National statistics

Legal aid statistics Quality Statement

Updated 28 March 2024

Introduction

Legal aid statistics are published in compliance with the Ministry of Justice quality strategy for statistics, which can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ministry-of-justice-statistics-policy-and-procedures

This requires that information is provided on how they meet user needs with particular reference to the principles of relevance, accuracy, timeliness, accessibility and clarity, comparability and coherence. This section describes the quality of legal aid statistics in relation to each of these principles. A more detailed assessment of data quality in each of our underlying systems is available in our User Guide which is published alongside this document.

Core Objectives

We aim to deliver a service in line with our four core objectives:

• Provision of data which are accessible, consistent and fully documented.
• Production of statistics which clearly communicate the story and meet users’ needs.
• Provision of analysis which is timely and based on robust methodology.
• Building capacity, capability and engagement.

Trust in statistics is important as statistics are fundamental to good government, to the delivery of public services and to decision making in all sectors of society, Statistics provide the parliament and the public with a window on society and the economy, and on the work and performance of government.

Assessing the quality of statistics is not a one-off exercise. It must be done on a continuous basis. This document explains by what measures we will assess the quality of our statistics, what users can expect us to do, and the information we will provide to users to aid them in making their own assessment of the quality of the statistics we produce.

As required by the Code of Practice for Official Statistics^{[footnote 1]} and in line with the Government Statistics Services Quality Strategy and associated guidance^{[footnote 2]}, we will measure and report on our quality using a framework based around European Statistical Systems (ESS) Dimensions of Quality^{[footnote 3]}.

Principle 1: Relevance

Relevance is the degree to which the statistics meets the current and potential needs of users.

Legal aid statistics can be used to understand the volumes of different types of activity across the legal aid system and to measure changes in those volumes. They can also be used to understand the expenditure associated with specific volumes of activity. This enables users to examine the impact of policy changes relating to both larger and smaller, more specific areas of the legal aid system. For more details on this way of measuring legal aid expenditure see the Introduction to the most recent statistical bulletin.

There are several groups of users who use different products from the statistical bulletin. To assess whether our outputs are meeting user needs, the legal aid statistics team encourages feedback from users and maintains a record of queries and other contact from users. For more information on users please see the section on Users and uses of our statistics, below.

We work with our data suppliers to understand how any changes to data required for operational purposes will affect its relevance to user needs. More information on data sources and data quality can be found in our user guide.

Principle 2: Accuracy and Reliability

Accuracy is the closeness between an estimated result and the, unknown, true value.

Reliability is the closeness of early estimates to subsequent estimated values.

Legal aid statistics are based entirely on administrative data^{[footnote 4]}. Their quality is managed and assured using the best practice guidance and tools published by the UK Statistics Authority. This quality management includes:

• working with data suppliers to understand their data collection and validation methods and the operational context;
• understanding how the data are used in an operational environment and any bias that may be created where the data is also used for performance metrics or other requirements;
• considering how any changes to data definitions or sources may have affected statistics over time;
• communicating to users about the quality of the statistics.

An explanation of the data sources used and the quality of the statistics for each main area of legal aid can be found later in this section.

Legal aid statistics comply fully with MoJ’s published revisions policy. Details of how the policy is applied to these statistics, and explanations of specific revisions that have been made, are set out in ‘Revisions’ section of the user guide. All revisions are indicated in the tables of the quarterly statistical release and the largest or most important revisions are also explained in the main document, along with an assessment of their impact.

Principle 3: Timeliness and Punctuality

Timeliness refers to the time gap between the publication date and the reference period for the statistics.

Punctuality is the time lag between the actual and planned dates of publication for statistics.

Timeliness refers to the lapse of time between publication and the period to which the data refer. Punctuality refers to the time lag between the actual and planned dates of publication. Legal aid statistics are published at quarterly intervals at 9:30am on a date which has been pre-announced a year in advance on the gov.uk website https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/announcements.

Each publication comprises the first release of National Statistics covering the previous quarter, and also provides the latest statement of all figures for previous periods and longer-term trends.

Currently, each statistical release is published towards the end of the third month after the period to which the headline figures relate. Generally for example:

• statistics for April to June are published on the last Thursday in the final week of September.
• statistics for July to September are published on the Thursday in the third week of December.
• statistics for October to December are published on the Thursday in the final week of March.
• statistics encompassing the full financial year for January to March are published on the Thursday in the final week of June.

This timing strikes a balance between the need to minimise the delay in releasing statistics and the size of any revisions to previous periods in subsequent publications. For example, much of the data relating to a period may be entered onto Legal Aid Agency (LAA) data systems by legal aid providers or LAA caseworkers up to two months after the period ends. This is most commonly the case for the submission of bills or claims for payment and allows for the collation of required documentation and validation checks to take place. The statistics are not based on data extracted prior to this point because they would be incomplete and therefore not comparable with previous periods, and would also be subject to substantial revisions in subsequent publications. The timing also allows for the production and thorough quality assurance of the statistical release.

A number of the statistical series included are updated only annually, usually in the January to March edition which is published in June. In deciding how frequently to publish figures the legal aid statistics team take account of factors such as the users’ needs, the nature of the data and the resource involved in doing so.

Principle 4: Accessibility and Clarity

Accessibility is the ease with which users can access the statistics and data.

Clarity refers to the quality and sufficiency of the commentary, illustrations, accompanying advice and technical details.

Good quality statistics are presented in a clear and understandable form, released in a suitable and convenient manner, available and accessible on an impartial basis with supporting metadata and guidance.

Statistics on all aspects of the legal aid system are published together in a single, quarterly series of National Statistics releases which are available on the gov.uk official statistics calendar. Each release comprises a set of documents to provide both summary and detailed information and to meet the needs of new and expert users alike (see the Introduction to the most recent release for details). User feedback has favoured this approach.

All commentary that accompanies these statistics is written by the legal aid statistics team, is intended to be impartial and aid user understanding. For users seeking further information, each publication includes contact details for the responsible statistician and for media enquiries.

Alongside the quarterly releases we publish this user guide to legal aid statistics, which contains information on the context, data sources and quality, coverage and uses of the statistics, a glossary of terminology and links to other relevant information to enable users to interpret and apply the statistics correctly and judge the quality and relevance of the statistics for their needs.

Principle 5: Comparability and Coherence

Comparability is the degree to which data can be compared over time, by region or another domain.

Coherence is the degree to which the statistical processes that generate two or more outputs use the same concepts and harmonised methods.

The LAA’s recording practices and data systems are designed to collect all the information needed to administer the legal aid system fairly and effectively, with generally as little beyond this as possible. The intention is to minimise burdens for providers, clients and government alike, which is common in administrative data systems. At times this can limit the comparability of the data, for example before and after major administrative changes, between the legal aid system and other areas of the justice system such as court statistics, or even between different areas of the legal aid system itself. Where such issues arise, an explanation is provided in this user guide and, for the more important instances, in the quarterly statistical releases themselves.

The statistical time series provided in the tables for each area of legal aid go as far back in time as comparable data can be sourced from LAA information systems and historical data sources, and range from 3 to over 15 years. More fundamental changes to the legal aid system, its structure and administration make comparisons over longer periods more difficult or less meaningful, even at higher levels. Many such changes were brought about by the Access to Justice Act 1999 and later the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. Others include the introduction of new schemes for the remuneration of legal aid providers and changes to LAA information systems.

When comparing statistics across different areas of legal aid system, users must bear in mind differences in the nature of the service being provided in order to avoid drawing misleading conclusions. Some areas involve the provision of a high volume of relatively quick, low-cost service, while others involve a relatively low volume of more costly services lasting a year or more from start to completion. This is true for comparisons within closely-related areas as well as between high level areas such as criminal and civil legal aid. The legal aid statistics team would advise users to consider looking at both expenditure and volume figures to draw the most meaningful comparison. More information is provided in the glossary of the user guide and in the bulletin.

Where figures are updated only annually they are generally presented by financial year (1 April to 31 March) rather than calendar year to aid comparison with financial reports.

Some users are interested in comparing legal aid statistics with those for other parts of the UK and other countries or other parts of the justice system in England and Wales, such as the criminal or civil courts. Links to published figures that users may find most relevant are provided in the ‘Related statistics’ section of the user guide.

When seeking to make comparisons between different countries or jurisdictions, users should bear in mind that the characteristics of their legal systems can have a significant bearing on whether the statistics on legal aid in those jurisdictions may meaningfully be compared. These include:

• Justice system: England and Wales operate mainly a common law system within which matters are determined on an adversarial basis, which aims to get to the truth in both civil and criminal cases through the open competition between the two sides to make the most compelling argument for their case. Many countries in mainland Europe and elsewhere instead operate a mainly civil law system within which matters are determined though an inquisitorial procedure, which seeks to get to the truth through investigation and examination of all evidence, generally led by a judge. Other jurisdictions, including Scotland, operate a combination of these two approaches. This makes a fundamental difference to how the work, and hence the costs, of the justice system are spread between the courts, the judiciary and the two sides in a civil dispute or a criminal case and this, in turn, has implications for what services are funded and provided by legal aid or equivalent systems. For example, in civil law countries prosecutors or magistrates conduct work that in England and Wales would normally be carried out by a defence lawyer remunerated through legal aid; inquisitorial systems may fund this work through parts of their justice budget other than legal aid.
• Differences in what jurisdictions see as a criminal or civil matter, and how it should be resolved, as well as differences in effectiveness of justice systems, can affect the levels of demand on legal aid systems.
• Differences in provision of and eligibility for legal aid: even in countries with similar legal systems, costs are apportioned differently across the system. For instance, early legal advice is provided through government-funded services in some countries but this is not always paid out of the legal aid budget.
• Data collection methods and the quality of statistics may differ.
• Societal trends such as crime rates affect legal aid workload volumes.

Within the UK, England and Wales, and Northern Ireland, are common law jurisdictions. The Scottish system has aspects of both common law and civil law.

Eligibility for legal aid varies between the countries of the UK. Criminal legal aid at the police station is free for everyone in England and Wales and in Northern Ireland, while in Scotland a means and merits test must be passed. Advice in court is free if a merits test is passed in England and Wales, while in Scotland and Northern Ireland a means test must also be passed. Representation in court is means and merits tested in both England and Wales and Scotland.

Civil legal aid varies in scope across the UK. More areas of law are in scope in Northern Ireland than in England and Wales, and in Scotland all areas of law are potentially within scope. In all three jurisdictions a merits test must be passed, and in most areas of law a means test must also be passed. The financial thresholds in the jurisdictions are not the same, and contributions may be required at different levels.

Contact

Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office: Tel: 020 3334 3536 Email: newsdesk@justice.gsi.gov.uk

Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Data and Evidence as a Service (DES) division of the Ministry of Justice:

Carly Gray
Ministry of Justice
Tel: +447784 275495

Email: statistics@justice.gov.uk

---

URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics

© Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice

Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gov.uk

---

1. https://gss.civilservice.gov.uk/policy-store/government-statistical-service-gss-quality-strategy/ ↩

2. https://gss.civilservice.gov.uk/policy-store/government-statistical-service-gss-quality-strategy/ ↩

3. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-catalogues/-/KS-02-18-142 ↩

4. https://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/monitoring-and-assessment/monitoring/administrative-data-and-official-statistics/ ↩