Recommendations

By 31 December 2024, the Ministry of Justice, Home Office and Attorney General’s Office should work together to use this inspection as the basis for a broader and fundamental review of the experience of victims of crime, involving other Government departments and agencies as necessary. Such a review could draw on evidence from this inspection and look more broadly at how best to include information on all services available to victims of crime, seeking to improve the availability of access for victims and the consistency of the service they receive. It could also seek to promote better sharing of information about positive practice and initiatives aimed at improving the victim experience.

Response

The Government is committed to ensuring victims receive the information and support they need to navigate the criminal justice system. Since this recommendation was made, we have taken forward a range of reforms to strengthen both the Victims’ Code itself and the way it is delivered, monitored and enforced.

The Victims’ Code sets out what victims can expect to receive from the criminal justice system. An updated legislative framework for the Code was passed in the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 and is in the process of being implemented. As part of that implementation, we are finalising a new Victims’ Code. The public consultation on the draft new Victims’ Code closed on 30 April, and the Department is now taking the time to consider the responses it has received. We will respond publicly to that consultation in due course, ahead of bringing a new Code into force alongside the new legislative framework.

We are taking steps to improve awareness of the Victims’ Code more generally, as we recognise that this is key to victims being able to understand what they can expect from the system. This includes an ‘Understand your Rights’ public campaign and we will implement the Code Awareness Duty in the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 in due course, placing a duty on certain criminal justice agencies to promote awareness of the Victims’ Code to the public and to victims of crime.

In parallel, we are strengthening oversight and accountability for delivery of the Code. The Code compliance framework in the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 will require local scrutiny and national oversight over certain criminal justice agencies, requiring them to collect, share and review prescribed Code compliance information with other criminal justice bodies and elected local policing bodies. Elected local policing bodies will then feed data and reviews up to Ministers for consideration. This will enable a clearer understanding of how services are accessed and delivered across the criminal justice system. The Victims and Courts Act 2026 also strengthens the powers of the Victims’ Commissioner within the framework by placing a new duty on the Victims’ Commissioner to produce a report to Ministers on Code compliance.

As set out in more detail, below, work on implementing this framework continues.

Taken together, these reforms represent steps forward in addressing issues identified in this recommendation, particularly in relation to consistency and oversights of victim experience. The Government will allow these measures to embed before considering the need for a broader review.

By 30 September 2024, the Ministry of Justice should develop Victims’ Code performance metrics and reporting systems. These should include how criminal justice bodies engage with victims and the quality of the engagement. Performance metrics should also include measures of how well criminal justice bodies obtain feedback from victims and how well they use this to assess the quality of engagement and improve the quality of services. By 31 March 2025, the Ministry of Justice should implement these performance metrics and reporting systems across criminal justice bodies.

Response

Once commenced, the Code compliance framework in the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 will, for the first time, require local scrutiny and national oversight over certain criminal justice agencies’ compliance with the Victims’ Code; this will create the conditions to help ensure that victims receive the Code rights they are entitled to. These provisions will place duties on those criminal justice agencies to collect, share, and review data on whether and how they are delivering the Code at a local level. The framework will require information on the provision of Code entitlements to be shared with the Ministry of Justice, and for performance to be reviewed at a national level, by Ministers and the Victims’ Commissioner.

The Code compliance provisions are not yet commenced, and implementation of the framework is impacted by the announcement in the ‘From local to national: a new model for policing’ white paper to abolish Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) by May 2028. The policy intent at the time this legislation was passed was for PCCs to take a pivotal role in discharging various functions under the Code compliance framework. This is reflected in the legislation itself, which specifically allocates obligations to PCCs in the framework, and puts PCCs at its heart. The Ministry is working closely with the Home Office to consider the impact of their policy and machinery changes on the existing legislative framework, and on our policy intent and design of the framework. This is essential to ensuring that the Code compliance framework will work as designed, and that any necessary legislative changes to bring the statutory basis up to date are made.

Alongside this, work is underway with criminal justice agencies to improve the quality of victims’ data held across systems. This is being driven through a cross-system data improvement programme to support the development of metrics for monitoring compliance with the Victims’ Code.

By 31 December 2024, the College of Policing should work with the National Police Chiefs’ Council and chief constables to develop minimum standards for the completion of victim needs assessments. These should include standards for timeliness of completion and clarity on the information to be recorded.

Response

NPCC and CoP accepted the recommendation and have developed a minimum standards framework: Victims’ Code of Practice: Right 4 Victim needs assessment (VNA)
Part of this (resources at the bottom of this page): Victims’ Code | College of Policing

By 30 September 2024, the National Police Chiefs’ Council and the Crown Prosecution Service should agree minimum standards and consistent processes for how witness care units or functions communicate with the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and victims to help effective, agile and timely information sharing so that victims’ needs are met.

Response

NPCC and CPS accepted the recommendation and developed an agreed minimum standards framework that has been implemented. Evaluation work is planned.

By 31 December 2024, the National Police Chiefs’ Council should work with His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service to make sure all eligible victims are referred to the Victim Contact Scheme.

Response

NPCC are continuing to work with HMPPS on this.

By 30 September 2024, the Probation Service should provide training on the work of the Victim Contact Scheme to all probation practitioners and those in training. The learning should include:

• what is involved in the Victim Contact Scheme; and
• how probation practitioners work with victim liaison officers to keep victims safe.

Response

HMPPS published their response in February 2024: A_thematic_inspection_Meeting_the_Needs_of_Victims.pdf

The recommendation was partly agreed on the grounds that it was not possible to deliver to all required staff by Sept 2024.

Completion among required staff is currently 62% (as of 31 January 2026). The learning initially applied only to new starters in relevant roles, but its scope has since been expanded.

By July 2026, the National Criminal Justice Board should create and publish a clear strategy and oversee the delivery of improvement across the criminal justice system but specifically the prosecution team. As soon as possible thereafter:

• implement a national criminal justice action plan which identifies priorities, allocates responsibilities, and sets performance objectives
• oversee the work of other relevant groups, including Local Criminal Justice Boards
• publish regular updates on progress against the national criminal justice strategy and objectives.

Response

Received 30 January 2026.

The Ministry of Justice will return to this recommendation following the publication of Part II of the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts. Given its focus on efficiency and timeliness, the findings are expected to provide valuable insights that should inform any cross-system strategy.

By October 2025, the National Criminal Justice Board should extend its membership to include the chair of the Criminal Justice Chief Inspectors’ Group.

Response

Received 30 January 2026.

The Criminal Justice Joint Inspectorate previously proposed that all Inspectors be invited to sit on the Criminal Justice Board (CJB). This proposal was formally considered and declined in October 2024, on the basis that the role of the inspectorate is to inspect the member agencies and hold them to account, rather than to engage in strategic decision-making. The CJB was therefore not considered the most appropriate forum for the inspectorate’s contribution, but as with Recommendation 1, the Ministry of Justice will return to this recommendation following the publication of Part II of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts.

By July 2026, the National Criminal Justice Board (NCJB) should, as part of its national criminal justice strategy, create a viable, realistic plan for securing a national joint police and Crown Prosecution Service Digital Case File (DCF) management system or multiple, fully compatible systems. The NCJB should approach the challenges associated with securing the necessary funding for its proposed solution, and subsequently implementing it, as either its highest priority or one of its highest priorities.

Response

Received 30 January 2026.

Both the Home Office and AGO are supportive of the responses provided by CPS and NPCC. The Home Office is already funding some work to enable cross system partners to capture, share and use prosecution files in a structured digital format through the Digital Case File programme. We support looking at further ways to expedite delivery, while noting that Home Office funding is currently confirmed only to the end of 2025/26.

By January 2026, the Joint Operational Improvement Board should make sure that there is a clearly defined action plan reflecting adequate resourcing, joint commitments and shared milestones and outcomes to expedite the development and implementation of the Digital Case File (DCF) management system.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

Q3 2025-26: The JOIB has a direct link into DCF progression with a designated NPCC product owner to ensure all benefits are realised as it moves from project to production.

By July 2026, police forces should have in place as part of their gatekeeping or comparable arrangements:

• an effective governance and decision making capability to ensure investigations are timely and completed to the appropriate standards
• agreed contact arrangements in place in forces and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Areas to facilitate clear, consistent, and transparent communication between police and CPS
• sufficient, trained, and competent decision-makers
• effective and efficient systems and processes to manage case file submission queues, to avoid
• unnecessary delays and risks to cases
• subject to statutory time limits.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims,
witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

The Home Office agrees that strong gatekeeping functions or comparable arrangements are essential in supporting fluid case progression. We are supportive of the NPCC response and the work the NPCC and CPS have undertaken to improve case progression capabilities.

By July 2026, the College of Policing should develop a national supervisors’ training course and assessment on case file building.

Response

The Home Office supports appropriate training for supervisors on case file building as this forms an essential part of their role. As per the NPCC response the College of Policing have developed PIP1 supervisor training. This is being piloted with national rollout intended for May 2026. We are supportive of the work the NPCC and CPS are undertaking to meet this recommendation.

Within 12 months of the completion of recommendation 6, police forces should ensure that every supervisor responsible for assessing case files prior to referral to the Crown Prosecution Service for a charging decision is trained in case file building and Director’s Guidance on Charging (6th edition) (DG6) quality assurance.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

The Home Office supports appropriate training for supervisors on case file building as this forms an essential part of their role. As per the NPCC response the College of Policing have developed PIP1 supervisor training. This is being piloted with national rollout intended for May 2026. We are supportive of the work the NPCC and CPS are undertaking to meet this recommendation.

By July 2026, the National Police Chiefs’ Council and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) should review all national and local case file submission checklists to identify good practice and consolidate this into a single national checklist. This should ensure accuracy and consistency of case file checklists until the Digital Case File (DCF) is fully operational in all police force and CPS Areas.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

The Home Office supports appropriate training for supervisors on case file building as this forms an essential part of their role. As per the NPCC response the College of Policing have developed PIP1 supervisor training. This is being piloted with national rollout intended for May 2026. We are supportive of the work the NPCC and CPS are undertaking to meet this recommendation.

Q3 2025-26: Case file submission check list incorporated in the charging handbook.

By July 2026, the police and Crown Prosecution Service at Joint Operational Improvement Meetings should develop a joint local training plan to increase awareness and understanding of each other’s roles, including the operation of IT systems.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.”

JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

The Home Office and AGO support this recommendation and will support the NPCC and CPS through this work, under the remit of the Joint Operational Improvement Board.

Q3 2025-26: A joint landscape review was conducted to understand current internal and reciprocal training including locally led initiatives to identify next steps for CPS and Police.

By July 2026, the National Criminal Justice Board should commission a joint review (supported by independent expertise) of performance data. This should include:

• the current use of criminal justice system (CJS) performance data
• how CJS performance data is collected, presented, and analysed
• how CJS performance data is used to support effective partnership working between the police and Crown Prosecution Service.

Response

Received 30 January 2026.

Although we recognise in principle the value of a review of performance data drawing on independent expertise, the scope of the CJJI report covers case building between the police and CPS and therefore we do not consider the wider political CJB to be the right forum. In addition, we expect Sir Brian Leveson to make fundamental recommendations about the remit of the Criminal Justice Board, therefore committing to an extensive data initiative at this stage could conflict with those forthcoming recommendations.

By January 2027, the National Criminal Justice Board (NCJB) should use the outcome of that independent review to define and publish a national set of common metrics to enable effective scrutiny of all relevant aspects of the police’s and Crown Prosecution Service’s performance in pre- and post charge cases. The NCJB should also extend this to include other aspects of performance to include matters relating to His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service and His Majesty’s Probation and Prison Service.

Response

Received 30 January 2026.

Work to develop robust, cross-system metrics is ongoing. Alongside the national overview at JOIB, NPCC has supported the rollout of a force-level dashboard and is developing joint performance indicators with CPS, as well as contributing to the Home Office’s police performance framework. Attempting to develop metrics within the timelines outlined in the CJJI report risks either non-delivery due to underlying

By July 2026, the Joint Operational Improvement Board should review the Director’s Guidance on Charging (6th edition) (DG6) including the National File Standard (NFS) and issue a new (7th) edition to reduce unnecessary burdens on police and prosecutors. The review should include, as a minimum:

• reconsidering whether ‘front-loading’ is necessary in all cases
• reconsidering the extent to which rebuttable presumption material must be supplied to the Crown Prosecution Service pre charge
• clarifying the format in which medical and forensic evidence is required for a charging decision
• in as many respects as is possible, removing ambiguity from the guidance.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

HO, AGO and MOJ response 30 January 2026: Both DG6 and the NFS are being reviewed. As per the NPCC and CPS response we agree the outcome of the review will determine whether new guidance is needed.

By July 2026, Crown Prosecution Service Area managers should take steps to satisfy themselves that all action plans:

• are produced in accordance with the requirements of
  Director’s Guidance on Charging (6th edition) (DG6)
• have a clearly documented rationale
• only contain requests for necessary and relevant documents, evidence or other material
• do not duplicate previously completed actions.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

Q3 2025-26: CPS assurance teams conducting level 2 assurance checks to inform next steps.

By January 2026 the National Police Chiefs’ Council to undertake a review of redaction systems and to determine which systems are the most effective, including their compatibility with the Crown Prosecution Service’s case management system and communicate this across all forces.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

We agree with the NPCC response that Recommendation 14 has been superseded by work already underway across policing and the CJS.

The use of AI-enabled automation is key to reducing the redaction burden. Most forces have implemented or are planning to implement automated tools for redacting text. Audio visual redaction is more complex with a less mature market. In 2024/25, a Home Office funded programme engaged with forces and suppliers, demonstrating that tools are available offering significant time savings for policing. We are providing funding in 2025/26 to support policing to adopt effective audio-visual redaction technology and processes, alongside providing guidance to all forces. In addition, the Home Office has consulted with the Information Commissioner’s Office and is working with the AGO, NPCC and CPS to actively explore ways to improve redaction processes and reduce burdens.

By July 2026, building on the work already started, the Joint Operational Improvement Board should take action to:

• work with the Home Office to, if necessary, draft proposals for amendments to the Data Protection Act 2018 and placing these before Parliament for its consideration
• work with the Attorney General’s Office to consider how Attorney General’s Guidance on Disclosure may be amended to reduce the burden of redaction in cases
• set out a list of approved police IT systems so that they become capable of handling unredacted and redacted material without the risk of unlawful disclosure
• consider how making greater use of artificial intelligence to automate elements of the redaction process may reduce the burden.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

We agree with the NPCC response that Recommendation 14 has been superseded by work already underway across policing and the CJS. The use of AI-enabled automation is key to reducing the redaction burden. Most forces have implemented or are planning to implement automated tools for redacting text. Audio visual redaction is more complex with a less mature market. In 2024/25, a Home Office funded programme engaged with forces and suppliers, demonstrating that tools are available offering significant time savings for policing. We are providing funding in 2025/26 to support policing to adopt effective audio-visual redaction technology and processes, alongside providing guidance to all forces. In addition, the Home Office has consulted with the Information Commissioner’s Office and is working with the AGO, NPCC and CPS to actively explore ways to improve redaction processes and reduce burdens.

Q3 2025-26: this has been superseded by the multi-agency HO led Accelerated Capability Environment (ACE) programme for which discovery is underway and in which CPS and NPCC are engaged as key stakeholders which aims to identify the most efficient and cost-effective redaction process for the CJS.

By October 2025, Crown Prosecution Service Area managers should take steps to ensure that prosecutors provide their contact details on all Manual of Guidance Form 3 (MG3s) and Manual of Guidance Form 3A (MG3As) to facilitate communication where required.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.”

JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

AGO notes that the CPS have responded to these recommendations.

Q3 2025-26: CPS assurance teams carrying out level 2 assurance to assess next steps.

By October 2025, the Director of Public Prosecutions considers amending the current Director’s Guidance on Charging (6th edition) (DG6) – which states that ‘digital communication is [the] preferred’ means of communication.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

AGO notes that the CPS have responded to these recommendations.

Q3 2025-26: real time case conversations launched to encourage direct communication between officer and prosecutor.

By October 2026, the Joint Operational Improvement Board should conduct an evaluation of early advice surgeries to assess their impact on culture and communication between police and Crown Prosecution Service, and whether they added value to the effectiveness of the charging process. If found to be successful, expand their use nationwide.

Response

Joint CPS and NPCC statement issued on publication: “We will consider the recommendations relevant to the CPS and policing and remain strongly committed to working together to improve outcomes for victims, witnesses and the public.” JOIB has included discussion on these recommendations in its meeting following publication and invited representatives from HMICFRS and HMCPSI to attend open JOIB meetings as observers.

AGO, Home Office and MOJ supportive of an evaluation of the benefits of early advice surgeries.

Q3 2025-26: Early advice being rolled out nationally.

The Home Office should amend crime outcome types to clearly distinguish between Outcome 22 (no further action), deferred youth cautions, and deferred prosecutions. Also, consider whether deferred youth cautions and deferred prosecutions should be formally recognised as positive police outcomes.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The Home Office should ensure that out-of-court disposals data for children is separated from that for adults.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The Ministry of Justice should work with the Home Office and Youth Justice Board to review the relevance, suitability, and effectiveness of the first-time entrants key performance indicators, and implement new reporting processes for all out-of- court disposals. This includes tracking Outcomes 20 and 21.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The Ministry of Justice should include all out-of-court disposals where interventions are delivered to children, including community resolutions and Outcome 22, in criminal justice system reoffending statistics.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The Home Office and Ministry of Justice should remove youth cautions from the out-of-court disposal framework and explore the feasibility of introducing statutory deferred prosecution schemes and statutory provision for community resolutions.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The Home Office, Ministry of Justice, and the Youth Justice Board should evaluate the data on outcomes delivered to children to understand the effectiveness of out-of-court disposals in reducing reoffending.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council should amend the NPCC child gravity matrix guidance so that any divergence of more than one score must be authorised by an officer of at least the rank of police inspector.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council should amend the NPCC Community Resolutions Guidance to include standardised wording for community resolution forms, to ensure consistency and to prohibit the use of coercive wording.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council should work with the Youth Justice Board and Home Office to develop guidance in relation to the use of Outcome 20 and 21. This should include referral to youth justice services when appropriate (in accordance with the NPCC child gravity matrix guidance).

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council, College of Policing, and Youth Justice Board should amend the NPCC Community Resolutions Guidance, the College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice for prosecution and case management, and the YJB case management guidance to reflect that community resolutions are issued only when the child has admitted guilt or where there is evidence that would provide a realistic prospect of conviction.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

Chief constables should improve how out-of-court disposals are managed by:

• working with YJSs to establish formal data-sharing arrangements to ensure timely and consistent access to information on all types of out of-court disposal
• ensuring decisions about the use of crime Outcomes 20 and 21 are consistent and appropriate and reflect revised NPCC guidance
• ensuring that police always use the NPCC child gravity matrix guidance when making decisions relating to outcomes for children and that the rationales for those decisions are always recorded.
• ensuring that joint decisions with the youth justice service about out-of-court disposals are made at the appropriate level of seniority.
• ensuring that children’s legal rights are met before issuing a community resolution; this includes the need to caution and make sure that an appropriate adult is present
• ensuring that safeguarding referrals are made when appropriate.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The Youth Justice Board should ensure that current data collection mechanisms support future evaluation of the effectiveness of out-of-court disposals in outcomes for children, reoffending rates, potential net widening, and their cost effectiveness.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The Youth Justice Board should work proactively with youth justice partnership boards to help them build a clear understanding of all out-of-court disposals used locally, evaluate their impact, and ensure their effectiveness.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

The Youth Justice Board should work together with partners to establish an evidence base about which interventions and disposals are most effective in reducing reoffending and delivering positive outcomes for children.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

Youth justice partnership boards should in line with the case management guidance:

• collate data on all out-of-court disposals, including from partner agencies, to analyse and monitor use, to ensure appropriate application, identify trends, and assess for net widening.
• ensure all partners take a collaborative approach to out of-court disposal decision making and intervention delivery, supporting joint work and effective exit planning.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

Youth justice service managers should consider the complexity and nature of the risk and safety concerns for each child, and match these with the skillset and experience of staff when allocating work.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

Youth justice service managers should improve the quality of assessment, planning, and service delivery so that they focus equally on supporting the child and keeping them and other people safe.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.

Youth justice service managers should ensure that children and their parents or carers understand the requirements of the out-of-court disposal and the aims of their intervention plan.

Response

Recommendation leads are invited to attend a Chief Inspector roundtable on 14 January 2026 to discuss the planned response to the recommendations.