We will use data that helps us to identify the specific courts (and associated probation regions) that are sentencing offenders to an ATR or DRR. This will enable the project to see more clearly where the pathways between probation and treatment are working effectively or not.

Interesting Information for Parc Erissey Industrial Estate

DHSC and MOJ will work together to ensure that the following data elements are available in the next phase of this project. They will begin to regularly share data and refine their methodology for linking and analysing the information. They will also make sure they can evidence any progress being made in the pathways between probation and treatment services – for example, the proportion of people with an ATR or DRR engaging with treatment within a particular time. Which courts sentence people to ATRs and DRRs The census collection is designed so that each group of postcodes should contain at least 100 people (50 in Scotland). We linked the records using both deterministic and probabilistic methods to test and improve the matching of the 2 data sets. You can find out more about these data linking methods in section ‘2.8 Pathways between probation and specialist addiction treatment’ of the methodology report.One of the main eligibility criteria for a court to issue an ATR or DRR is that the offender is willing to engage in treatment. The findings in this report suggest that many offenders do not access treatment. One explanation for this could be that the pre-sentencing reports (a requirement in the process for sentencing an offender to an ATR or DRR) do not accurately reflect the offender’s willingness to comply with the treatment requirement. The underlying reasons will need to be explored further. 7. Next steps There were differences in the treatment status between offenders sentenced to an ATR compared with those sentenced to a DRR.

Materiality: communicating audit matters for 2020 year-ends

Again, the characteristics associated with a decreased likelihood of accessing treatment have confidence intervals to the left of the red dashed line, while those associated with an increased likelihood of accessing treatment have confidence intervals to the right of this line. There were also 9,713 people (61.1% of those linked) who engaged in treatment after their sentence date. For people not already in treatment on their sentence date, on average (mean), it took offenders sentenced to an ATR 93 days to engage in treatment after their sentencing date. This compared with 160 days for offenders sentenced to a DRR. To engage with probation staff, treatment staff or people using services to understand barriers to treatment and suggest solutions. For more about this objective, see section ‘7.2 Qualitative research with service providers and users’ below.Figure 11: frequency of substance use for offenders sentenced to a DRR and categorised as opiates Substance Figure 8: prevalence of substance use for offenders sentenced to an ATR and categorised as ‘alcohol only’ Substance People accessing treatment are asked for consent to share their information. Part of this consent explicitly includes provisions for linking their information with other administrative data sets.

DRR USA – G-FORCE POWERSPORTS DRR USA – G-FORCE POWERSPORTS

Offender management statistics from MOJ and HM Prison and Probation Service report that 5,501 DRRs and 5,361 ATRs started as part of community sentences in 2021 to 2022 in England and Wales. This suggests that NDTMS referral information may not be reliable, or a substantial proportion of people sentenced to DRRs and ATRs are not attending treatment. The analysis in this report is the start of the evidence we can gather by linking probation and specialist addiction treatment data sets. For the first time, we were able to show that it’s possible to link all ATRs and DRRs recorded on the probation information system (nDelius) with information from the NDTMS. However, we cannot fully outline the implications at this stage and further work is required (see section ‘5. Strengths and limitations’ below). having an accommodation status of either bail or probation accommodation, or were otherwise housed (compared with those in settled accommodation)Figure 10: prevalence of substance use for offenders sentenced to a DRR and categorised as opiates Substance DHSC received around 40,000 records from MOJ’s probation case management system, nDelius. These were records of offenders sentenced to an ATR or DRR between August 2018 and March 2022. Our aim was to link these records with the National Drug Treatment Monitoring System ( NDTMS) to estimate how many of these sentences resulted in people accessing treatment and to describe how these groups progress through treatment. When offenders sentenced to an ATR or a DRR enter treatment, they are categorised into one of the 4 substance groups depending on what substances they are having problems with. For offenders with an ATR, we show the changes captured on the TOP as being in the ‘alcohol only’ substance group. For offenders sentenced to a DRR, we show the changes captured on the TOP as being on the ‘opiate’ substance group. Section ‘3.7 Treatment status at the end of the data period’ above reported that 61.4% of people with an ATR successfully completed their treatment, compared with 29.2% of those with a DRR. We used similar statistical models to those reported in sections ‘3.2 Linking probation and treatment data sets’ and ‘3.3 Pathways between probation and treatment’ (multilevel logistic regression) to measure the associations between individual-level characteristics and the likelihood of successfully completing treatment. We describe how many of the offenders we could link in the NDTMS data set were in treatment, either on the date they were sentenced or at some point after sentencing and between August 2018 and March 2022. We also consider the rate of offenders who access treatment within 3 weeks of being sentenced.