Official Statistics

Annual Prison Performance Ratings Guide 2024/25

Published 31 July 2025

Applies to England and Wales

© 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/statistics/prison-performance-ratings-2024-to-2025/annual-prison-performance-ratings-guide-202425

1. Introduction

His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) is an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) with the goal of helping prison and probation services work together to manage offenders through their sentences. HMPPS assesses performance for both public and privately managed prisons across England and Wales using a suite of measures that are in line with HMPPS priorities.

The Annual Prison Performance Ratings reflect performance between 1 April 2024 and 31 March 2025.

There is overlap between some information provided in the Annual Prison Performance Ratings and other MoJ publications:

Data presented have been drawn from administrative IT systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the data, the level of detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system.

2. Policy Interventions

A number of policy interventions introduced to relieve prison capacity pressures are likely to have had some effect on the performance reported on in this publication. These policy interventions are summarised below.

  • 17 October 2023 to 9 September 2024: End of Custody Supervised Licence (ECSL)[footnote 1]
    The End of Custody Supervised Licence scheme released eligible determinate sentenced prisoners prior to their conditional release date.

  • 2 April 2024: Fixed term recall[footnote 2]
    Changes to the recall process mandate the use of fixed term recalls rather than standard recalls for offenders sentenced to less than 12 months of custody, subject to certain exceptions.

  • 29 April 2024: Probation Reset[footnote 3]
    On 29 April 2024, the Probation Service introduced a change in practice known as Probation Reset. Under Probation Reset, probation practitioner engagement is prioritised towards the first two-thirds of an individual’s sentence where intervention can have the most impact. This directly impacts the Employment at six weeks following custodial release and Employment at six months following custodial release measures.

  • 10 September 2024: Standard Determinate Sentences (SDS40)[footnote 4][footnote 5]
    The Standard Determinate Sentences scheme allows certain prisoners serving a ‘standard determinate sentence’ (with a 50% conditional release point) to be released at the 40% point of their sentence, subject to eligibility criteria. SDS40 has been in operation since 10 September 2024. ‘Tranche 1’ releases were comprised of eligible prisoners serving sentences of ‘less than 5 years’. ‘Tranche 2’ releases were comprised of eligible prisoners serving sentences of ‘5 years or more’. The first ‘Tranche 2’ releases took place on 22 October 2024.

3. Prison Performance Framework

The 2024/25 prison performance framework was used to assess the 119 HMPPS adult estate prisons.

The under 18 YOIs (4) and Secure Training Centre (1) are excluded from the prison performance framework as they are monitored through the Youth Custody Service Performance Framework, summarised in the YCS Annex: 2024/25, YCS Annex Guide: 2024/25 and YCS Annex Table: 2024/25.

The 2024/25 prison performance framework used 36 outcome-focused key performance measures reflecting HMPPS priorities over the following areas:

  • Safety

  • Security

  • Respect

  • Purposeful Activity

  • Preparation for Release

  • Organisational Effectiveness

The majority of measures within the framework utilise a performance against target model to assess performance in each prison. See Annex A for more detail regarding the methodology, thresholds and rules applied.

The data-driven ratings were subject to a moderation process and ratified in June 2025. Overall performance in each prison is rated on a 1 to 4 scale. The different ratings are:

Figure 1: Rating definitions

Rating Definition
4 Outstanding performance
3 Good performance
2 Performance of concern
1 Performance of serious concern

The measures by priority area are shown in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2: 2024/25 Performance Measures[footnote 6] by Priority Area

Priority Area Measure
Safety Prisoner on prisoner assaults incidents
  Assaults on staff incidents
  Self-harm incidents
  Positive random mandatory drug testing (rMDT)
  Number of months required MDT levels not met
  Safety Audit/Risk Management Audit
  Measuring the Quality of Prisoner Life - Safety and Security
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Safety
Security Escapes from closed prisons
  The rate of absconds
  Releases in error
  Security Audit
Respect Racial disparity in the use of force applied in prisons
  Measuring the Quality of Prison Life - Respect
  Audit of Living Conditions
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Respect
Purposeful Activity Education progress in English and Maths
  Attendance at education courses
  Percentage of prisoners in half time purposeful activity
  Percentage of prisoners in full time purposeful activity
  Prisoners on paid work Release on Temporary License (ROTL) - rate per 1,000 prisoners
  Measuring the Quality of Prisoner Life - Purposeful Activity
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Purposeful Activity
Preparation for Release Employment at six months following custodial release
  Employment at six weeks following custodial release
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Preparation for Release
  Housed on first night of custodial release
  Family and Significant Others
  Accredited Programmes completions
  Keyworker Quality Assessment
  Keyworker Quality Invalid Notes
Organisational Effectiveness Incident Reporting System - Data Quality Audit
  Incident Reporting System - Assaults checks
  Incident Reporting System - Self-harm checks
  Staff resignation rate
  Staff sickness

Each performance measure along with its relevant data source can be found in Annex B.

4. Prison Scores

Each prison has an overall performance rating, which is constructed by combining all the measures in the framework.

Each measure is assigned a weighting, with the sum of all measure weights adding up to 100% for each prison. The weightings represent the importance of the performance measure for HMPPS. Measures are weighted differently for different prison functional groups, based on their relative importance. Not all performance measures in the framework apply to every prison as a result of varying prison functions.

Each applicable measure carries a rating for each prison; most are rated on a 1 to 4 scale, while some measures only allow ratings of 1 to 3. As such, the maximum possible score a prison can achieve varies depending on which measures apply to the prison and the specific distribution of weights. To overcome this, the overall prison ratings are assigned using the score the prison achieved as a percentage of the maximum possible score achievable.

There are also differences in the way measure ratings are calculated. Some compare performance to target, some are set nationally to reflect consistent expectations across the estate, whereas others are specific to each prison considering a range of local factors. For audit and HM Inspectorate of Prisons measures, the measure rating corresponds directly to the audit or inspection outcome.

The prison’s overall percentage performance score is calculated by dividing the sum of these scores multiplied by the weighting, by the sum of the maximum possible scores multiplied by the weighting. This overall percentage score determines the overall rating of the prison using the thresholds shown below in Figure 3:

Figure 3: Rating thresholds for 2024/25

Rating Percentage of max score
4: Outstanding performance Greater than or equal to 81%
3: Good performance Less than 81% and greater than or equal to 58%
2: Performance of concern Less than 58% and greater than or equal to 51%
1: Performance of serious concern Less than 51%

For 2024/25, the performance framework now assesses Fosse Way which was opened in 2023. During the performance year that a prison is opened they are excluded. In their first full performance year, their targets are set with limited data and so their final score may not be reflective of their actual performance yet.

5. Weights

Each measure is weighted differently for each group, reflecting the relative importance HMPPS places on the measure for that group to account for the different nature of the prisons. The agreed weightings for each group can be seen in Annex C.

5.1 Weight redistribution

Where a measure does not apply to a prison, the weighting for that measure is proportionately redistributed to all other measures across the framework, ensuring the weightings continue to sum to 100%.

Generally, Audits and HMIP Inspections do not take place on an annual basis. As such these measures are age weighted on the assumption that the results become less relevant over time. The weighting for these measures reduces in weight as shown in Figure 4 below:

Figure 4: Weighting reduction over time for Audit measures

Age Weighting reduces by:
Up to 1 year 0%
1 to 2 years 20%
2 to 3 years 40%
3 to 4 years 60%
Over 4 years 80%

In these cases, the weighting which no longer applies to the measure is proportionately redistributed across all other measures in the framework.

6. Rules

There are a number of rules in place across the framework that impact on the data-driven ratings for the measures. These rules can be grouped into the following categories:

  • Measure level ratings being capped:

    • where, even if they meet their target, a prison cannot attain a rating above a predetermined level; or

    • performance below a certain level in an audit-based measure can enforce a cap on a non-audit based measure; or

    • where drug testing levels are not met for a certain number of months, the rating for the corresponding measure is capped.

  • A certain number of prisoners must have been released in the time period for a measure to apply to a prison.

A full list of rules and the measures to which they apply can be found in Annex A.

7. Moderation

Prior to the publication of Annual Prison Performance Ratings, an annual moderation process is undertaken by HMPPS. During this process, performance data is scrutinised by key stakeholders in the prison performance process and considered alongside wider contextual evidence to make a final assessment for the year-end rating of each prison. This ensures the rating for each prison is fully reflective of performance.

In 2024/25 prisons were automatically considered for moderation if any of the following criteria was met:

  • The prison had an escape in the 2024/25 performance year,

  • The prison received an Urgent Notification in 2024/25 that was not considered as part of moderation in 2023/24,

  • The prison received a rating of Unsatisfactory in the ‘Managing Risk of Escape’ Function of the Security Audit/Security Diagnostic in 2024/25, or,

  • A prison in the Long Term High Security Estate (LTHSE) received a score below 3 (good) in their 2024/25 Security Audit/Security Diagnostic.

In addition, prisons and prison leaders could submit a moderation proposal to challenge the data-driven performance rating. Where a justifiable improvement or decline in performance would move a prison to the next rating, evidence was considered by the moderation panel as to whether the rating should change.

A moderation panel discussed each proposal to agree a final rating. Prisons that were not brought forward to the moderation panel kept their data-driven rating.

In the Annual Prison Performance Ratings Publication, we present the data-driven breakdowns at measure level and whether the overall rating was changed following moderation.

8. Prison Functional Groups

Prisons were assigned to functional groups based on their predominant function. The prison functional groups were the basis of the relative performance used for assessment. Descriptions of the prison functional groups can be found in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Prison Functional Group Descriptions

Group Description
High Security (5 prisons) Hold male prisoners classified as category A; prisoners whose escape would be highly dangerous to the public, the police or the security of the state and for whom the aim must be to make escape impossible.
Category B (10 prisons) Hold male prisoners classified as category B; prisoners for whom the very highest conditions of security are not necessary but for whom escape must be made very difficult.
Category C Resettlement (7 prisons) Hold male prisoners classified as category C with up to 24 months’ time left to serve in preparation for resettlement.
Category C Trainer (15 prisons) Hold male prisoners classified as category C; prisoners who cannot be trusted in open conditions but who do not have the will to make a determined escape attempt or the resources to do so. Some category C trainer prisons will hold a specialist cohort of men including men convicted of sexual offences. Some prisons hold foreign national prisoners who are category C and are of interest to the Home Office with between 3 and 36 months’ time left to serve of their sentence. Prisoners in training prisons will transfer to a resettlement prison with between 10 and 24 months’ time left to serve. This will be dependent on addressing their offending behaviour needs and on resettlement requirements.
Category C Trainer/Resettlement (23 prisons) Hold male prisoners classified as category C; prisoners who cannot be trusted in open conditions but who do not have the will to make a determined escape attempt or the resources to do so. Prisoners in training/resettlement prisons will transition between the training and resettlement cohorts with between 10 and 24 months’ time left to serve in preparation for resettlement. This may mean those with 10 months’ time left to serve require a transfer to a more appropriate resettlement prison based on individual need.
Category C Foreign National (3 prisons) Hold foreign national prisoners who are category C and are of interest to the Home Office with between 3 and 36 months’ time left to serve of their sentence.
Open (13 prisons) Accommodate category D prisoners whose risk of absconding is considered to be low or who are of low risk to the public because of the way they have addressed their offending behaviour. Open prisons also house indeterminate and longer-sentenced prisoners who are coming towards the end of their sentence and who have gradually worked their way down the categories.
Reception (31 prisons) Hold male prisoners. These serve the courts and receive remand and post-conviction prisoners, before their allocation to other establishments. They hold many short-term prisoners; remand prisoners; those waiting allocation to training prisons; and may hold a small number of immigration detainees. The short-term prisoners held in local prisons are those who are due for release into the surrounding area and as such engage with resettlement providers in the last 16 months of their sentence.
Female (12 prisons) Hold female prisoners of all category classifications.

9. Comparator Groups

The 2024/25 comparator groups of prisons can be found in Table 5 of the Supplementary Tables that accompany this guide. A nearest neighbour statistical model is used to calculate the comparator groups. A number of contextual variables are used to determine a statistical score for each prison. These include:

  • Prison type;

  • Whether the prison holds young offenders;

  • Prison category;

  • Gender of prisoners;

  • Proportion of prisons who are sex offenders;

  • Complexity of the prison to determine whether it is a standard site, complex or diverse and complex[footnote 7];

  • Operational capacity;

  • Average age of the prisoners;

  • Churn of prisoners[footnote 8];

  • Building age;

  • Proportion of different category prisoners;

  • Proportion of prisoners who are foreign national offenders;

  • Urban or rural classification;

  • Average sentence length of prisoners in the prison.

The variables are weighted with the most important, as set by HMPPS, contributing more to the statistically derived score. Prisons with the nearest scores are set as the comparators with each prison having a maximum of eight within their group. A comparator group is unique to the prison. If Prison A has Prisons B and C in its comparator group, this does not necessarily mean Prison B would have Prisons A and C in its group.

10. Statistical Notes

10.1 Data Redactions

1. Positive random mandatory drug testing (rMDT)

Due to reduced testing levels, reduced number of prisons with sufficient testing and the need to update the testing panel, the data is currently not sufficient to robustly estimate the percentage positive. For more information, please refer to the HMPPS Annual Digest Official Statistics. Although the data has been included in the performance calculations, due to these data quality concerns data for the Positive random mandatory drug testing is not included in Table 2.

2. Accredited programmes completions

The data for the accredited programme completions measure has not been finalised for 2024/25, so it is not included in the publication. This data will be included in the Prison Education and Accredited Programme Statistics 2024 to 2025 due to be released on 25 September 2025.

11. Data Quality Statement

11.1 Relevance

These statistics are generally used by:

  • Government
  • Academia
  • Media
  • Charity sector
  • General public

Additionally, these statistics play an important role in helping to ensure the Ministry of Justice’s accountability to the public. To ensure these statistics meet the needs of users, users are encouraged to provide comments and feedback on existing outputs including content, breadth, frequency and methodology.

11.2 Accuracy and Reliability

These statistics are from Management Information data from administrative systems and involve manual data entry. Management Information refers to information that is not collected specifically for statistics or research. This data is collected by the Ministry of Justice for uses such as registration and record-keeping.

Although due care has been taken when processing and analysing the returns, as with any large administrative data source, the possibility of errors cannot be eliminated. While the figures shows have been checked as far as practicable, they should be regarded as approximate and not necessarily accurate to the last whole number shown in the tables.

Over time, minor changes are made to recording practices to improve the accuracy of these statistics.

In accordance with Principle 2 of the Code of Practice for Statistics, the Ministry of Justice is required to publish transparent guidance on its policy for revisions.

The 3 reasons specified for statistics needing to be revised are changes in sources of administrative systems or methodology changes, receipt of subsequent information, and errors in statistical systems and processes. Each of these points, and its specific relevance to this publication, are addressed below:

  • Changes in sources of administrative systems or methodology This guidance document will clearly state where there have been revisions to data due to changes in methodology or administrative systems. In addition, statistics affected within the publication will be appropriately footnoted.

  • Receipt of subsequent information The nature of any administrative system is that data may be received late. Revision mid-year will only be made where it has been deemed that the late data has a major influence on the statistics. All other minor revisions will be published in the next scheduled update.

  • Errors in statistical systems and processes Occasionally errors can occur in statistical processes, however procedures are constantly reviewed to minimise this risk. Should a significant error be found, the publication on the website will be updated and an errata slip published documenting the revision.

11.3 Timeliness and Punctuality

Data in this publication is drawn from different sources, each with their own collection, validation and quality assurance processes and timelines. To account for this, data is extracted two months after the end of the performance year to allow for the most amount of time for data to mature whilst remaining practical for performance rating.

To comply with the Code of Practice for Statistics, these statistics will be announced at least 4 weeks before the publication date. Any changes to pre-announced release dates will be agreed by the Head of Profession for Statistics and promptly announced, with reasons provided for these changes.

11.4 Comparability and Coherence

The data presented in this publication was extracted in June 2025 and reflects the basis upon which prison performance was assessed. However, this may differ from other statistical publications where the data was extracted later and therefore includes any revisions. This may impact the following measures:

  • For finalised data on the Prisoner on prisoner assaults incidents, Assaults on staff incidents, and Self-harm incidents measures, please refer to the Safety in Custody National Statistics publication.

  • For finalised data on the Staff resignation rate measure, please refer to the HMPPS Workforce Official Statistics publication.

  • For finalised data on the Housed on first night of custodial release measure, please refer to the Offender Accommodation Outcomes - Statistical Summary publication.

  • For finalised data on the Employment at six weeks following custodial release and Employment at six months following custodial release measures, please refer to the Offender Employment Outcomes - Statistical Summary publication.

  • For finalised data on the Escapes from closed prisons and Releases in error measures, please refer to the HMPPS Annual Digest publication.

11.5 Accessibility and Clarity

These statistics are published on the Ministry of Justice GOV.UK website, and the publication is available from 09:30am on the day of release.

The tables are published in an Excel format. The summary document and this guidance are both published in an accessible HTML format.

The summary document is designed in a way to provide quick access to the top-level statistics, with further information within the tables. This guidance document and the notes within the tables provide clarity on any technical terms, definitions, or acronyms to ensure that these statistics can be used effectively.

12. Annex A - Thresholds, Caps and Rules

Measure 1 2 3 4 Rules
Prisoner on prisoner assaults incidents > 125% of target Above target but <= 125% of target <= Target <= 75% of target A national maximum rate has been included. This is the level above which a prison can only achieve a maximum rating of 2, even if they achieve their target. For 2024/25 this is set based on the function of the prison: Adult prisons: 173.24, YOI prisons (18 to 21): 453.44. Additionally, if a prison has a rating of 2 or less for the IRS Assault checks measure (or if IRS Assaults check is N/A and they have a rating of 2 or less for the IRS Data Quality Audit measure) the maximum rating achievable will be a 2.
Assaults on staff incidents > 125% of target Above target but <= 125% of target <= Target <= 75% of target A national maximum rate has been included. This is the level above which a prison can only achieve a maximum rating of 2, even if they achieve their target. For 2024/25 this is set based on the function of the prison: Adult prisons: 83.22, YOI prisons (18 to 21): 151.09. Additionally, if a prison has a rating of 2 or less for the IRS Assault checks measure (or if IRS Assaults check is N/A and they have a rating of 2 or less for the IRS Data Quality Audit measure) the maximum rating achievable will be a 2.
Self-harm incidents > 125% of target Above target but <= 125% of target <= Target <= 75% of target A national maximum rate has been included. This is the level above which a prison can only achieve a maximum rating of 2, even if they achieve their target. For 2024/25 the maximum rate for male prisons is 600.48 and for female prisons is 3,441.5. Additionally, if a prison has a rating of 2 or less for the IRS Self-harm checks measure (or if IRS Self-harm check is N/A and they have a rating of 2 or less for the IRS Data Quality Audit measure) the maximum rating achievable will be a 2.
Positive random mandatory drug testing (rMDT) > 125% of target Above target but <= 125% of target <= Target <= 75% of target If a prison misses testing levels in at least one, but fewer than half of the months in the reporting period, the maximum rating achievable in the RMDT measure will be a 3. If a prison misses testing levels in half or more months in the reporting period, the rating for RMDT will be reduced by 1 and the maximum rating achievable will be a 2. If a prisons misses the testing levels in all months in the reporting period, the maximum rating achievable will be a 1. Additionally, a functional maximum rate has also been included for 2024/25. This is the level above which a prison can only achieve a maximum rating of 2, even if they achieve their target. For 2024/25 this is equal to 20.7%.
Safety Audit/Risk Management Audit 1 2 3 4  
Measuring the Quality of Prison Life - Safety & Security 1 2 3 4  
His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Safety 1 2 3 4  
Escapes from closed prisons 1 or more escapes N/A 0 escapes N/A An escape will result in automatic moderation at the end of the year.
The rate of absconds > 110% of target Above target but <= 110% of target <= Target Top 25% prisons with lowest absconds rate on condition the target is met  
Release in error          
Security Audit 1 2 3 4  
Racial disparity in the use of force applied in prisons Not in the RRI tolerance zone and RRI confidence interval does not include 1 Not in the RRI tolerance zone but RRI confidence interval includes 1 In the RRI tolerance zone but RRI confidence interval does not include 1 In the RRI tolerance zone and RRI confidence interval includes 1 OR if there have been no use of force incidents in the time period  
Measuring the Quality of Prison Life - Respect 1 2 3 4  
Audit of Living Conditions 1 2 3 4  
His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Respect 1 2 3 4  
Education progress in English and Maths <= 75% of target Below target but > 75% of target >= Target > 125% of target  
Attendance at education courses <= 85% of target Below target but > 85% of target >= Target > 115% of target A national minimum percentage has been included. This is the level below which a prison can only achieve a maximum rating of 2, even if they achieve their target. For 2024/25 this is equal to 65%.
Percentage of prisoners in full time purposeful activity <= 90% of target Below target but > 90% >= Target > 110% of target  
Percentage of prisoners in half time purposeful activity <= 90% of target Below target but > 90% >= Target > 110% of target  
Prisoners on paid work ROTL - rate per 1,000 prisoners <= 75% of target Below target but > 75% of target >= Target >= 125% of target A national minimum has been included. This is the level below which a prison can only achieve a maximum rating of 2, even if they achieve their target. For 2024/25 this is equal to 259.93
Measuring the Quality of Prison Life - Purposeful Activity 1 2 3 4  
His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Purposeful Activity 1 2 3 4  
Employment at 6 months following custodial release <= 75% of target Below target but > 75% of target >= Target > 120% of target A national minimum percentage has been included. This is the level below which a prison can only achieve a maximum rating of 2, even if they achieve their target. For 2024/25 this is equal to 10%.
Employment at 6 weeks following custodial release <= 75% of target Below target but > 75% of target >= Target > 120% of target A national minimum percentage has been included. This is the level below which a prison can only achieve a maximum rating of 2, even if they achieve their target. For 2024/25 this is equal to 10%.
His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Preparation for Release 1 2 3 4  
Housed on first night of custodial release <= 90% of target Below target but > 90% of target >= Target > 105% of target  
Family and Significant Others <= 90% of target Below target but > 90% >= Target > 110% of target  
Accredited programmes completions <= 80% of target Below target but > 80% of target >= Target N/A  
Keyworker Quality Cases where conditions for ratings 2 to 4 do not apply Outturn > 1.85 and Invalid Cases < 5% Outturn > 2.35 and Invalid Cases < 2.5% Outturn > 3.15 and Invalid Cases < 1%  
Incident Reporting System - Data Quality Audit 1 2 3 4  
Incident Reporting System - Assaults checks          
Incident Reporting System - Self-harm checks          
Staff resignation rate > 125% of target Above target but <= 125% of target <= Target N/A  
Staff sickness > 12 days Between 9 and 12 days <= 9 days <= 9 days and top 15% nationally  

13. Annex B - Performance Measure Information

Priority Area Performance Measure Description Data Source
Safety Prisoner on prisoner assaults incidents Prisoner on prisoner assaults incidents reported as an annualised rate per 1,000 prisoners. An assault is defined as unwanted physical contact between two or more individuals. Prison NOMIS
  Assaults on staff incidents Assaults on staff reported as an annualised rate per 1,000 prisoners. An assault is defined as unwanted physical contact between two or more individuals. Prison NOMIS
  Self-harm incidents Self-harm incidents reported as an annualised rate per 1,000 prisoners. Self-harm is defined as any act where a prisoner deliberately harms or injures themselves. Prison NOMIS
  Positive random mandatory drug testing (rMDT) The average rate of positive results from random mandatory drug testing. MDT testing lab
  Number of months required MDT levels not met The total number of months required MDT levels are not met MDT testing lab
  Safety Audit/Risk Management Audit An announced audit to determine how effectively the prison is assessing and managing risks of violence and self-harm. A higher score shows better performance. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
  Measuring the Quality of Prisoner Life - Safety and Security A survey of prisoners’ perceptions of safety in the prison. A higher score shows better performance. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Safety Focusses on early days in custody, managing behaviour, security, safeguarding and leadership and management of safety. A higher score shows better performance. His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons
Security Escapes from closed prisons A prisoner escapes from a prison or prisoner escort if they unlawfully gain their liberty by breaching the secure perimeter of a closed prison, i.e. the outside wall or boundary of the prison. Prison NOMIS
  The rate of absconds Abscond incidents reported as a rate per 100,000 prisoner days. An abscond is an escape that does not involve overcoming a physical security. Only applies to open prisons. Prison NOMIS
  Releases in error A prisoner is released in error if they are released from a HMPPS establishment or court when they should otherwise have remained in HMPPS/HMCTS custody and the prisoner or third party has not deliberately played a part in the error. Prison NOMIS
  Security Audit To review levels of compliance within specific HM Prison Service Performance Standards. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
Respect Racial disparity in the use of force applied in prisons The relative rate of use of force applied to the ethnic minority population as compared to the white population, to assist with identifying racial disparity. The 95% confidence intervals for the Relative Rate Index (RRI) value are also calculated and used alongside the RRI value to determine how well each establishment is performing. Prison NOMIS and Digital Prison Services
  Measuring the Quality of Prison Life - Respect A survey of prisoners’ perceptions of respect in the prison. A higher score shows better performance. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
  Audit of Living Conditions To help drive improvements in living conditions in prisons. Residential units, cells, communal areas including serveries, toilets and showers are observed. A higher score shows better performance. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Respect Focuses on staff-prisoner relationships, daily life, equality, diversity and faith, health, well-being and social care and leadership and management of respect. A higher score shows better performance. His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons
Purposeful Activity Education progress in English and Maths The percentage of prisoners, initially assessed as being below level 2 in English and/or maths, who make progress by achieving an accredited qualification in either or both of these subjects while in custody. This measure does not apply to prisons in Wales or privately managed prisons who are not signed up for the Prison Education Framework. CURIOUS and Prison NOMIS
  Attendance at education courses The percentage of prisoners attending classroom or workshop lessons in custody, as a proportion of the number of lessons the prisoner is expected to attend. This measure does not apply to prisons in Wales or privately managed prisons who are not signed up for the Prison Education Framework. CURIOUS
  Percentage of prisoners in half time purposeful activity The percentage of prisoners in half-time Purposeful Activity, as a proportion of the prison population. This measure does not apply to privately managed prisons. Prison NOMIS
  Percentage of prisoners in full time purposeful activity The percentage of prisoners in full-time Purposeful Activity, as a proportion of the prison population. This measure does not apply to privately managed prisons. Prison NOMIS
  Prisoners on paid work Release on Temporary License (ROTL) - rate per 1,000 prisoners Prisoners released on ROTL for paid work as a rate per 1,000 prisoners in the male open estate and the fully open women’s estate. Prison NOMIS
  Measuring the Quality of Prisoner Life - Purposeful Activity A survey of prisoners’ perceptions of purposeful activity in the prison. A higher score shows better performance. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Purposeful Activity Focusses on time out of cell, education, skills and work activities and leadership and management of purposeful activity. A higher score shows better performance. His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons
Preparation for Release Employment at six months following custodial release The number of releases in employment on the date six months after release date, as a proportion of all eligible releases from a custodial sentence. National Delius and Prison NOMIS
  Employment at six weeks following custodial release The number of releases in employment on the date six weeks after release date, as a proportion of all eligible releases from a custodial sentence. National Delius and Prison NOMIS
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Preparation for Release Focusses on children and families and contact with the outside world, reducing risk, rehabilitation and progression, interventions, specialist units, release planning and leadership and management of rehabilitation and release planning. A higher score shows better performance. His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons
  Housed on first night of custodial release The number of releases with accommodation on the first night of release as a proportion of all eligible releases from a custodial sentence. National Delius and Prison NOMIS
  Family and Significant Others Self-assessment of services and provisions put into place within prisons to strengthen the relationship between prisoners and their family and significant others. Family and significant other self-assessment form
  Accredited Programmes completions The number of Offending Behaviour Programme (OBP) completions Monthly data from prison establishments collated in central performance systems
  Keyworker Quality Assessment Assessment of key worker session quality delivered to a random sample of prisoners at establishments in the male closed estate and women’s estate. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group and Prison NOMIS
  Keyworker Quality Invalid Notes The percentage of case notes which do not meet the criteria of a key worker session Performance, Assurance and Risk Group and Prison NOMIS
Organisational Effectiveness Incident Reporting System - Data Quality Audit Audit ensuring reportable incidents are recorded on the Incident Reporting System package of Prison-NOMIS. A higher score shows better performance. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
  Incident Reporting System - Assaults checks Percentage of assaults incidents checked in the Incident Reporting System Data Quality Audit recorded on Prison-NOMIS. A higher percentage shows better performance. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
  Incident Reporting System - Self-harm checks Percentage of self-harm incidents checked in the Incident Reporting System Data Quality Audit recorded on Prison-NOMIS. A higher percentage shows better performance. Performance, Assurance and Risk Group
  Staff resignation rate Rate of Band 3-5 Prison Officer staff resignations. Some resignations are expected, but too high a rate is cause for concern. This measure does not apply to privately managed prisons. Single Operating Platform
  Staff sickness Average working days lost to sickness absence. Single Operating Platform and Manual Data Return

14. Annex C - Measure Weightings

Priority Area Measure Weightings[footnote 9]
    Male closed Open Female
Safety Prisoner on prisoner assaults incidents 4.3% 3.1% 4.0%
  Assaults on staff incidents 4.3% 3.1% 4.0%
  Self-harm incidents 4.3% 3.1% 4.0%
  Positive random mandatory drug testing (rMDT) 2.9% 3.1% 2.7%
  Number of months required MDT levels not met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
  Safety Audit/Risk Management Audit 4.3% 4.7% 4.0%
  Measuring the Quality of Prisoner Life - Safety and Security 1.4% 1.6% 1.3%
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Safety 4.3% 4.7% 4.0%
Security Escapes from closed prisons 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
  The rate of absconds 0.0% 4.7% 2.7%
  Releases in error 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
  Security Audit 9.0% 6.3% 8.3%
Respect Racial disparity in the use of force applied in prisons 2.9% 3.1% 2.7%
  Measuring the Quality of Prison Life - Respect 1.4% 1.6% 1.3%
  Audit of Living Conditions 2.9% 1.6% 4.0%
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Respect 4.3% 4.7% 4.0%
Purposeful Activity Education progress in English and Maths 2.9% 1.6% 2.7%
  Attendance at education courses 2.9% 3.1% 2.7%
  Percentage of prisoners in full time purposeful activity 2.9% 2.3% 2.0%
  Percentage of prisoners in half time purposeful activity 2.9% 2.3% 2.0%
  Prisoners on paid work Release on Temporary License (ROTL) - rate per 1,000 prisoners 1.4% 4.7% 4.0%
  Measuring the Quality of Prisoner Life - Purposeful Activity 1.4% 1.6% 1.3%
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Purposeful Activity 4.3% 4.7% 4.0%
Preparation for Release Employment at six months following custodial release 2.9% 3.1% 2.7%
  Employment at six weeks following custodial release 2.9% 3.1% 2.7%
  His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons - Preparation for Release 4.3% 4.7% 4.0%
  Housed on first night of custodial release 4.3% 6.3% 4.0%
  Family and Significant Others 1.4% 4.7% 4.0%
  Accredited Programmes completions 4.3% 1.6% 4.0%
  Keyworker Quality Assessment 4.3% 0.0% 4.0%
  Keyworker Quality Invalid Notes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Organisational Effectiveness Incident Reporting System - Data Quality Audit 4.3% 4.7% 4.0%
  Incident Reporting System - Assaults checks 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
  Incident Reporting System - Self-harm checks 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
  Staff resignation rate 2.9% 3.1% 2.7%
  Staff sickness 2.9% 3.1% 2.7%

  1. Details of the End of Custody Supervised Licence data can be found here: ECSL_Commentary_Transparency.pdf ↩

  2. Details around suitability for fixed term recall can be found here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024/408/contents/made ↩

  3. Further details on Probation Reset are available at: Prisons and Probation: Foreign National Offenders - Hansard - UK Parliament: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2024-03-13/debates/901D0DE9-45FD-4061-9F4C-FB3A3F66AC1D/PrisonsAndProbationForeignNationalOffenders ↩

  4. Most prisoners sentenced to a standard determinate sentence (SDS) are automatically released at their conditional release date, which is the half-way point of their sentence. Prisoners serving an SDS are on licence supervision until the end of their sentence. ↩

  5. Figures on the number of prisoners released under the SDS40 scheme are available here: Standard Determinate Sentence (SDS40) release data - GOV.UK ↩

  6. Some measures are used solely in the calculation of performance scores for other measures, or to identify prisons for the end of year moderation process. These measures do not directly contribute to a prison’s overall rating. For more information on measure weightings, see Annex C. ↩

  7. Prison complexity is a judgement based on prison population and churn rate, amount of staff, complexity of prisoner population and notoriety, location, site logistics, categorisation and risk, political scrutiny, media relations and management and financial commercial management. ↩

  8. Churn of prisoners is the rate of new admissions or transfers in as a proportion of the prison population. ↩

  9. Percentages are rounded to one decimal place and therefore may not add to exactly 100%. ↩

Back to top