Closed consultation

Local Criminal Justice Boards (LCJBs) - Call for Evidence

Published 8 January 2024

Introduction

1.This Call for Evidence is seeking evidence from all parties with an interest in Local Criminal Justice Boards (LCJBs) to better understand the challenges that LCJBs face and how they can best be supported.

2.This Call for Evidence is aimed at, but not limited to, the following individuals: - LCJB administration staff - Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs), as chairs of the Boards - Local representatives from Police Forces - Local representatives from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) - Local representatives from His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) - Local representatives from His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS), representing the Probation Service, the Prison Service, and the Youth Custody Service - Local representatives from the Youth Offending Team (YOT) - Local representatives from the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) - Legal professionals from the defence community - Victim and witness service providers - Representatives from other rehabilitation service providers, for example, health or Local Authorities - Other individuals who have had interactions with an LCJB and/or have an interest in their operation without being a member

3.This list is not exhaustive or exclusive, and responses are welcomed from anyone with an interest in this Call for Evidence.

4. Evidence gathered as part of this Call for Evidence is intended to be used to inform future policy proposals relating to LCJBs.

5. Where possible, respondents should answer questions as individuals, rather than as a collective LCJB or organisation. Where individuals are part of, or have an interest in, multiple LCJBs they are free to respond in relation to one or multiple LCJBs and can indicate which LCJB(s) their response relates to in the ‘About You’ section. Respondents are only required to respond to questions they feel are relevant to them.

Background to this Call for Evidence

6. LCJBs are a dedicated forum for organisations across the CJS to come together to work in the common interest, and in partnership, to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the CJS at a local level.

7. There are 41 LCJBs in operation, which are predominantly aligned to Police Force Areas (PFA). In Wales, in addition to the 4 PFA boards, there is the “Criminal Justice Board for Wales” which brings together the 4 LCJBs with senior representatives from wider partners such as the Welsh Government.

8. National Guidance for LCJBs[1] sets out that LCJBs should comprise of local decision makers, including representatives from the Police, CPS, Police and Crime Commissioner, HMCTS, Legal Aid Agency, the defence, Prison Service, Probation, and the NHS. A member of the judiciary or magistracy should be invited to attend the LCJB, noting that the judiciary or magistracy can only comment on the operational impacts for the courts, not on policy and are in no way accountable to the LCJB.

9. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is responsible for the relationship between the Criminal Justice Board and LCJBs. The Criminal Justice Board brings together criminal justice leaders at a national level, to maintain oversight of the system and promote a collaborative approach to addressing its challenges.

10. Over the past four years the MoJ has significantly increased its engagement with LCJBs and local leaders to better understand and support them.

11. For example, in response to recommendations set out in part two of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Review[2], in March 2023 the MoJ renewed the National Guidance for LCJBs[3] and in October 2023, the Home Office and MoJ jointly published data sharing guidance[4] and a template memorandum of understanding[5] to support local data sharing. Part two of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) review also recommended LCJBs be placed on a statutory footing, with PCCs as chairs, and this recommendation will be taken forward when Parliamentary time allows.

12. However, in recognition that there are still challenges faced by LCJBs which require greater investigation, we are conducting this Call for Evidence.

13. Evidence collected as part of this Call for Evidence will be considered in conjunction with other work relating to LCJBs, including user research relating to local data use and data tools, and in light of the new duty in the Victims and Prisoners Bill for Police and Crime Commissioners to convene criminal justice bodies to review Victims’ Code compliance within their area, which in practice we expect will be delivered through Local Criminal Justice Boards.

A Welsh language version of this Call for Evidence is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/local-criminal-justice-board-call-for-evidence

Questions

1. LCJB Structure

We want to understand how LCJBs fit within the landscape of the local CJS and how this positioning impacts the ability of LCJBs to effectively perform their role. Anecdotal evidence suggests that LCJBs often differ in how they are structured and how they engage with other local groups. We want to understand which structures are most effective, and how existing engagement between LCJBs and other local groups could be improved.

1. Does the LCJB in your area have any sub-groups, either operational or strategic, which feed in or out of the LCJB (e.g. Victims and Witnesses task and finish groups)? [Yes/No]

• a. If yes; please describe these sub-groups.

2. Does the LCJB in your area engage with other local CJS groups (e.g. Court User Groups?) or non-CJS groups (e.g. Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hubs) and/ or other LCJBs? [Yes/No]

• a. Please describe this engagement, for example what is the purpose of this engagement?

• b. In your opinion, how beneficial is this engagement? [very beneficial/fairly beneficial/not very beneficial/not at all beneficial]

• c. In your opinion, do you have any challenges with engagement? How could these challenges be overcome?

3. LCJBs, in general, are well placed in the local CJS to drive local improvements. [strongly agree/agree/neither agree nor disagree/disagree/strongly disagree]

• a. Please describe changes that could be made so that LCJBs are better placed to drive local improvements?
• b. The arrangement of LCJBs at Police Force Area Level is the most effective arrangement. [strongly agree/agree/neither agree nor disagree/disagree/strongly disagree]
• c. Please explain your answer to question 3.c.

4. Are there any changes you would make to the membership of the LCJB in your local area?

2. LCJB Administration

We want to understand the administrative and resourcing capabilities of LCJBs. We are specifically interested in proposed solutions to any challenges. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some local areas consider that additional funding is required for LCJBs to operate most effectively, and we would like to understand the specific areas where funding would be beneficial if it were to be available at some point in the future.

5. Are there any challenges related to the administration of the LCJB in your local area? [Yes/No]

• a. If yes; please describe these challenges and what changes are required for the LCJB in your area to overcome these challenges?

6. The LCJB in your area is well-resourced. [strongly agree/agree/neither agree nor disagree/disagree/strongly disagree]

• a. If applicable; why not? And what changes are required for the LCJB in your area to be well-resourced?

7. If extra funding were to become available in future years, are there any aspects of the LCJB in your area that this would benefit? [Yes/No]

• a. If yes; please describe which aspects and why?

• b. Please describe any opportunities where extra funding could drive efficiencies and savings.

3. LCJB Delivery and Decision Making

We want to better understand how LCJBs set priorities, problem solve and make decisions related to their operation and local CJS area. We are also interested in how the responsibilities and purpose of LCJBs is understood.

8. The responsibilities and purpose of the LCJB in your area clear [strongly agree/agree/neither agree nor disagree/disagree/strongly disagree]

• a. If applicable; please describe what is unclear and why?

LCJB priority setting

We want to understand the process of priority setting within LCJBs, including the considerations that inform these decisions.

9.    Does the LCJB in your area have a plan or set of priorities? [Yes/No]

• a. If yes; how do you agree these priorities? Do they align to the Police and Crime Plan?
• b. If no; why not?

LCJB decision making

We are interested in how LCJBs make decisions, the challenges that are faced, and the potential solutions to overcome them. We also want to better understand the relationship between national priorities and projects and how these impact LCJB decisions. Anecdotal evidence suggests that LCJBs differ in their approaches to decision making, and that there can be challenges related to unblocking local CJS issues.  

10. Please describe the main influences on the decision making of the LCJB in your area.

11. Does the LCJB in your area face any challenges when making decisions? [Yes/No]

• a. If yes; please describe these challenges and what changes could be made to enable the LCJB to overcome these challenges?

12. In your opinion, how much influence should national priorities and projects have on an LCJB’s decision making? [a lot of influence/some influence/no influence at all]

• a. How should national priorities and projects influence an LCJB’s decision making?

LCJB problem solving

We are interested in how LCJBs problem solve and any challenges that they face when doing this. We also want to gain greater insight into the relationship between the national and local CJS, specifically when raising local concerns and driving national priorities.

13. Does the LCJB in your area enable you to solve local problems? [Yes/No]?

• a. If no; what changes could the LCJB in your area make to enable you to solve local issues more easily?

14. In your opinion, are there any challenges with raising local concerns nationally? [Yes/No]

• a. If yes; what are the challenges and what changes could be made to resolve these challenges?

15. LCJBs are an effective vehicle through which national policy initiatives can be taken forward. [strongly agree/agree/neither agree nor disagree/disagree/strongly disagree] - a. If applicable; why not? And what would you change about LCJBs to make them an effective vehicle to do this?

4. LCJB Data Use and Performance Management

Some work has been done to support LCJBs to use data, for example the recent publication of Data Sharing Guidance by the Home Office and MoJ in October 2023. Additionally, user research is being conducted to understand local data use and data tools. However, we want to gain further insight into how LCJBs manage performance of the local CJS and use data.

Performance management

Anecdotal evidence indicates LCJBs are a critical forum to drive local CJS improvements, so we want to understand the extent to which LCJBs have a collective understanding of what good performance of their local CJS looks like and how performance is managed.

16. The LCJB in your area has a shared understanding about what good performance looks like in the local area. [strongly agree/agree/neither agree nor disagree/disagree/strongly disagree]

• a. If applicable; please describe the LCJB’s view of good performance and how this shared understanding was established?

• b. If applicable; what would enable the LCJB to establish this shared understanding?

17. Please describe how the LCJB in your area manages local performance to drive improvements?

Data use

Anecdotal evidence suggests that LCJBs use data to make decisions and influence action within the local CJS. We want to understand how LCJBs are using data and whether there are any challenges associated with providing, using or analysing CJS and non-CJS data.

18. What role does data play in the LCJB in your local area? E.g. do you use it to influence LCJB priorities?

19. Do you provide and/or analyse data from or for the LCJB in your area? [Yes/No]

• a. If yes; If you encounter any challenges with analysis, please describe them here and describe what you think could solve these issues?

20. What data is used by the LCJB in your local area and why?

Data sharing

We want to understand if current data sharing processes within LCJBs are effective, and if not, gain further insight into the barriers that are restricting the sharing of useful CJS and non-CJS data at a local level.

21. Do you feel that current data sharing arrangements within the LCJB in your area meet the needs of both the LCJB and individual organisations? [Yes/No]

• a. If no; in your opinion, what could be done to meet your data sharing needs?

Additional comments or suggestions

22. If you have any other suggestions for radical reform, improvements or recommendations, please include these here. For example, how national CJS organisations could improve their support for LCJBs.

Thank you for participating in this Call for Evidence exercise.

About you

This section is optional should you wish for your response to be anonymous. However, should you wish to provide these details, please use this section to tell us about yourself.

Full Name :

Job title or capacity in which you are responding to this Call for Evidence exercise (e.g. member of the public etc.) :

Date :

Organisation/agency name (if applicable) :

Email Address :

Region :

1. London
2. North East
3. North West
4. Yorkshire
5. East Midlands
6. West Midlands
7. South East
8. East of England
9. South West
10. Wales

LCJB(s) within the respondent’s area [multiple choice] :

1. Avon and Somerset
2. Bedfordshire
3. Cambridgeshire
4. Cheshire
5. Cleveland
6. Cumbria
7. Derbyshire
8. Devon and Cornwall
9. Dorset
10. Durham
11. Dyfed Powys
12. Essex
13. Gloucestershire
14. Greater Manchester
15. Gwent
16. Hampshire & IoW
17. Hertfordshire
18. Humberside
19. Kent
20. Lancashire
21. Leicestershire
22. Lincolnshire
23. London
24. Merseyside
25. Norfolk and Suffolk
26. North Wales
27. North Yorkshire
28. Northamptonshire
29. Northumbria
30. Nottinghamshire
31. South Wales
32. South Yorkshire
33. Staffordshire
34. Surrey
35. Sussex
36. Thames Valley
37. Warwickshire
38. West Mercia
39. West Midlands
40. West Yorkshire
41. Wiltshire

If you would like us to acknowledge receipt of your response, please respond yes :

Email address to which the acknowledgement should be sent, if different from above :

Representative groups

If you are a representative of a group or providing a co-ordinated response on behalf of a group, please tell us the name of the group and give a summary of the people or organisations that represented in your response.

Please confirm if you are happy to be contacted for follow-up discussion:

YES              NO

Contact details and how to respond

Please send your response by 23 February 2024 via the online survey. If you are unable to complete the survey online and would like to provide your response via email, please email this to lcjb.evidence@justice.gov.uk

Complaints or comments

If you have any complaints or comments about this Call for Evidence process, you should contact the Criminal Justice System Insights team.

Email: lcjb.evidence@justice.gov.uk  

CJS Insights Team

Ministry of Justice

102 Petty France

London

SW1H 9AJ

Where possible, we would prefer complaints or comments via email.

Publication of response

A response to this Call for Evidence will be published on a date to be confirmed.

Confidentiality and Data Protection

Information provided in response to this consultation, including personal information, may be published or disclosed in accordance with the access to information regimes (these are primarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA), the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004).

If you want the information that you provide to be treated as confidential, please be aware that, under the FOIA, there is a statutory Code of Practice with which public authorities must comply and which deals, amongst other things, with obligations of confidence. In view of this it would be helpful if you could explain to us why you regard the information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a request for disclosure of the information we will take full account of your explanation, but we cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in all circumstances. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded as binding on the Ministry.

The Ministry will process your personal data in accordance with the DPA and in the majority of circumstances, this will mean that your personal data will not be disclosed to third parties.

Consultation principles

The principles that Government departments and other public bodies should adopt for engaging stakeholders when developing policy and legislation are set out in the Cabinet Office Consultation Principles 2018 that can be found here:

[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/691383/Consultation_Principles__1.pdf](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/691383/Consultation_Principles__1.pdf)

---

© Crown copyright 2023

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

Alternative format versions of this report are available on request from lcjb.evidence@justice.gov.uk.

---

[1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6419bed8d3bf7f7ff7d3b3c8/local-criminal-justice-boards-guidance.pdf

[2] PCC Review Part Two – Parliamentary written statement - https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2022-03-07/debates/22030711000009/PoliceAndCrimeCommissionerReviewPart2

[3] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6419bed8d3bf7f7ff7d3b3c8/local-criminal-justice-boards-guidance.pdf

[4] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/652cefa56b6fbf000db7567a/data-sharing-guidance-criminal-justice-system.pdf

[5] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/652cefdf697260000dccf829/criminal-justice-system-data-sharing-memorandum-understanding-template.odt