Official Statistics
Compendium of re-offending statistics and analysis - CSV tables
Updated 11 July 2013
Download CSV 96.2 KB
| PAPER 1 |
|---|
| Table A1: Proven re-offending outcomes for matched pairs of offenders where one sentencing type is an immediate custodial sentence in England and Wales, for 2009 and 2010¹² |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Immediate Custody (less than 12 months) † |
| Community Orders |
| Difference |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Immediate Custody (less than 12 months) † |
| Suspended Sentence Orders |
| Difference |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Immediate Custody (less than 12 months) † |
| Court Orders (Community Orders and SSOs) |
| Difference |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Immediate Custody (less than 12 months) † |
| Immediate Custody (1 to 4 years) |
| Difference |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Immediate Custody (less than or equal to 6 months) |
| Immediate Custody (more than 6 to less than 12 months) † |
| Difference |
| *** Significant at the 0.1% level, ** Significant at the 1% level, * Significant at the 5% level |
| ¹ Differences in proven re-offending rate and proven re-offending custody rate between sentences are expressed in percentage points. |
| ² Differences in proven re-offending frequency rate between sentences are expressed in terms of number of re-offences per offender. |
| ³ The proven re-offending custody rate refers to the proportion of re-offenders only. |
| † Indicates the sentence designated the 'treatment' group for the comparison. |
| Table A2: Proven re-offending outcomes for matched pairs of offenders for sentences other than custodial in England and Wales, for 2009 and 2010¹² |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Community Orders |
| Suspended Sentence Orders † |
| Difference |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Community Orders |
| Conditional Discharges † |
| Difference |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Community Orders † |
| Fines (recorded by the police) |
| Difference |
| Matched pairs (and unmatched 'treated' offenders) |
| Fines (recorded by the police) |
| Conditional Discharges † |
| Difference |
| *** Significant at the 0.1% level, ** Significant at the 1% level, * Significant at the 5% level |
| ¹ Differences in proven re-offending rate and proven re-offending custody rate between sentences are expressed in percentage points. |
| ² Differences in proven re-offending frequency rate between sentences are expressed in terms of number of re-offences per offender. |
| ³ The proven re-offending custody rate refers to the proportion of re-offenders only. |
| † Indicates the sentence designated the 'treatment' group for the comparison. |
| Table A3: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with similar, matched offenders receiving a community order in England and Wales, for 2010. |
| Days into one year follow-up period |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table A4: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with similar, matched offenders receiving a suspended sentence order in England and Wales, for 2010. |
| Days into one year follow-up period |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table A5: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with similar, matched offenders receiving a court order in England and Wales, for 2010. |
| Days into one year follow-up period |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table A6: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with similar, matched offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence of between 1 and 4 years in |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table A7: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders recieving an immediate custodial sentence of more than 6 to less than 12 months compared with similar, matched offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence of less than |
| Days into one year follow-up period |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table A8: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders who received a suspended sentence order compared with similar, matched offenders receiving a community order, in England and Wales, for 2010. |
| Days into one year follow-up period |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table A9: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders who received a conditional discharge compared with similar, matched offenders receiving a community order, in England and Wales, for 2010. |
| Days into one year follow-up period |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table A10: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders who received a community order compared with similar, matched offenders receiving a fine, in England and Wales, for 2010. |
| Days into one year follow-up period |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table A11: Re-offending rates over the one year follow-up period, for offenders who received a conditional discharge compared with similar, matched offenders receiving a fine, in England and Wales, for 2010. |
| Days into one year follow-up period |
| 30 |
| 60 |
| 90 |
| 120 |
| 150 |
| 180 |
| 210 |
| 240 |
| 270 |
| 300 |
| 330 |
| 365 |
| Table B1: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with matched offenders receiving a community order in England and Wales, for 2010 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B2: Re-offending comparisons offenders who received an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with offenders receiving a suspended sentence order in England and Wales, for 2010 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B3: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with matched offenders receiving a court order, for 2010. |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B4: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with matched offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence of between 1 and 4 years in England and Wales, for 2010 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B5: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial of less than or equal to 6 months compared with matched offenders receiving immediate custodial sentences of more than 6 to less than 12 months in England and Wales, for 2010 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B6: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received a community order compared with matched offenders receiving a suspended sentence order in England and Wales, for 2010 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B7: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received a conditional discharge compared with matched offenders receiving a community order in England and Wales, for 2010 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B8: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received a fine compared with matched offenders receiving a community order in England and Wales, for 2010 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B9: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received a fine compared with matched offenders receiving a conditional discharge in England and Wales, for 2010 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B10: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with matched offenders receiving a community order, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B11: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with matched offenders receiving a suspended sentence order, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B12: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with offenders receiving a court order, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B13: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial sentence of less than 12 months compared with offenders receiving immediate custodial sentences of between 1 and 4 years, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B14: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received an immediate custodial of less than or equal to 6 months compared with offenders receiving immediate custodial sentences of more than 6 to less than 12 months, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B15: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received a community order compared with offenders receiving a suspended sentence order, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B16: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received a conditional discharge compared with offenders receiving a community order, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B17: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received a fine compared with offenders receiving a community order, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table B18: Re-offending comparisons of offenders who received a fine compared with offenders receiving a conditional discharge, for 2009 |
| All offenders |
| Males |
| Females |
| Age at index offence |
| 18-20 |
| 21-24 |
| 25-29 |
| 30-34 |
| 35-39 |
| 40-44 |
| 45-49 |
| 50 and over |
| Number of previous conviction events |
| 0 |
| 01-Feb |
| 03-Jun |
| 07-Oct |
| Nov-14 |
| 15 or more |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 or more |
| Notes: Significance tests have not been performed on the differences in this table. |
| Table C1: Logistic regression model output showing the statistically significant offender and offence characteristics that affect offenders receiving a custodial sentencing outcome, for 2010; England and Wales |
| Offender Characteristics |
| Ethnicity |
| White |
| Black |
| Asian |
| Other |
| Unknown |
| Gender |
| Male |
| Female |
| Criminal History |
| Number of previous offences |
| Number of previous Tier 1 offences |
| Number of previous Tier 2 offences |
| Number of previous Tier 3 offences |
| Copas Rate |
| Age at first offence |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| Number of previous court orders |
| Number of previous convictions |
| Number of previous cautions |
| Index Offence |
| Violence |
| Robbery |
| Public order or riot |
| Sexual |
| Sexual (Child) |
| Sexual (Soliciting or Prostitution) |
| Domestic burglary |
| Other burglary |
| Theft |
| Handling |
| Fraud and forgery |
| Absconding or bail offences |
| Taking and driving away and related offences |
| Theft from vehicles |
| Other motoring offences |
| Drink driving offences |
| Criminal or malicious damage |
| Drugs import/export/ production/supply |
| Drugs possession/small scale supply |
| Other |
| Tier 1 Severity |
| Tier 2 Severity |
| Tier 3 Severity |
| Age |
| Constant |
| Table C2: Logistic regression model output showing the statistically significant offender and offence characteristics that affect offenders receiving a sentencing outcome other than immediate custody, for 2010; England and Wales |
| Offender Characteristics |
| Ethnicity |
| White |
| Black |
| Asian |
| Other |
| Unknown |
| Gender |
| Male |
| Female |
| Criminal History |
| Number of previous offences |
| Number of previous Tier 1 offences |
| Number of previous Tier 2 offences |
| Number of previous Tier 3 offences |
| Copas Rate |
| Age at first offence |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| Number of previous court orders |
| Number of previous convictions |
| Number of previous cautions |
| Index Offence |
| Violence |
| Robbery |
| Public order or riot |
| Sexual |
| Sexual (Child) |
| Sexual (Soliciting or Prostitution) |
| Domestic burglary |
| Other burglary |
| Theft |
| Handling |
| Fraud and forgery |
| Absconding or bail offences |
| Taking and driving away and related offences |
| Theft from vehicles |
| Other motoring offences |
| Drink driving offences |
| Criminal or malicious damage |
| Drugs import/export/ production/supply |
| Drugs possession/small scale supply |
| Other |
| Tier 1 Severity |
| Tier 2 Severity |
| Tier 3 Severity |
| Age |
| Constant |
| Table C3: Logistic regression model output showing the statistically significant offender and offence characteristics that affect offenders receiving a custodial sentencing outcome, for 2009; England and Wales |
| Offender Characteristics |
| Ethnicity |
| White |
| Black |
| Asian |
| Other |
| Unknown |
| Gender |
| Male |
| Female |
| Criminal History |
| Number of previous offences |
| Number of previous Tier 1 offences |
| Number of previous Tier 2 offences |
| Copas Rate |
| Age at first offence |
| Number of previous custodial sentences |
| Number of previous court orders |
| Number of previous convictions |
| Number of previous cautions |
| Index Offence |
| Violence |
| Robbery |
| Public order or riot |
| Sexual |
| Sexual (Child) |
| Sexual (Soliciting or Prostitution) |
| Domestic burglary |
| Other burglary |
| Theft |
| Handling |
| Fraud and forgery |
| Absconding or bail offences |
| Taking and driving away and related offences |
| Theft from vehicles |
| Other motoring offences |
| Drink driving offences |
| Criminal or malicious damage |
| Drugs import/export/ production/supply |
| Drugs possession/small scale supply |
| Other |
| Tier 1 Severity |
| Tier 2 Severity |
| Tier 3 Severity |
| Age |
| Constant |
| Table C4: Logistic regression model output showing the statistically significant offender and offence characteristics that affect offenders receiving a sentencing outcome other than immediate custody, for 2009; England and Wales |
| Offender Characteristics |
| Ethnicity |
| White |
| Black |
| Asian |
| Other |