RACE & ETHNIC MONITORING – ACHIEVING QUALITY DATA AND EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF 2001 16+1 CENSUS CATEGORISATION

PURPOSE
To ensure that all areas have implemented the classification of offenders and staff in accordance with the ‘16+1’ Census 2001 categories. To seek actions aimed at improving the quality of race ethnicity data.

Probation Circular
REFERENCE NO: 60/2004 ISSUE DATE: 30 December 2004 IMPLEMENTATION DATE: Immediate EXPIRY DATE: December 2009 TO: Chairs of Probation Boards Chief Officers of Probation Secretaries of Probation Boards CC: Board Treasurers Regional Managers AUTHORISED BY: Roger McGarva, Head of Regions & Performance Management ATTACHED: N/A

ACTION
Board chairs and Chief Officers are asked to ensure that they are recording, collating and returning data on ethnicity to RDS and NPD based on the Census 2001 classification. Boards must examine their data and have an action plan in place to improve performance. Specific actions as stated on page 3 should be taken.

SUMMARY
RDS publish information on the number of offenders commencing penalties by ethnic group. A circular was issued in January 2004 to alert areas that as a consequence of the correct information not being available to RDS, no data on the ethnicity of offenders for the period after September 2001 had been available for publication. Boards were asked to take immediate actions to remedy the situation. RDS has again been unable to publish national data on the ethnicity of offenders for the period January to March 2004, because the data collected for the relevant period was not sufficiently complete due to local recording problems in a number of probation areas. The NPS will have a target on the collection of race and ethnic monitoring data in 2005-06 and it will be included in the weighted scorecard.

RELEVANT PREVIOUS PROBATION CIRCULARS
PC09/2004, PC12/2002, PC55/2002

CONTACT FOR ENQUIRIES
Daniel.Smith44@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk or tel: 020 7217 8095

National Probation Directorate
Horseferry House, Dean Ryle Street, London, SW1P 2AW General Enquiries: 020 7217 0659 Fax: 020 7217 0660

Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection

BACKGROUND
The ‘16+1’ census classification of race and ethnicity became mandatory in April 2003. PC152/2001 asked Chief Officers/Boards to begin to make arrangements to classify the race and ethnicity of all new staff members as of 2 January 2002 and to reclassify all existing staff members by 31 March 2002 in accordance with the 16+ 1 Census 2001 and to make similar arrangements for offenders. A timetable was designed to comply with the overall deadline for criminal justice agencies. The timetable was revised by PC12/2002 to take into account the difficulties some criminal justice agencies were facing in regard to the time-scale for migrating their IT systems to cope with the new categories. PC09/2004 asked Board Chairs/Chief Officers to ensure that all commencement data for the period 1 January 2004 onwards sent to RDS on the Quarterly Probation Listings contain current 2001 ethnic classification. The current situation indicates that the NPS is yet to achieve the required performance on this.

CURRENT DATA PROBLEMS
Poor quality and missing data on ethnicity has been evidenced by a variety of sources: • • • • • In the NPS and NPD Second Year Review of Race Equality Schemes no area provided all the information required on the monitoring of staff by ethnic background. The Human Resource Workforce Profile Report published November 2004 concluded that whilst the overall number of staff identified as ‘Not Stated’ is reasonably low at 7.5% across the NPS, there are regions with higher figures i.e. East Midlands (17.15), London (15.6%), South East (9.8%) and Yorkshire & Humberside (7.6%) A recent exercise looking at ICCP and diversity identified that the quality of race data collection remains an issue with over 500 cases where no race data was recorded. RDS data for April to June 2004 shows that the overall situation regarding missing data has improved (5.2% missing for court order commencements and 9% missing for pre/post release commencements in the second quarter of 2004), but in some areas the situation had worsened slightly compared to the previous quarter. The table on page 4 identifies those areas demonstrating real achievement (less than one per cent missing) and those where an urgent improvement action plan is required (more than 7 per cent missing). (published September 04)

SPECIFIC ACTIONS
1. All Board Chairs/Chief Officers are asked to examine their performance and satisfy themselves that they have implemented effectively the 16+1 census classification of race and ethnic monitoring. 2. Board Chairs/Chief Officers of the areas identified as under-performing i.e. those in table 1 should provide the NPD with an improvement action plan by 31 March 2005. The Head of Diversity will be writing individually to the Chairs/Chief Officers of these areas by 31 December 04. 3. Board Chairs/Chief Officers in the categories with missing data over 5% should have improvement action plan within their 05/06 business plans 4. All Board Chairs/Chief Officers should pay particular attention to those areas that have been identified as delivering effective outcome on this issue and where applicable areas should include practical steps to learn/share practices and include evidence of this in improvement plans. 5. ‘Not Stated’ Category/Refusals issues. There are noticeable large numbers of refusals from some areas. Whilst acknowledging the challenges around the ‘Not Stated’ category, the NPD is increasingly concerned that we do not know the basis for determining this categorisation. We need some intelligence to determine what lies behind the ‘Not Stated’ identification. Is it a refusal? Is it a lack of opportunity to categorise? Board Chairs/Chief Officers should ensure that a distinction is made between those who genuinely refuse and those who are not asked at all. This is of particular relevance in determining potential causes of the problem and devising appropriate solutions. A National Policy on this issue will be determined shortly. Should further clarification or discussion regarding any aspect of this circular be necessary, please contact Diane Baderin on 020 7217 0739.

PC60/2004 – Race & Ethnic Monitoring – Achieving Quality Data and Effective Implementation of 2001 16+1 Census Categorisation

2

Persons commencing supervision by the Probation Service, April 2004 - June 2004 Court orders Table 1
Total commenci ng Ethnic code missing % with missing code Refusa ls % refusals Total commenci ng Ethnic code missing

Licences
% with missing code Refusa ls % refusal s

Over all % Missi ng

Areas with high missing rates Inner London Dorset Outer London Bedfordshire Essex Hertfordshire Nottinghamsh ire Merseyside Thames Valley Table 2 1,110 308 2,701 421 885 574 873 1,484 950 325 54 384 54 120 44 86 122 73 29.3 17.5 14.2 12.8 13.6 7.7 9.9 8.2 7.7 7 0 24 0 4 3 7 4 4 0.6 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.3 0.4 586 96 871 104 241 119 279 458 208 246 33 217 23 32 21 14 27 12 42.0 34.4 24.9 22.1 13.3 17.6 5.0 5.9 5.8 2 3 10 1 0 0 4 0 1 0.3 3.1 1.1 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.5 33.7 21.5 16.8 14.7 13.5 9.4 8.7 7.7 7.3

Areas with very low missing rates Durham Kent Dyfed-Powys West Yorkshire Wiltshire North Yorkshire Cumbria Teesside Gwent Lancashire England and Wales 463 674 298 2,345 277 510 388 684 482 1,221 36,150 0 0 0 3 1 0 2 1 2 10 1,884 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.8 5.2 0 5 0 16 2 0 1 1 0 1 167 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.5 88 350 53 636 51 134 138 173 118 312 12,240 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 3 1 1 1,098 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.7 0.8 0.3 9.0 0 26 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 2 105 0.0 7.4 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 6.2

(These figures are slightly different to those published in Performance Report 14. This is due to revised, corrected data received by RDS)

PC60/2004 – Race & Ethnic Monitoring – Achieving Quality Data and Effective Implementation of 2001 16+1 Census Categorisation

3