Guidance

User guide to: Individuals referred to and supported through the Prevent Programme, England and Wales

Updated 7 December 2023

Applies to England and Wales

1. Introduction

This user guide is designed to be a useful reference guide with explanatory notes on the data issues and classifications that are key to the production and presentation of the Home Office’s annual statistical release, Individuals referred to and supported through the Prevent Programme.

The release contains official statistics in development on referrals to the Prevent programme due to concerns that an individual is susceptible to a risk of radicalisation. The statistics cover the journey of the individuals referred from referral to adoption as a Channel case, broken down by demographic statistics and geography.

More information about official statistics in development can be found on the UK Statistics Authority website. The Home Office aims to improve the quality of data recording and assurance procedures so that these statistics can be designated as National Statistics in future years.

1.1 Official statistics in development status review

These statistics are considered to have immediate value to users and help with the understanding of how many individuals in England and Wales are deemed susceptible to radicalisation and if suitable, how these individuals are supported by the Prevent programme.

Since the publication of these statistics began in 2017, quality assurance exercises have shed light on various issues with the collection regarding consistency of recording case information, statuses and outcomes. A significant factor affecting the quality of data is that there are 2 separate database systems used for recording case information at different stages of the programme:

• the Prevent Case Management System (PCM) is used to record details of all referrals to Prevent and includes information on the first stages of the process up until the point at which a case may be referred to a Channel Panel
• the Channel Management Information System (CMIS) is used to record details of all cases that are referred to Channel, including the details for those individuals who are subsequently discussed and adopted at Panel. CMIS captures the later stages of the process for those individuals who reach this point

The 2 database systems are not linked and therefore a matching process is required to create the dataset for publication showing individuals’ progress through the Prevent programme. A limitation to this approach is that in some cases there is conflicting data about an individual on each system requiring manual processing.

Home Office analysts have worked with policy colleagues and Counter Terrorism Policing to address these issues which includes developing further guidance and training for Police Case Officers and Channel Practitioners, and developing a merged data recording system. With the new single database in place many of the data quality issues currently experienced should be eliminated and data quality will improve. Home Office statisticians will aim to review the status of these statistics again once the new system has been launched and sufficient time has been allowed for users to familiarise themselves with the new system.

2. Data Quality

As described above the statistics in this release come from 2 data sources:

• data on referrals to Prevent are provided by the Counter-Terrorism Policing Headquarters (CTPHQ) from the Prevent Case Management (PCM) database
• data on Channel cases is extracted from the Home Office owned Channel Management Information System (CMIS). Data from both sources are then matched to provide a complete picture of the journey of individuals through the Prevent programme

The Home Office considers the data to be sufficiently robust, and the quality assurance process undertaken by data providers and Home Office statisticians ensure the risk of data errors are minimised.

2.1 Quality assurance

Before the data is published, it undergoes a strict quality assurance (QA) process. The first part is undertaken by data providers, who need to keep administrative datasets accurate and up to date for operational purposes.

Home Office and Counter-Terrorism Policing policy advisors meet quarterly to discuss caseloads for each of the Channel Panel areas. This allows potential inaccuracies in data recording to be detected, if for example there are areas with unusually high or unusually low caseloads. When potential inaccuracies are found, the Home Office Channel Policy team will commission a dip-sampling of cases in the identified areas with an aim to ensure that best practice is being followed in line with the Channel duty guidance.

Similarly, Counter-Terrorism Policing coordinate Business Assurance Processes (BAP) with regions across England and Wales to ensure that best practice is being followed by their officers. They might commission a BAP following their quarterly performance reviews of Prevent.

The second part of the QA process is undertaken by statisticians within the Home Office. This part of the process identifies any potential data quality issues, which are then raised and resolved where possible with Regional Counter Terrorism Police Coordinators.

Quality assurance is undertaken to confirm the figures presented in this release; however, the statistics rely on recording of information by police and Local Authority partners, so totals cannot be guaranteed to be complete and accurate. Home Office analysts will continue to work with data suppliers to improve the quality of these statistics as the collection continues.

Once the Prevent referral and Channel case data have been matched, a number of checks are undertaken. These are designed to identify things such as:

• incomplete fields
• inconsistencies in the data
• duplicated cases
• cases that are not up to date
• incorrect values in data fields

Once issues from the initial checks have been resolved, analysis is undertaken to check for unusual or unexpected trends in the data. Where alternative data sources are available, data may be cross-checked. Specifically, trends in the publication data is checked against the quarterly data feed received by the Homeland Security Group within the Home Office.

2.2 Limitations and caveats of the data

The limitations and caveats regarding this data are outlined below. Some of these limitations will be a by-product of the large-scale administrative processes required to collate these statistics. While the QA process is designed to minimise the scale of any data quality issues, there remain some limitations that even the most comprehensive of QA processes are unable to eliminate. The implications of the limitations are also outlined below.

Total Prevent referrals:

• this data comes from a live database which is regularly updated and in some cases there may be a delay in a particular case being entered into the system, therefore, at any given time, the published figures may not be 100% accurate

• the total number of referrals reported includes individuals who are referred more than once during the year. This information is included as each referral may not contain the same information (for example, different sector of referral or type of concern) and may not have the same outcome (for example, signposted to statutory partners, discussed at a Channel panel). Including multiple referrals provides a fuller picture of all support recorded and provided through the Prevent programme each year

Demographic information:

• demographic information on individuals referred may not be complete in all cases. This is particularly relevant to referrals received towards the end of a financial year when the referral is still within the information gathering stage. However, this is likely to be a small proportion of all referrals received within a financial year

• in this report, we refer to gender rather than sex of individuals referred to Prevent. ‘Sex’ can be considered to refer to whether someone is male or female based on their physiology, with ‘gender’ representing a social construct or sense of self that takes a wider range of forms. However, it is likely that recording includes a mixture of physiological and personal identity

Type of concern raised:

• the type of concern presented is based upon information provided by the referrer. For cases that progress further into the programme, officers may update this based upon new information that comes to light as they gather further information to help them provide support tailored to the individual’s need. Therefore, the statistics regarding the ‘type of concern’ raised, are likely to include a mix of type of concern raised by original referrer and type of concern that the Channel Case Officers believe the individual is presenting

• the type of concern is recorded differently within the 2 data recording systems used to manage Prevent referrals (PCM) and subsequent Channel cases (CMIS). The PCM data recording system has a list of 28 type of concern options which Case Officers can initially select from, which are then automatically grouped by the PCM system into 10 high level categories for analytical purposes. The CMIS data recording system has a list of 7 type of concern options which Case Officers can select from. As there are fewer categories on the CMIS system than the PCM system, Case Officers may need to select a ‘best fit’ category for the type of concern if the PCM category does not exist in CMIS

• as the type of concern options are not the same across PCM and CMIS, Home Office analysts map the categories used in each system to a common set of high level categories for the purpose of this statistical publication. In previous years the categories have been mapped to a set of 4 high level categories: Islamist, Extreme Right Wing, Mixed, unstable or unclear and Other. To improve transparency and provide a more granular view of trends, last year the type of concern category list was extended to a set of 10 high level categories. In particular, the categories that were previously mapped into the ‘Mixed, unstable or unclear’ high level category for publication were disaggregated out for last year’s publication. This year’s publication continues with the same approach. The type of concern categories in the publication this year are: Islamist, Extreme Right Wing, Incel, School Massacre, High CT risk but no ideology, Vulnerability present but no CT risk or ideology, No risk, vulnerability or ideology, Conflicted and Other. Please see the glossary of terms for more information regarding the type of concerns included within each category this year

• the categories in the PCM data recording system have changed over the years. Therefore, Home Office analysts have had to map the categories each year using ‘best fit’ to produce the timeseries for the extended list of type of concern published this year. The extended list of type of concern for 2015/16 was not available therefore it is missing from the time series presented

Stage of the Prevent programme referrals progressed to:

• the stage of the programme that the individual referred progressed to, is based upon the latest case status recorded as of the date that the dataset was finalised for publication. This therefore relies on Channel Case Officers using case status correctly and timely in line with case progression. As a result, at any given time, the published figures regarding the number of referrals discussed at a Channel Panel and adopted as a Channel case may not be 100% accurate

Services signposted to:

• data quality checks found that in some cases, Channel Case Officers are recording that an individual has been ‘signposted to a service’ following case closure, when notifying the source of referral to re-refer if concerns are raised again in future. Therefore, the statistics on the number of individuals referred to alternative services may include services providing new support following case closure, and services continuing to support the individual following their exit from the Prevent programme

2.2 Data quality statement

Based on the summary above, we are satisfied that the data in this release are fit for purpose. As with all large administrative datasets, there will be some inaccuracies in the data and while they should be considered, they do not detract significantly from the overall trends. The QA processes in place at all stages of the process further minimise the scale of the data quality issues.

Where there are known data quality issues, these are highlighted in the relevant parts of the bulletin, user guide, or accompanying data tables.

Home Office statisticians continue to work with Home Office policy advisors and Counter-Terrorism Policing Head Quarters colleagues to develop further guidance and inform the updated training delivered to Channel Case Officers to improve consistency of recording.

3. Glossary of terms

This glossary is intended to give an overview of the terms used in the statistical release, rather than full legal/technical descriptions. If there are terms in Prevent programme statistical releases that you would like to be included in this glossary, please contact Home Office Statisticians via: HSAI_Statistics@homeoffice.gov.uk.

Term: CMIS

Definition: This is an acronym used for the Channel Management Information System. This is the database used to manage cases that are deemed suitable for the Channel programme following a referral to Prevent.

Term: Channel Case

Definition: Following agreement at the first Channel Panel, a referral is adopted as a Channel case in order to further assess the vulnerability, or to provide a tailored package of support where necessary and proportionate to do so. Cases who were recommended at Channel panel for adoption but where the individual did not consent or withdrew consent are counted as ‘Not adopted as a Channel case’.

Term: Channel Case Officer

Definition: A Channel Case Officer refers to either the police counter-terrorism officer or the Home Office-funded Channel Coordinator, employed by the local authority. There are 10 pilot sites across England and Wales whereby a designated local authority role (Channel Coordinator) holds Channel case management responsibility instead of a police counter-terrorism officer. In these sites, the police still manage any terrorism risk, yet the Channel Coordinator administers the Channel Panels, coordinates referrals and updates the case management system, ensuring that the data is accurate. Channel Case Officers are responsible for managing referrals and cases through the Channel process in accordance with the Channel guidance and case management principles. See the Channel duty guidance for further information.

Term: Channel Panel

Definition: A Channel Panel, chaired by the Local Authority, and attended by other partners such as representatives from education and health services, will meet to discuss the referral. They will discuss the extent of the vulnerability, assess all the circumstances of the case, and decide whether to adopt the individual as a Channel case.

Term: Prevent

Definition: Prevent forms part of the Government’s wider counter-terrorism strategy, known as CONTEST. Prevent aims to safeguard people from becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism. For more information, please see the following publications on the GOV.UK website: Prevent duty guidance, Channel duty guidance and 2023 CONTEST strategy.

Term: Prevent Duty

Definition: Section 26 of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 (the Act) places a duty on certain bodies (“specified authorities” listed in Schedule 6 to the Act), in the exercise of their functions, to have “due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism”. This guidance is issued under section 29 of the Act. The Act states that the authorities subject to the provisions must have regard to this guidance when carrying out the duty. Please see the Prevent duty guidance for further information.

Term: Regional Prevent Coordinator

Definition: Regional Prevent Coordinators are responsible for leading the coordination, referrals, programme management and communications of all aspects of Prevent within a given region in England or Wales.

Term: Unspecified

Definition: The term ‘unspecified’ is used in the data tables and narrative report of this publication where data is not available. This can be where database fields have not been completed at all that is, data is missing, or where a field has been completed as ‘not applicable’.

3.1 Source of referral categories

Term: Community

Definition: This includes those in the community that are not a friend or family member of the individual they are referring and are not subject to the Prevent Duty. This includes members of the public, charity workers, sports clubs, and faith leaders, for example.

Term: Education

Definition: This includes professionals working in schools and higher/further education institutions.

Term: Friends and Family

Definition: This includes friends or family members of the individual referred.

Term: Health

Definition: This includes professionals working in the health sector including GPs, mental health professionals and hospital staff.

Term: HMPPS

Definition: This includes staff working for HM Prison and Probation Service, including Youth Offender Services.

Term: Local Authority

Definition: This includes those providing a Local Authority Service, including social services, housing services and children services.

Term: Police

Definition: This includes both local Policing and Counter-Terrorism Policing.

Term: Other source of referral

Definition: This includes those working in sectors that are not covered by the other sources of referral, for example those working in military, government (includes Home Office Enforcement and HMRC), or other private sectors of employment.

3.2 Type of concern categories:

Term: Extreme Right-Wing

Definition: This category reflects those who are vulnerable to being drawn into Extreme-Right Wing Terrorism. ‘Extreme right-wing’ is an umbrella term encompassing all ideologies and narratives that seek to undermine fundamental values (democracy, rule of law, individual liberty, tolerance) including Cultural Nationalism, White Nationalism and White Supremacism. These themselves span a range of extreme beliefs such as antisemitism, anti-Islam, neo-Nazi, ethno-nationalism or anti-establishment.

Term: Islamist

Definition: This category reflects those who are vulnerable to being drawn into Islamist Terrorism. Islamist terrorism is defined as acts of terrorism perpetrated or inspired by politico-religiously motivated groups or individuals who support and use violence as means to establish their interpretation of an Islamic society. In the UK context, the Islamist terrorist threat comes overwhelmingly from Salafi-Jihadi movements, which are inherently violent. Islamism describes a spectrum of movements that hold a variety of views on the use of violence; some are conditional in their view on the use of violence and others are explicit in their rejection of it.

Term: Incel

Definition: This category reflects those who are vulnerable due to engagement with Incel culture. Incel is an abbreviation of the term Involuntary Celibate and is a culture that encompasses misogynistic and violent views towards women as a result of feeling rejected by women.

Term: School Massacre

Definition: This category reflects those who are vulnerable due to being fixated with school massacre or extreme mass violence without targeting a particular group.

Term: High CT risk but no ideology present

Definition: This category is used when there is no clear ideological link to the concerns raised on referral but a CT risk is still identified as present. It is used retrospectively by case officers once further information gathering has been completed.

Term: Vulnerability present but no ideology or CT risk

Definition: This category is used when there is no clear ideological link to the concerns raised on referral. It is used retrospectively by case officers once further information gathering has been completed.

Term: No risk, vulnerability or ideology

Definition: This category is used when there is no clear ideological link to the concerns raised on referral. It is used retrospectively by case officers once further information gathering has been completed.

Term: Conflicted

Definition: This category reflects instances where the type of concern presented involves a combination of elements from multiple ideologies (mixed), shifts between different ideologies (unstable), or where the individual does not present a coherent ideology yet may still be vulnerable to being drawn into terrorism (unclear). On the PCM system this is recorded as Conflicted.

Term: No specific extremism issue

Definition: This category was an option on the Prevent Case Management system from 2016/17 to 2019/20. It describes case that do not have a clear, specific ideological concern. This category is no longer in use.

Term: Other

Definition: This category includes types of concerns that are not covered by the types of radicalisation concerns defined above. The following options within the Prevent data recording system are included within this group:

• left-wing extremism
• Northern Ireland related extremism
• animal rights extremism
• environmental extremism
• international separatist-related extremism
• international (other) extremism

3.3 Channel case outcomes

Term: Case closed – no further radicalisation concerns

Definition: This includes Channel cases that were closed as the Panel believed that the risk of radicalisation was suitably reduced and the objectives of the intervention were sufficiently addressed.

Term: Case closed – withdrew or withdrawn

Definition: This includes Channel cases that were closed as the individual concerned would not engage with the support provided or the police withdrew the individual from Channel as the risk had increased. In these circumstances, the police will manage any risk of terrorism they might present.

4. Conventions and revisions

4.1 Rounding

Data is provided unrounded in the data tables of the terrorism statistics releases. This is to promote transparency and allow users to exploit the data further.

Percentages, percentage changes and proportions presented in the releases are rounded to the nearest per cent using the ‘round half away from zero’ method. Therefore, in the borderline case where the fraction of the percentage is exactly 0.5, the rounded figure is equal to y + 0.5 if y is positive, and y - 0.5 if y is negative. For example, 23.5% is rounded to 24%, and -23.5% is rounded to -24%.

Where data is rounded, it may not sum to the totals shown, or, in the case of percentages, to 100%, because it has been rounded independently.

4.2 Revisions

The presented figures are correct at the time of publication and may include revisions for the periods covered by, and received since, the publication of the previous edition in the series.

Data may be revised for various reasons. For example, open cases are presented in this release based on the latest position as at the date of data provision to the Home Office. Regional Prevent Coordinators are asked for updates on any Channel cases that were open at the time of publication for previous releases and updated in the subsequent release. Substantial revisions to figures presented in earlier editions should they occur, are described in the ‘Revisions analysis’ section in each release.

Corrections and revisions follow the Home Office corporate revisions policy, as detailed on page 6 of its statement of compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics.

4.3 Missing data

Across the data collection phase for each annual publication, there is a small subset of cases that do not have a complete data record. This can arise for several reasons including complications during the data matching process between the 2 systems, or the partial completion of referral forms when a referral is added to the system. Home Office and CTPHQ analysts work together to investigate these cases as best as possible, but for some cases missing fields cannot be fully rectified and remain incomplete.

Home Office analysts maintain a quality assurance log to record each case with missing fields, which is used to review and determine the inclusion of each individual case based on the amount of information missing. Although a level of data missingness exists across each data collection, this is a small subset of cases and Home Office analysts are confident this still captures the full picture.

5. Uses of the data

Specific uses of the data are listed below:

a) Informing the general public

• about the state of the economy, society and the environment – figures are made available to increase transparency around the Prevent programme and provide the public with an accurate source of information on referrals
• about the activity of the police – figures are requested via Parliamentary Questions and Freedom of Information requests

b) Government policy making and monitoring

• statistics are used to inform government policy by providing a national overview of how the programme is working on the ground

c) Resource allocation – typically by central and local government

• these statistics are used, alongside other information, to help determine the locations where the threat from terrorism and radicalisation is greatest, in order to allocate resources accordingly

d) Third parties

• these statistics are used by a range of third parties from civil liberty groups to academics

5.1 Where are the latest published figures?

Dates of future releases are pre-announced on the Statistics: release calendar on GOV.UK.

Home Office statistical releases on the Individuals referred to and supported through the Prevent Programme are available on the GOV.UK website.

Information on how the Home Office complies with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics is also on the GOV.UK website.

5.2 Related publications

Prevent Referral Data - Police Scotland

Police Scotland publish statistics on the number of individuals referred to Prevent in Scotland.

5.3 Feedback and enquiries

We welcome feedback on the statistics.

If you have any feedback or enquiries about this publication, please contact HSAI_Statistics@homeoffice.gov.uk.

Home Office Responsible Statistician:

Rosanna Currenti, Head of Policing Statistics.

The ‘Individuals referred to and supported through the Prevent programme’ release is an Official Statistics output produced to the highest professional standards and free from political interference. It has been produced by statisticians working in the Home Office Analysis and Insight Directorate in accordance with the Home Office’s ‘Statement of compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics’ which covers our policy on revisions and other matters. The Chief Statistician, and the Head of Profession, report to the National Statistician with respect to all professional statistical matters and oversees all Home Office Official Statistics products with respect to the Code of Practice, being responsible for their timing, content and methodology.