Facebook
TwitterOpen Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Data from across the government on responses to and outcomes of domestic abuse cases in the criminal justice system.
Facebook
TwitterCC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
The Global Transitional Justice Dataset codes personnel transitional justice events --lustrations, purges (leadership and thorough), and truth commission. After assigning each event to one of four categories it is coded as a negative or positive event (see notes below). The number of positive and negative TJ events was then aggregated to create an annual panel, with countries as the cross section and time since transition as the temporal dimension. A panel assembled in this way allows for the creation of many different measures of personnel TJ. In addition, the raw chronologies (available with the PI) allow researchers to experiment with different systems of disaggregation.
Facebook
TwitterComplete data set from the Washington State Criminal Justice Data Book. Combines state data from multiple agency sources that can be queried through CrimeStats Online.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
This dataset contains 200,000 rows of arraignment records from a metropolitan court system.
It includes demographic details (age, gender), criminal history (prior arrests, convictions), offense severity, charge type, arraignment decisions (bail, detention, release), and final court outcomes.
Sensitive attributes such as race and zip code have been intentionally excluded to prevent direct discrimination.
Facebook
TwitterThe report is released by the Ministry of Justice and produced in accordance with arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority.
For further information about the Justice Data Lab, please refer to the following guidance:
http://www.justice.gov.uk/justice-data-lab">http://www.justice.gov.uk/justice-data-lab
Two requests are being published this quarter: The Thinking Skills Programme (2010-2019), and Lancashire Women – second request (2015-2021).
There are two Thinking Skills Programme (TSP) reports which evaluate (a) the impact on reoffending behaviour, and (b) the impact on prison misconduct, for individuals who participated in the TSP. The TSP is an accredited offending behaviour programme designed and delivered by His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS).
The reoffending study involved a treatment group of 20,293 adults (18,555 males, 1,738 females) who participated in the TSP in custody between 2010 and 2019. Proven reoffending was measured over a two-year period from the point of release from custody.
Over a two-year period from release, men who participated in the TSP were less likely to reoffend, reoffended less frequently, and took longer to reoffend, compared to similar males who did not participate in the TSP. These results were statistically significant and the effect sizes were very small.
Results indicated that over a two-year period following release, females who participated in the TSP reoffended less frequently, compared to similar females who did not participate in the TSP. These results were statistically significant with very small effect sizes.
The prison misconduct study involved a treatment group of 13,891 adults (12,938 males, and 953 females) who participated in the TSP between 2011 and 2019.
The male headline analysis results showed that over a 6-month period after starting the TSP those who had participated were less likely to receive an adjudication compared to males who did not participate in the TSP and received an adjudication less frequently. These results had very small effect sizes and were statistically significant.
The female headline analyses showed that over a 6-month period after starting the TSP females who had participated in the TSP received any form of adjudication less frequently compared to those who did not participate in the TSP. This result had a very small effect size and was statistically significant.
Lancashire Women support women involved, or at risk of involvement, in the criminal justice system. The gender specific organisation offers support around societal stigmas, housing, emotional wellbeing, education, employment, and family and relationships. This is the second JDL evaluation for Lancashire Women, looking at programme participants between 2015 and 2021.
The overall results show that those who took part in the Lancashire Women were less likely to reoffend, reoffended less frequently and took longer to reoffend than those who did not take part. These results were statistically significant.
The Justice Data Lab team have brought in reoffending data for the second quarter of 2021 into the service. It is now possible for an organisation to submit information on the individuals it was working with up to the end of June 2021, in addition to during the years 2002 to 2020.
The bulletins are produced and handled by the Ministry’s analytical professionals and production staff. Pre-release access of up to 24 hours is granted to the following persons: Minister of State, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, Special Advisers, Permanent Secretary, Deputy Head of News, 1 Director General, 6 press officers, 18 policy officials, and 5 analytical officials. Relevant Special Advisers and Private Office staff of Ministers and senior officials may have access to pre-release figures to inform briefing and handling arrangements.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/30701/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/30701/terms
The new FJSRC linking system, implemented with the 2008 FJSRC data, includes sets of agency dyad linked files created by improved methods of algorithmic matching. There are both inter-agency linked files and intra-agency dyad linked files. The inter-agency matched pair files (or "dyads") permit the linking of records from two different source agencies for adjacent stages of federal case processing by providing a crosswalk of the agency-specific key ID variables for the two agency data files in the pair. These agency ID variables (sequential ID numbers) may be used to link records from one agency's standard analysis file (SAF) to the next. The system enables users to track individual defendant-cases through stages of the federal criminal justice system (from arrest to prosecution, adjudication, sentencing, and corrections) sequentially, one agency dyad pair at a time. Each inter-agency paired linked file relates the sequential record numbers (i.e. SEQ_NUM) included in the SAFs from one agency/stage to another. The intra-agency matched pair files (also dyads) permit the same type of linking as described above except that the linkages are within the same federal agency. The linkages are to different stages of case processing withing a particular agency. The system covers all data years from 1994-2023. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, D.C.) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute through 2012. Data from 2013 and on were prepared by Abt Associates.
Facebook
TwitterAccess to the Washington State Criminal Justice Data Book. For additional information about the data available and an online query system, click https://sac.ofm.wa.gov/data
Facebook
TwitterThe Justice Data Lab was established in April 2013. Participating organisations supply the Justice Data Lab with details of the offenders they have worked with and information about the services they have provided. The Justice Data Lab team matches these individuals to the re-offending datasets held within the Ministry of Justice and uses statistical modeling techniques to generate a matched control group of individuals with very similar characteristics; including demographic, criminal history and employment and benefit history.
As standard, the Justice Data Lab supplies aggregate one-year proven re-offending rates for that group, and a matched control group of similar offenders. The re-offending rates for the organisation’s group and the matched control group are compared using statistical testing to assess the impact of the organisation’s work on reducing re-offending. We also include the frequency of proven re-offending over the one year as standard following feedback from users.
There are three publication types:
A summary of the findings of the Justice Data Lab pilot to date (2nd April 2013 to 28th February 2014).
Tailored reports about the re-offending outcomes of services or interventions delivered by each of the organisations who have requested information through the Justice Data Lab pilot. Each report is an Official Statistic and will show the results of the re-offending analysis for the particular service or intervention delivered by the organisation who delivered it.
This month the Justice Data Lab team have also produced a document reflecting on the successes and challenges of the pilot, called “Justice Data Lab; The pilot year”. This document shares learning from the experience of running the pilot, details the future of the Justice Data Lab and demonstrates the commitment to continual improvement in the Justice Data Lab service.
For further information about the Justice Data Lab, please refer to the following guidance: http://www.justice.gov.uk/justice-data-lab">www.justice.gov.uk/justice-data-lab
We are pleased to announce that the Justice Data Lab will continue to be piloted for another year. The service will continue to be free at the point of use, and the same service model will continue to operate, as detailed in our guidance. Following feedback from users, we are hoping to bring in the following improvements to the service:
improving the Data Upload Template with further questions about referral routes to the organisation, and where the intervention or programme was received. We will release an updated version of our Data Upload Template over the next few weeks alongside updates to our guidance documents.
providing additional metrics of re-offending in particular looking at measures of severity
improving our underlying data, including bringing Offender Assessment (OASys) information into analyses
taking account of area in our analysis where possible
within a request, giving the re-offending outcomes by different demographic profiles where possible
providing power calculations to indicate necessary sample sizes for results which are inconclusive.
These improvements are discussed in more detail in the document “Justice Data Lab; the pilot year”
To date, the Justice Data Lab has received 80 requests for re-offending information, including 55 reports which have already been published. A further 2 are now complete and ready for publication, bringing the total of completed reports to 57.
To date, there have been 12 requests that could not be processed as the minimum criteria for analyses through the Data Lab had not been met, and one further request that was withdrawn by the submitting organisation. The remaining requests will be published in future monthly releases of these statistics.
Of the 2 reports being published this month:
One report looks at the effectiveness of The Footprints Project. This analysis shows that the impact of this intervention on re-offending is currently inconclusive.
One report looks at the effectiveness of the Family Man programme run by Safe Ground. This analysis includes offenders from the two previous Safe Ground requests published in October and November 2013. This analysis shows that the impact of this intervention on re-offending is currently inconclusive.
The bulletin is produced and handled by the Ministry’s analytical professio
Facebook
Twitterhttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/24167/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/24167/terms
The data contain records of sentenced offenders released from the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) during fiscal year 2003. The data include commitments of United States District Court, violators of conditions of release (e.g., parole, probation, or supervised release violators), offenders convicted in other courts (e.g., military or District of Columbia courts), and persons admitted to prison as material witnesses or for purposes of treatment, examination, or transfer to another authority. Records of offenders who exit federal prison temporarily, such as for transit to another location, to serve a weekend sentence, or for health care, are not included in the exiting cohort. These data include variables that describe the offender, such as age, race, citizenship, as well as variables that describe the sentences and expected prison terms. The data file contains original variables from the Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY database, as well as "SAF" variables that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, Tables 7.9-7.16. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Facebook
TwitterBuilding statistics of the Ministry of Justice 2018-2023
Facebook
Twitterhttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/37000/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/37000/terms
The objective of this study was to systematically review and statistically synthesize all available research that, at a minimum, compared participants in a restorative justice program to participants processed in a more traditional way using meta-analytic methods. Ideally, these studies would include research designs with random assignment to condition groups, as this provides the most credible evidence of program effectiveness. The systematic search identified 99 publications, both published and unpublished, reporting on the results of 84 evaluations nested within 60 unique research projects or studies. Results were extracted from these studies, related to delinquency, non-delinquency, and victim outcomes for the youth and victims participating in these programs.
Facebook
TwitterThese tables and Pocketbook summarise the latest information presented in Justice in Numbers in printable format. For a full explanation of each measure, sources and full time series, please visit:
https://data.justice.gov.uk/justice-in-numbers">https://data.justice.gov.uk/justice-in-numbers
The Pocketbook is designed to be printed as an A5 booklet on A4 paper but can be printed in other layouts as required. Please ensure that you have selected the appropriate print settings for your setup in order to print in an appropriate layout for your requirements.
Facebook
TwitterStatistics on the electronic services of the Ministry of Justice 2019-2023
Facebook
TwitterApache License, v2.0https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
License information was derived automatically
This dataset was created by Mani510
Released under Apache 2.0
Facebook
TwitterThe report is released by the Ministry of Justice and produced in accordance with arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority. For further information about the Justice Data Lab, please refer to the guidance.
One request is being published this quarter: Spark Inside (2016-2018).
Spark Inside works with young male offenders, who are within 6 months of the end of their custodial sentence. This is the first JDL evaluation for Spark Inside, looking at programme participants between 2016 and 2018.
The overall results do not show that the programme had a statistically significant effect on a person’s reoffending behaviour. They suggest more people need to be available for analysis to determine the way in which the programme affects the one-year proven reoffending rate, the frequency of proven reoffences, and the time taken to reoffend.
The Justice Data Lab team have brought in reoffending data for the first quarter of 2020 into the service. It is now possible for an organisation to submit information on the individuals it was working with up to the end of March 2020, in addition to during the years 2002 to 2019.
The bulletin is produced and handled by the Ministry’s analytical professionals and production staff. Pre-release access of up to 24 hours is granted to the following persons: Minister of State, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, Special Advisers, Permanent Secretary, Head of News, Deputy Head of News, 2 Director Generals, 5 press officers, 3 policy officials, and 10 analytical officials.
Facebook
TwitterOpen Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
License information was derived automatically
The Department of Justice Canada created the first performance monitoring framework (“the Framework”) for Canada’s criminal justice system in 2019. The Framework identified broad expected outcomes, measured by key indicators. The State of the Criminal Justice System Dashboard presents information from the Framework in one easily accessible location. The Dashboard shows information and data collected for over 40 performance indicators grouped by nine outcomes. This information is presented for the total population and by population-based theme. The population-based themes currently available are: Indigenous Peoples and Women. These themes present pre-filtered views of the data by sub-population, such as by Indigenous identity or sex/gender (where data are available). Under each theme, data users can also find contextual information on how different populations interact with the criminal justice system as victims, survivors, accused and offenders. The State of the Criminal Justice System Dashboard will be updated regularly as more data and information become available.
Facebook
TwitterU.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
License information was derived automatically
Investigator(s): Bureau of Justice Statistics The National Justice Agency List is a master name and address file created and maintained by the United States Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The file was first created in 1970, and the Census Bureau has continued to maintain and expand the file. For the original survey, each county in the United States and each municipality and township with a 1960 population of 1,000 or more persons was surveyed to identify the names and addresses of the criminal justice agencies and institutions controlled by local government. The survey was conducted by mail canvass. In addition to the mail survey, the Census Bureau collected information on state-level governments and counties with a 1960 population of 500,000 or more and cities with a 1960 population of 300,000 or more through in-house research methods. The reference information included a variety of published government documents such as budget statements, organization manuals, and state, county, and municipal directories.
Facebook
TwitterOpen Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
License information was derived automatically
The following concepts detailed in the publication were taken from an article written by Howard Zehr and Henry Mika, (1998),"Fundamental Concepts in Restorative Justice", in Contemporary Justice Review, Vol. 1. At the primary level, restorative justice in Canada is guided by recognizing the need for victims to heal and put right the wrongs. Restorative Justice also grounds itself in engaging with community and recognizing the need for dialogue between victims and offenders as appropriate.
Facebook
TwitterAssociations under the supervision of the Ministry of Justice 2021
Facebook
TwitterPartner agencies in electronic connectivity to the Ministry of Justice for the year 2023
Facebook
TwitterOpen Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Data from across the government on responses to and outcomes of domestic abuse cases in the criminal justice system.