Justice Data Lab Re-offending Analysis: Family Man Safe Ground

Transcription

1 Justice Data Lab Re-offending Analysis: Family Man Safe Ground Summary The analysis assessed the impact of a course run by the organisation Safe Ground on re-offending. The one year proven re-offending rate 1 for 35 offenders on the Family Man course was 29%, compared with 42% for a matched control group of similar offenders. Statistical significance testing has shown that this difference in the reoffending rates is not statistically significant; meaning that at this stage there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the Family Man course actually led to a real reduction in re-offending. What you can say: With further years of data, the impact of Family Man on reducing re-offending will be more precisely detected through the Justice Data Lab. At the moment a statistically significant impact on re-offending cannot be detected. What you cannot say: This analysis shows that the Family Man course reduced reoffending by 13 percentage points or any other amount. For a full description of the methodology applied to this data, please consult the methodology guidance document at Introduction Safe Ground is a charity working with offenders on a range of projects both in prison and in the community with the aim of reducing re-offending. This analysis relates to offenders who completed the Family Man course between 2005 and 2008 in Wandsworth Prison. Family Man is a course about family relationships, which uses drama and group work to develop offender s thinking. All course participants were male. Processing the Data 207 Safe Ground sent data to the Justice Data Lab for 207 offenders who had completed the Family Man course whilst in Wandsworth prison between 2005 and of the 207 offenders were matched to the Police National Computer, a match rate of 61.8%. Dates of birth were not provided for 75 (36.9%) of the unmatched offenders; they could not be matched as date of birth is a requirement for matching. 1 The one year proven re-offending rate is defined as the proportion of offenders in a cohort who commit an offence in a one year follow-up period which received a court conviction, caution, reprimand or warning during the one year follow-up or in a further six month waiting period. The one year follow-up period begins when offenders leave custody or start their probation sentence. This document is released under the Open Government License 1

2 35 35 offenders had identifiable custodial sentences with a release date from prison before Analysis on the unmatched offenders revealed that they have either since been released from prison (2011 or after), or have not yet been released - a number were serving long custodial sentences, and therefore do not have re-offending data available. Creating a Matched Control Group 35 Of the 35 offender records for which re-offending data was available, all 35 could be matched to offenders with similar characteristics but who were not on the Family Man course2. In total the matched control group consisted of 83,215 offender records. Annex A provides information on the similarity between the treatment and control groups. Further data on the matching process is available upon request. Results The one year proven re-offending rate for 35 offenders on the Family Man course was 29%. This compares to 42% for a matched control group of similar offenders. The best estimate for this difference is 13 percentage points. This information is displayed in Figure 1. Figure 1: The one year proven re-offending rate for offenders on the Family Man course and a matched control group % 45.00% 40.00% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Fam ily Man participants (35 offender records) Matched Control Group (83,215 offender records) 2 Matching was carried out using Propensity Score Matching. Please refer to the Methodology Document for more details on what this matching method entails. This document is released under the Open Government License 2

3 The figure presents 95% confidence intervals for the re-offending rates of both groups; for this analysis we can be confident that the impact of the Family Man Course on reducing re-offending is between 28 and -2 percentage points 3. It is important to show confidence intervals because both the treatment and matched control groups are samples of larger populations; the re-offending rate is therefore an estimate for each population based on a sample, rather than an actual rate. The precision of this estimate could be improved if the size of the Family Man offender group used in the analysis was increased. It is recommended that the analysis is repeated on a larger sample, if and when additional years of Family Man data become available. Caveats and Limitations The results of the analysis do not mean that Safe Ground failed to reduce reoffending. The statistical methods used in this analysis are based on data collected for administrative purposes. It is possible that underlying characteristics about the individuals included in the analysis which were not captured by the data (e.g. family relationships and attendance on other interventions targeted at offenders) may have impacted re-offending behaviour. Furthermore, only 35 of the 207 offenders on Safe Ground were in the final treatment group. As such, the final treatment group may not be representative of all offenders who have been on Safe Ground. The re-offending rates included in this analysis should not be compared to the national average, nor any other reports or publications which include reoffending rates including those assessing the impact of other interventions. The re-offending rates included in this report are specific to the characteristics of matched Family Man offenders. Any other comparison would not be comparing like for like. 3 The p value for this significance test was This document is released under the Open Government License 3

4 Annexes Annex A: Characteristics of offenders in the treatment and control groups This document is released under the Open Government License 4

5 The table above shows that the two groups were well matched on all variables found to have associations with receiving treatment and/or re-offending. All of the absolute standardised mean differences are highlighted green because they were less than 5%, indicating close matches on these characteristics. Gender is not included in the table as all offenders in each group were male. Contact Points Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office: Tel: Other enquiries about the analysis should be directed to: Justice Data Lab Team Ministry of Justice Justice Data Lab Justice Statistical Analytical Services 7 th Floor 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ Tel: Justice.DataLab@justice.gsi.gov.uk General enquiries about the statistical work of the Ministry of Justice can be e- mailed to: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk General information about the official statistics system of the United Kingdom is available from Crown copyright 2013 Produced by the Ministry of Justice You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit or psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This document is released under the Open Government License 5