Guide to road safety and contributory factors for reported road casualties Great Britain
Updated 25 September 2025
© Crown copyright 2025
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 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-contributory-factors-for-reported-road-casualty-statistics/guide-to-contributory-factors-for-reported-road-casualties-great-britain
About this guidance
This guidance relates to the reporting of road safety factors (RSFs) and contributory factors (CFs) within the STATS19 road collision data collection. CFs were first added to the data collection from 2005, to provide insight into reasons why collisions occur. As a result of recommendations in the 2018 STATS19 review, the collection system is changing from CFs to the new RSFs, which have been designed to facilitate more consistent recording. Currently some forces are still recording data as CFs, while others have move to RSFs, and the impact of this transition is outlined below.
1. Overview
1.1 Contributory factors and road safety factors
CFs and RSFs provide some insight into why and how road collisions occur. They are designed to give the key actions and failures that led directly to the actual impact to aid investigation of how collisions might be prevented.
When police officers attend the scene of a collision, they are able to select up to 6 factors they believe contributed to the collision. These can be assigned to vehicles, casualties or uninjured pedestrians involved. Please note that this does not assign blame for the collision to any specific road user but gives an indication of which factors the attending officer thought contributed to the collision.
The police officer also indicates whether the factor was ‘very likely’ to have contributed to the collision or only have a ‘possible’ link to the collision. More than one factor can be linked to a single road user, and the same factor can be linked to a series of road users.
Officers do not need to carry out a full investigation of the incident before allocating CFs or RSFs; they usually use professional judgement about what they can see at the scene. Some CFs or RSFs, such as exceeding the speed limit, may not be obvious to the officer and are therefore may be subject to under-reporting.
1.2 History of CF and RSF recording
CFs were added to the STATS19 collection in 2005, which is the first year for which the data are available, and have been consistently recorded from that point until towards the end of 2023. There are a total of 77 CFs from which reporting officers can choose, grouped into 9 sections.
The latest review of the STATS19 collection in 2018 recommended that the CF data collection was replaced with a new collection, known as RSFs. The basic premise of the data remained unchanged, but the number of factors reduced to 37, based on those considered most analytically relevant, and better aligned to the ‘safe system’ pillars which support road safety policy development. It is hoped that the new system will support easier and more consistent recording.
Further details of the reasons for this change are set out in the STATS19 review reports.
As police forces have transitioned to using the specification they are beginning to record data as RSFs and provide this to DfT, though currently some forces are still recording CFs which presents implications for the analysis of the data, as outlined in the section on transition to road safety factors below.
2. Strengths and limitations
Please note that not all collisions are included in the contributory or road safety factor data. Only collisions where the police attended the scene and reported at least one road safety factor or contributory factor are included. Overall, a total of 66% of collisions reported to the police in 2024 met these criteria.
It is also important to note that collisions can have multiple factors attributed to them. As a result, it is advised that you do not add the results of individual factors in our published tables because collisions could be counted multiple times.
The contributory and road safety factors are different in nature from the remainder of the STATS19 data which is based on the reporting of factual information. CFs and RSFs are largely subjective and depend on the skill and experience of the investigating officer to reconstruct the events which led directly to the collision. This should be kept in mind when interpreting the data.
Guidance to police (STATS20) states that the factors reflect the reporting officer’s opinion at the time of reporting and are not necessarily the result of extensive investigation. Furthermore, it is recognised that subsequent enquiries could lead to the reporting officer changing their opinion, for example because something was not obvious at the time or is revealed following a more detailed investigation (such as the driver using a mobile phone, or a hidden vehicle defect).
Factors should be identified on the basis of evidence rather than guesses about what may have happened. This evidence can come from various sources such as witness statements, vehicle and site inspections. It can be of variable quality, which is the reason for recording the assessment of the reliability of the road safety factors.
We have explored the potential impact on the factors recorded for fatal collisions, with a summary report available containing further details.
3. Available data and statistics
3.1 Published data tables
The road safety factor data are considered sensitive as it may be considered that they imply blame and responsibility for a collision. If the factors can be matched with specific collisions (and specific drivers, vehicles or casualties) they may be sub judice to a prosecution, or may lead to individuals or media reports laying accusations at participants in the collision. As a result, RSF data is not made available at detailed record level or in our data download tool.
Instead, data are published as a series of data tables, which contain number and percentage of collisions and casualties with each factor assigned. In analysing the factor data, it is generally recommended that percentages are used, because, as noted above, factors are not recorded for all collisions.
From 2024 onwards, data will only be presented using the RSF categories (as the CFs can largely be mapped to the new categories), though the previous CF tables, with data to 2023, have been retained for reference purposes.
The transition from CFs to RSFs has raised some challenges in the presentation of the data, which are outlined below and in particular, comparisons between forces recording the new RSFs and those where data are still captured as CFs should be made carefully, as the change in collection system appears to have led to a break in the time series for some factors. For this reason, a number of data tables (RAS0704 to RAS0706) have been withdrawn while further analysis is carried out.
3.2 Data access and confidentiality
If more detailed data are required than are presented in our spreadsheet tables, a data extract can be requested from the road safety team, subject to completion of an end user agreement setting out the use of the data and how the sensitive data will be protected. An application for sensitive data can be completed and sent to the team via roadacc.stats@dft.gov.uk.
The department has previously published research looking at appropriate release practices for contributory factors as carried out by the Methodology Advisory Unit at the Office for National Statistics. This outlined the main risks for identifying contributory factors with individuals and what action would be required to take to minimise this risk. In practice, the main change this brought about was allowing the release of a table containing the total number of contributory factors by local authority. This table was published for the first time in 2013 and has previously been published as table RAS0706, though updates to this table have been paused during the switch from CFs to RSFs.
4. Transition to road safety factors
As noted above, following the last STATS19 review, CFs will be replaced by RSFs. However, as the adoption of the new STATS19 specification is happening at different times in different police forces, for the years between 2023 and 2026 (at least) there is likely to be a mix of both RSF and CF data. This section illustrates some of the challenges this presents and outlines the department’s approach to addressing these, based on the available data.
4.1 Mapping of contributory factors
It is possible to map from the CFs to RSFs, so that data recorded as CFs can be analysed using the RSF categorisation. This has been done in our initial analysis. While some factors map directly across between the two systems there are some factors that cannot be mapped directly from CFs to RSFs or where multiple CFs map to a single RSF. In the department’s published materials, the RSF categories will be presented by default, though the CF data can be made available on request.
4.2 Timeline in adoption of RSF recording
The first directly recorded RSFs relate to data from November 2023, for some forces using the CRASH (Collision Reporting and Sharing) system. As of publication of the 2024 statistics in September 2025 some police forces have provided at least portion of their data for 2024 that was directly collected as RSFs, the list of police forces by specification can be found in table 7 in the background information section. The majority of these are forces using the CRASH system.
Overall, for 2024 data, it is estimated 31% of collisions with at least one CF or RSF recorded were collected directly as RSFs in 2024. However, a majority of the data has been recorded as CFs and converted to RSF categories. Based on force plans regarding the new STATS19 specification, for 2025, it is likely that a majority of data will have been directly recorded as RSFs. In 2026 we anticipate that most, but not all, data will be RSFs.
Chart 1: Proportion of collisions with CFs or RSFs recorded by data collection method
| Year | Collected as CFs | Collected as RSFs | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 and before | 100% | 0% | 100% |
| 2023 | 97% | 3% | 100% |
| 2024 | 69% | 31% | 100% |
5. Impact of transition to RSFs
This section represents an initial analysis, based on data available as at September 2025. Further work is planned to better understand the impact of the move from CFs to RSFs, and this guidance will be updated in due course.
The mapping of CFs to RSFs was derived prior to the collection of any directly recorded RSF data and was based on an understanding of how the systems should relate to each other rather than any analysis of how the police would collect data in the RSF system. The analysis presented below aims to explore if the change in system has resulted in a change in what factors are being reported.
In 2024 approximately 31% of collisions have data that has been directly recorded as RSFs. While this is still a minority of collisions it is enough data to begin to analyse if there have been changes in reporting practices as a result of moving to the new data collection system.
5.1 Number of factors recorded
On average, 2.5 RSFs have been reported per collision, which compares with around 1.9 RSFs converted from CFs per collision, for collisions collected using the CF system. The STATS19 review recommended that each collision have 3 to 6 factors assigned, and it appears that around 60% of collisions with RSFs have 3 or more factors.
5.2 Comparison of data by RSF section
RSFs are grouped into different categories, broadly aligned to the safe system pillars.
Chart 2 shows the proportion of collisions with at least one factor, split by RSF section, for:
-
2022 (the last year for which all forces consistently recorded CFs), converted from CFs
-
the 69% of collisions with data collected as CFs and converted to RSFs in 2024
-
the 31% of collisions with data directly collected as RSFs in 2024
The chart shows that although not all forces are now recording data as CFs, the pattern of which factors are being collected remains broadly similar to previous years when all data was collected as CFs and then converted to RSFs. However, when the data are directly collected as RSFs, there are some notable differences.
Chart 2: Proportion of collisions with road safety factors, by RSF section, 2022 and 2024 comparing converted and directly recorded RSF data
| Road safety factor section | % with factor 2022 (all recorded as CFs) | % with factor 2024 recorded as CFs | % with factor 2024 recorded as RSFs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speed | 41 | 40 | 36 |
| Behaviour or inexperience | 63 | 64 | 75 |
| Distraction or impairment | 19 | 19 | 28 |
| Road | 16 | 18 | 22 |
| Non-motorised road users | 6 | 7 | 14 |
| Not coded | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| Vehicles | 4 | 4 | 6 |
Table 1 shows specifically how the proportion of collisions in 2024 that were assigned to each road safety factor section under the two different collection systems, as well as the relative change in these proportions.
This shows that there has been an increase in the number of collisions assigned a factor from each section with the exception of the speed section. In part this is likely to be driven by the increase in the number of factors being assigned. However the fact that this increase is not evenly distributed across the different RSF categories indicates that the move to directly collecting RSF data results in a change in which factors are being recorded.
The biggest proportional increases are for the factors in the “non-motorised road users” section, and while smaller in proportional terms the increase in the “behaviour or inexperience” section from 63% of converted collisions to 75% of directly recorded collisions is notable for being a large absolute change.
Table 1: Change in the proportion of collisions with different road safety factor sections assigned, 2024
| Road safety factor section | Proportion of collisions converted from CFs | Proportion of collisions directly collected as RSFs | Relative change in proportion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speed | 41 | 36 | 0.88 |
| Behaviour or inexperience | 63 | 75 | 1.18 |
| Distraction or impairment | 19 | 28 | 1.48 |
| Road | 16 | 22 | 1.40 |
| Non-motorised road users | 6 | 14 | 2.21 |
| Vehicles | 4 | 6 | 1.60 |
5.3 Comparison of data for individual factors
A similar analysis can be done looking at the recording of individual factors.
The top 10 most commonly recorded factors for data collected as CFs and converted to RSFs, and directly recorded as RSFs, are shown in Chart 3. This shows a mixture of patterns – in some cases, the proportion of collisions are broadly similar (for example, travelling too fast for conditions), in some cases there is a greater prevalence of a factor when recorded directly as an RSF (including exceeding speed limit) and in others the proportion of collisions is lower when RSFs are directly coded (such as driver being aggressive).
Chart 3: Top 10 most commonly assigned RSFs for collisions with data collected as CFs and converted to RSFs, compared with data directly records as RSFs, Great Britain 2024
| Road safety factor | % with factor – converted from CFs | % with factor – directly recorded as RSFs |
|---|---|---|
| Ineffective observation by either the driver or rider or pedestrian | 48 | 53 |
| Driver or rider being aggressive or dangerous or reckless | 26 | 15 |
| Driver or rider travelling too fast for conditions (including loss of control or swerving) | 16 | 17 |
| Driver or rider overshot junction or poor turn or manoeuvre | 12 | 24 |
| Driver or rider exceeding speed limit | 7 | 14 |
| Affected by alcohol | 7 | 8 |
| Road surface was slippery due to weather | 6 | 11 |
| Driver or rider illegal turn or direction of travel or failed to comply with traffic sign or signal | 6 | 9 |
| Driver or rider inexperienced or learner | 6 | 9 |
| Distraction to driver or rider from inside or outside or on vehicle | 5 | 11 |
While overall there has been a decrease in the overall number of collisions assigned a factor in the speed section, this overall decrease can mask the changes at a factor level where there is a notable increase in the number of collisions assigned “driver or rider exceeding speed limit” that is obscured as a sectional level by the larger decrease in the number of collisions assigned “driver or rider being aggressive or dangerous or reckless” which is also in the speed section.
Table 2: Top 10 changes in the proportion of collisions with different road safety factors assigned, by absolute percentage change, 2024
| Road safety factor | Proportion of collisions converted from CFs | Proportion of collisions directly collected as RSFs | Absolute change in proportion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Driver or rider overshot junction or poor turn or manoeuvre | 12% | 24% | 13% |
| Driver or rider being aggressive or dangerous or reckless | 26% | 15% | -11% |
| Driver or rider passing too close to another road user or pedestrian | 1% | 10% | 9% |
| Driver or rider exceeding speed limit | 7% | 14% | 7% |
| Distraction to driver or rider from inside or outside or on vehicle | 5% | 11% | 6% |
| Ineffective observation by either the driver or rider or pedestrian | 48% | 53% | 5% |
| Pedestrian careless or in a hurry | 3% | 8% | 5% |
| Road surface was slippery due to weather | 6% | 11% | 5% |
| Pedestrian or cyclist or equestrian hard to see | 1% | 6% | 5% |
| Sudden braking or braking in a way unsuitable for conditions | 4% | 8% | 4% |
Further analysis shows that for the 10 factors highlighted in table 2 there is relatively little change in what proportion of collisions were assigned these factors for collisions that were collected as CFs and converted to RSFs from 2022 to 2024. This indicates that the changes shown in table 2 are likely a result of the change from collecting CFs to directly collecting RSF data.
This is illustrated in Chart 4 which shows that the levels of recording for the top 4 RSF sections in the directly recorded data is substantially different from the background trend in data converted from CFs over the last 10 years.
Chart 4: Percentage of collisions assigned a road safety factor, by RSF section and collection methodology, Great Britain, 2013 to 2024 (some sections omitted)
6. Guidance on analysing CFs and RSFs
The results shown in the previous section demonstrate that there appears to be a step change in the factors that are being recorded by police forces as a result of the move to directly collecting RSFs.
6.1 Suggested approach
While users are welcome to analyse the published data as they wish, based on the above analysis, we recommended that:
-
data that has been collected as CFs and converted to RSFs is not directly compared to data that has been collected directly as RSFs to avoid implying trends in the data that do not exist
-
any time-series analysis should be based on the proportion of collisions assigned a given factor rather than the number of collisions as the reduced scope of CF collection will mean that the number of collisions assigned any given factor is likely to have gone down, as around a third of the data is now being captured as RSFs
Despite the fact that CF data is currently only collected for some police forces it is still possible to use data from 69% of collisions where data has been collected as CFs and converted to RSFs to analyse national trends in collision factors up to 2024. As shown above, the reduced geographic scope of the CF (as opposed to RSF) collection does not seem to have affected which factors are being collected. We will present analyses in our reports and statistics on this basis, while data recorded as CFs remains a majority of the data, but use the new RSF categories for presentation.
Analysis of directly collected RSF data should be treated with caution until more work is done to fully understand the impact of the change in collection system. While there are some clear differences, it is hard to draw firm conclusions, and further work is needed to better understand the behaviour of reporting officers when presented with a different, shorter list of factors. The nature of the system used – whether desktop or mobile – is also likely to influence patterns shown.
6.2 Changes to published materials
As a result of the changes to the data collection we have made the following changes to our published outputs, which include:
-
where reports and factsheets contain national level CF or RSF data this is only based on the portion of collisions where data was collected as CFs and converted to RSFs, consequently any collision numbers have been changed to percentages
-
revising the format of tables RAS0701, RAS0702, and RAS0703 to separate out data collected as CFs and then converted to RSFs from data directly collected as RSFs
-
temporarily withdrawing tables RAS0705 and RAS0706 as it is not possible to make comparisons between areas where data has been converted as CFs and where it has been directly collected as RSFs
-
pausing updates on the fatal 4 factsheet as this relies on the number of collisions assigned various RSFs, therefore any trends in this analysis could be misleading
7. Future developments
We expect the majority of police forces to transition to directly recording RSFs during 2025. We will continue to monitor the effect that this has on the statistics and will update this guidance once more data has been collected.
Once more data has been collected, we will also explore if we are able to reinstate the tables with local authority breakdowns that have been dropped and what can be done to create a long-term comparable time-series of road safety factors.
This will involve working with police forces and other road safety stakeholders to explore where the step change in the data has come from and what can be done to account for it our analysis. This guidance will be updated as and when further information is available.
8. Background information: CF and RSF coverage
CF and RSF reporting can vary from force to force depending on operational practices, experience of road traffic collisions, systems used and requirements of the force.
Tables 3 to 7 give more insight about underlying reporting practices. Figures for collisions collected with RSFs for 2023 should be treated with caution, as they can be based on a relatively small number of collisions.
Table 3a: Percentage of reported collisions collected in the CF specification included in the contributory factor analysis, by severity
| Severity | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fatal | 91 | 85 | 87 | 87 | 86 | 84 | 86 | 90 | 95 | 91 |
| Fatal or Serious Collisions (adjusted) | 86 | 82 | 82 | 81 | 80 | 79 | 80 | 82 | 83 | 80 |
| All collisions | 77 | 73 | 72 | 69 | 67 | 66 | 66 | 67 | 66 | 65 |
Table 3b: Percentage of reported collisions collected in the RSF specification included in the road safety factor analysis, by severity
| Severity | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Fatal | 97 | 99 |
| Fatal or Serious Collisions (adjusted) | 81 | 86 |
| All collisions | 61 | 70 |
Table 4a: Percentage of reported collisions collected in the CF specification included in the contributory factor analysis, by road class
| Road class | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Motorways | 84 | 80 | 81 | 78 | 76 | 75 | 74 | 77 | 77 | 75 |
| A Roads | 80 | 77 | 75 | 73 | 69 | 68 | 68 | 69 | 69 | 67 |
| B Roads | 79 | 74 | 73 | 71 | 69 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 69 | 66 |
| Other roads | 73 | 69 | 67 | 64 | 63 | 62 | 63 | 62 | 62 | 61 |
Table 4b: Percentage of reported collisions collected in the RSF specification included in the road safety factor analysis, by road class
| Road class | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Motorways | 70 | 76 |
| A Roads | 65 | 74 |
| B Roads | 63 | 72 |
| Other roads | 55 | 66 |
Table 5a: Percentage of vehicles in reported collisions collected in the CF specification directly allocated a contributory factor, by vehicle type
| Vehicle type | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pedal cycle | 65 | 62 | 58 | 55 | 52 | 53 | 52 | 50 | 49 | 48 |
| Motorcycle | 86 | 82 | 81 | 80 | 77 | 72 | 71 | 70 | 66 | 67 |
| Car | 78 | 74 | 73 | 70 | 68 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 69 | 67 |
| Bus or coach | 70 | 68 | 70 | 66 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 69 | 65 | 73 |
| Van 3.5 tonnes mgw or under | 78 | 76 | 76 | 73 | 70 | 68 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 68 |
| HGV | 83 | 79 | 81 | 78 | 77 | 76 | 76 | 79 | 80 | 73 |
| Other | 71 | 63 | 62 | 58 | 58 | 62 | 58 | 58 | 58 | 56 |
Table 5b: Percentage of vehicles in reported collisions collected in the RSF specification directly allocated a road safety factor, by vehicle type
| Vehicle type | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Pedal cycle | 37 | 50 |
| Motorcycle | 71 | 81 |
| Car | 63 | 72 |
| Bus or coach | 46 | 57 |
| Van 3.5 tonnes mgw or under | 63 | 72 |
| HGV | 68 | 82 |
| Other | 55 | 58 |
Table 6a: Percentage of reported collisions collected in the CF specification included in the contributory factor analysis, by police force
| Police force | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metropolitan Police | 83 | 82 | 77 | 71 | 65 | 61 | 60 | 60 | 55 | 59 | |
| Cumbria | 58 | 63 | 62 | 58 | 72 | 75 | 67 | 68 | 70 | 63 | |
| Lancashire | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 76 | 75 | 72 | 74 | 73 | 73 | |
| Merseyside | 80 | 81 | 76 | 70 | 70 | 68 | 66 | 64 | 65 | 67 | |
| Greater Manchester | 77 | 60 | 60 | 54 | 48 | 49 | 35 | 32 | 47 | 17 | |
| Cheshire | 80 | 70 | 75 | 75 | 74 | 75 | 70 | 66 | 69 | 69 | |
| Northumbria | 71 | 58 | 46 | 34 | 28 | 25 | 30 | 29 | 38 | 85 | |
| Durham | 69 | 43 | 27 | 54 | 19 | 18 | 36 | 51 | 58 | 75 | |
| North Yorkshire | 82 | 82 | 81 | 80 | 80 | 81 | 74 | 80 | 82 | 81 | |
| West Yorkshire | 73 | 69 | 69 | 69 | 69 | 68 | 73 | 76 | 73 | 69 | |
| South Yorkshire | 81 | 74 | 70 | 73 | 70 | 74 | 72 | 72 | 76 | 69 | |
| Humberside | 73 | 60 | 57 | 63 | 62 | 64 | 64 | 62 | 61 | 62 | |
| Cleveland | 75 | 75 | 80 | 77 | 76 | 73 | 76 | 76 | 68 | 78 | |
| West Midlands | 64 | 51 | 45 | 40 | 40 | 51 | 53 | 49 | 46 | 39 | |
| Staffordshire | 46 | 36 | 36 | 34 | 32 | 41 | 54 | 54 | 64 | 59 | |
| West Mercia | 79 | 78 | 78 | 78 | 78 | 76 | 79 | 76 | 78 | 74 | |
| Warwickshire | 84 | 77 | 78 | 80 | 75 | 81 | 81 | 79 | 76 | 76 | |
| Derbyshire | 74 | 73 | 70 | 65 | 64 | 75 | 68 | 69 | 65 | 72 | |
| Nottinghamshire | 73 | 74 | 74 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 57 | 60 | 33 | |
| Lincolnshire | 81 | 80 | 81 | 79 | 80 | 84 | 84 | 87 | 81 | NA | |
| Leicestershire | 69 | 73 | 70 | 70 | 73 | 79 | 87 | 94 | 78 | 0 | |
| Northamptonshire | 46 | 52 | 55 | 64 | 70 | 76 | 78 | 76 | 79 | 0 | |
| Cambridgeshire | 73 | 71 | 69 | 68 | 66 | 56 | 66 | 57 | 58 | 67 | |
| Norfolk | 82 | 61 | 76 | 78 | 71 | 45 | 73 | 70 | 72 | 73 | |
| Suffolk | 88 | 60 | 73 | 74 | 72 | 46 | 71 | 68 | 70 | 64 | |
| Bedfordshire | 70 | 71 | 69 | 70 | 73 | 65 | 68 | 59 | 54 | 46 | |
| Hertfordshire | 75 | 70 | 67 | 75 | 75 | 68 | 69 | 61 | 55 | 55 | |
| Essex | 74 | 36 | 36 | 32 | 65 | 60 | 57 | 62 | 72 | 96 | |
| Thames Valley | 78 | 81 | 84 | 74 | 68 | 68 | 67 | 66 | 61 | 55 | |
| Hampshire | 81 | 83 | 81 | 80 | 77 | 77 | 74 | 77 | 78 | 76 | |
| Surrey | 56 | 81 | 85 | 83 | 76 | 74 | 73 | 74 | 71 | 74 | |
| Kent | 83 | 64 | 54 | 51 | 67 | 71 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 32 | |
| Sussex | 77 | 75 | 74 | 73 | 73 | 75 | 73 | 74 | 72 | 72 | |
| City of London | 74 | 76 | 71 | 73 | 66 | 70 | 53 | 69 | 60 | 63 | |
| Devon and Cornwall | 81 | 77 | 76 | 80 | 81 | 80 | 80 | 79 | 72 | 76 | |
| Avon and Somerset | 63 | 67 | 69 | 59 | 58 | 52 | 54 | 58 | 66 | 69 | |
| Gloucestershire | 86 | 77 | 71 | 58 | 69 | 73 | 76 | 81 | 82 | 81 | |
| Wiltshire | 76 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 88 | 84 | 84 | 82 | 84 | 86 | |
| Dorset | 81 | 86 | 80 | 80 | 84 | 77 | 77 | 76 | 73 | 73 | |
| North Wales | 78 | 82 | 83 | 83 | 84 | 83 | 83 | 83 | 81 | 81 | |
| Gwent | 84 | 82 | 89 | 86 | 88 | 90 | 91 | 84 | 84 | 84 | |
| South Wales | 97 | 97 | 97 | 95 | 96 | 98 | 94 | 96 | 94 | 93 | |
| Dyfed-Powys | 81 | 81 | 81 | 80 | 81 | 80 | 76 | 86 | 84 | 80 | |
| Police Scotland | 84 | 85 | 85 | 86 | 69 | 61 | 76 | 82 | 87 | 85 |
Table 6b: Percentage of reported collisions collected in the RSF specification included in the road safety factor analysis, by police force
Note: for some forces, there are a low number of records for 2023 (under 100) which may affect the figures shown for that year.
| Police force | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Cumbria | 73 | 82 |
| Lancashire | 73 | 78 |
| Greater Manchester | 54 | 70 |
| Northumbria | 44 | 44 |
| Durham | 64 | 57 |
| West Yorkshire | 86 | 95 |
| West Midlands | 28 | 54 |
| Staffordshire | 56 | 74 |
| West Mercia | 89 | 85 |
| Nottinghamshire | 68 | 63 |
| Cambridgeshire | 73 | 68 |
| Norfolk | 53 | 80 |
| Suffolk | 62 | 79 |
| Bedfordshire | 80 | 66 |
| Hertfordshire | 83 | 69 |
| Essex | 51 | 66 |
| Kent | 69 | 93 |
| Sussex | 68 | 51 |
| Devon and Cornwall | 87 | 73 |
| Dyfed-Powys | 100 | 98 |
| Police Scotland | 83 | 85 |
| Cleveland | 0 | 64 |
| Derbyshire | 0 | 66 |
| Leicestershire | 0 | 76 |
| Northamptonshire | 0 | 79 |
Table 7: Status of police force RSF data collection
| Police Force | 2024 data status |
|---|---|
| Metropolitan Police | All data collected as CFs |
| Cumbria | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Lancashire | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Merseyside | All data collected as CFs |
| Greater Manchester | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Cheshire | All data collected as CFs |
| Northumbria | All data collected as RSFs |
| Durham | All data collected as RSFs |
| North Yorkshire | All data collected as CFs |
| West Yorkshire | Some data collected as RSFs |
| South Yorkshire | All data collected as CFs |
| Humberside | All data collected as CFs |
| Cleveland | Some data collected as RSFs |
| West Midlands | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Staffordshire | Some data collected as RSFs |
| West Mercia | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Warwickshire | All data collected as CFs |
| Derbyshire | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Nottinghamshire | All data collected as RSFs |
| Lincolnshire | All data collected as RSFs |
| Leicestershire | All data collected as RSFs |
| Northamptonshire | All data collected as RSFs |
| Cambridgeshire | All data collected as RSFs |
| Norfolk | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Suffolk | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Bedfordshire | All data collected as RSFs |
| Hertfordshire | All data collected as RSFs |
| Essex | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Thames Valley | All data collected as CFs |
| Hampshire | All data collected as CFs |
| Surrey | All data collected as CFs |
| Kent | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Sussex | Some data collected as RSFs |
| City of London | All data collected as CFs |
| Devon and Cornwall | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Avon and Somerset | All data collected as CFs |
| Gloucestershire | All data collected as CFs |
| Wiltshire | All data collected as CFs |
| Dorset | All data collected as CFs |
| North Wales | All data collected as CFs |
| Gwent | All data collected as CFs |
| South Wales | All data collected as CFs |
| Dyfed-Powys | Some data collected as RSFs |
| Police Scotland | Some data collected as RSFs |
9. Instructions for printing and saving
Depending on which browser you use and the type of device you use (such as a mobile or laptop) these instructions may vary.
You will find your print and save options in your browser’s menu. You may also have other options available on your device. Tablets and mobile device instructions will be specific to the make and model of the device.
10. How to search
Select Ctrl and F on a Windows laptop or Command and F on a Mac.
This will open a search box in the top right-hand corner of the page. Type the word you are looking for in the search bar and press enter.
Your browser will highlight the word, usually in yellow, wherever it appears on the page. Press enter to move to the next place it appears.
11. Contact details
Road safety statistics
Email roadacc.stats@dft.gov.uk
To hear more about DfT statistical publications as they are released, follow us on X at DfTstats.