltshire Regional Sub-Total London North London West London East London South London Sub Total Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Regional Sub-Total

73 29 68 250 420 51 121 59 231 37 42 88 50 50 39 307 63 35 225 111 136 570 67 66 40 42 86 300 74 42 112 184 412 107 97 40 79 103 426 89 92 36 31 34 281 154 125 120 171 569 33 49 47 106 235 3750

84 19 139 145 387 36 210 62 308 52 44 143 10 60 32 341 63 42 99 163 91 458 61 111 44 76 154 446 64 66 35 104 269 173 44 32 90 101 440 192 95 65 45 34 431 94 70 113 106 383 54 30 3 107 194 3657

115% 66% 204% 58% 92%

Above Below Above Below

Above Below Below Near miss

North East

71% Below 173% Above 105% Above 133% 139% 105% 162% 20% 119% 82% 111% 100% 121% 44% 146% 67% 80% 92% 169% 110% 182% 179% 149% 86% 159% 31% 57% 65% 161% 46% 80% 114% 98% 103% 217% 103% 181% 146% 100% 153% 61% 56% 95% 62% 67% 165% 61% 6% 101% 82% 98% Above Above Above Below Above Below Above Above Below Above Below Near miss Above Above Above Above Below Above Below Below Above Below Below Above Near miss Above Above Above Above Above Below Below Near miss Below Above Below Below Above

138% Above 81% Below 100% Above 98% 57% 54% 158% 0% 134% 84% 92% 113% 108% 22% 46% 0% 37% 66% 169% 60% 72% 119% 104% 37% 196% 24% 33% 48% 209% 14% 25% 54% 86% 89% 185% 84% 84% 53% 121% 117% 76% 68% 94% 53% 71% 164% 94% 59% 98% 98% 78% Below Below Above Below Above Below Above Above Below Below Below Below Above Below Below Above Below Above Below Below Above Below Below Below Below Above Below Below Below Above Below Below Near miss Below Above Near miss Below Near miss

East

North West

East Midlands

Yorkshire & Humberside

South East

South West

London

Wales

England & Wales Total

34

12.

Weighted Scorecard

The recently issued PC 28/06 referred to the weighted scorecard for 2006-07. The scorecard was designed to be a flexible, evolving system for assessing performance. It is reviewed regularly to ensure it is fit for purpose; the targets and their weightings are adjusted to reflect the prevailing priorities. There are a number of changes to the scorecard for 2006-07. Firstly, the performance against family group average has been removed. This was a useful and valid component of the scorecard at a time when targets were very stretching as it gave a more realistic, achievable goal and credited areas that achieved it. It provided the incentive for areas to perform as well as they could despite, in some cases, the knowledge that they could not achieve the target. Now that the situation has been reversed (and most areas meet their targets) it can be regarded as having served its purpose. Its removal will make for better transparency of the system and will do away with the arguments about the fairness of family group composition. Secondly, the indicators that make up the scorecard have been grouped into four categories that best describe the work of the NPS. The table below shows how the KPIs have been grouped.

Offender Management Enforcement Compliance Court report timeliness

Interventions OBP completions Skills for life referrals Employment gained DRR completions Unpaid work completions

Public Protection High risk asessments PPO assessments

Efficiency & Effectiveness Complete, timely ethnic data Sickness absence

The scores, which relate solely to performance against target, are presented for each of these categories along with the overall performance (an aggregate of the four) for each area, upon which the ranking is based. Other than losing the performance against family average element, the methodology has remained unchanged. It is merely presented in a different, more informative and helpful way. This has the advantage of showing, at a glance, in which areas of the business the strengths and weaknesses lie, both at a national and local level.

35

Weighted Scorecard Q1, 2006-07
Area name Offender Interventions Public Efficiency Overall Position Management Protection and Performance effectiveness -5 -17 4 -9 -7 -13 -21 -10 -5 -12 -17 14 -2 -11 -16 -27 -16 -8 -10 16 -13 -21 -21 -7 -44 -13 -17 -23 -7 -55 -16 -16 -15 -14 -10 2 -28 -42 -37 0 -49 -21 -27 -44 -34 -746 14 28 0 -16 -14 16 4 13 9 21 -6 -30 -13 -16 -2 28 -29 -6 3 -32 -9 -10 -21 -13 -1 -17 -36 9 -15 6 -45 -23 -20 -27 -9 -52 -19 -33 -18 -30 -35 -22 -53 -55 -59 -639 8 19 23 23 22 23 23 9 16 6 11 7 6 19 16 -2 13 20 -34 6 0 -6 -5 -10 13 23 2 -2 -17 6 2 -6 -4 -1 -13 -24 -33 -8 -18 -51 4 -12 -12 -14 -17 34 11 -8 -6 19 15 -12 5 -4 -12 -11 7 0 -6 -7 -13 -15 9 -35 10 -21 -12 2 11 -7 -6 -32 11 -28 -7 -5 7 -8 -18 -18 -31 10 10 7 -6 0 -9 -46 -11 0 -59 -318 29 22 21 17 16 15 11 8 7 5 -5 -9 -14 -15 -16 -17 -22 -29 -31 -31 -33 -35 -36 -37 -38 -39 -41 -44 -47 -48 -53 -54 -58 -59 -63 -65 -70 -76 -80 -82 -89 -101 -103 -112 -169 -1670 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

Leicestershire & Rutland Nottinghamshire Wiltshire Lincolnshire Humberside Gloucestershire Dorset Northumbria South Wales Bedfordshire Devon & Cornwall Staffordshire Derbyshire Merseyside Cumbria Lancashire Sussex London East Essex Dyfed/Powys Cheshire North Yorkshire Warwickshire Gwent Northamptonshire London South West Mercia Hampshire Avon & Somerset Thames Valley Teesside Surrey Greater Manchester West Midlands London North Suffolk Kent West Yorkshire Norfolk County Durham South Yorkshire London West North Wales Cambridgeshire Hertfordshire Overall Performance

36

50

BAND 1

0

BAND 2

-50

BAND 3

-100 BAND 4

-150

BAND 5

-200

Leicestershire & Rutland Nottinghamshire Wiltshire Lincolnshire Humberside Gloucestershire Dorset Northumbria South Wales Bedfordshire Devon & Cornw all Staffordshire Derbyshire Merseyside Cumbria Lancashire Sussex London East Essex Dyfed/Pow ys Cheshire North Yorkshire Warw ickshire Gw ent Northamptonshire London South West Mercia Hampshire Avon & Somerset Thames Valley Teesside Surrey Greater Manchester West Midlands London North Suffolk Kent West Yorkshire Norfolk County Durham South Yorkshire London West North Wales Cambridgeshire Hertfordshire

37