MAPPA

I understand that as a force you release statistics each year in relation to MAPPA guidelines of managing offenders in the community. These specifically relate to level 2 and level 3 offenders and include their re-offending rates.

We understand that published figures exist for level 2 and 3 offenders for previous years.

The Ministry of Justice has now requested that from April 1, 2008 to March 31, 2009, data must be collected on the number of offenders across all categories and all levels who are charged with a serious further offence whilst being a part of MAPPA.

Please could you answer the following questions based upon this information:

1. How many people were managed at each of the three Categories and at each of the three levels of MAPPA in the year 2008-09? I.E. - how many Category 1 offenders at Level 1? How many Category 1 offenders at Level 2? And so on.
2. How many Category 1 (Registered Sex Offenders) offenders, managed at Level 3 under MAPPA, were charged with serious further offences in the year 2008-09?
3. How many Category 1 (Registered Sex Offenders) offenders, managed at Level 2 under MAPPA, were charged with serious further offences in the year 2008-09?
4. How many Category 1 (Registered Sex Offenders) offenders, managed at Level 1 under MAPPA, were charged with serious further offences in the year 2008-09?
5. How many Category 2 (Violent Offenders and other Sexual Offenders) offenders, managed at Level 3 under MAPPA, were charged with serious further offences in the year 2008-09?
6. How many Category 2 (Violent Offenders and other Sexual Offenders) offenders, managed at Level 2 under MAPPA, were charged with serious further offences in the year 2008-09?
7. How many Category 2 (Violent Offenders and other Sexual Offenders) offenders, managed at Level 1 under MAPPA, were charged with serious further offences in the year 2008-09?
8. How many Category 3 (Other Dangerous Offenders) offenders, managed at Level 3 under MAPPA, were charged with serious further offences in the year 2008-09.
9. How many Category 3 (Other Dangerous Offenders) offenders, managed at Level 2 under MAPPA, were charged with serious further offences in the year 2008-09.
   *There are no Category 3 (Other Dangerous Offenders) managed at Level 1 under MAPPA.
10. How many Level 1 offenders were returned to custody for a breach of their license?
11. How many Level 1 offenders were returned to custody for a breach of their SOPO?
12. How many Level 2 offenders were returned to custody for a breach of their license?
13. How many Level 2 offenders were returned to custody for a breach of their SOPO?
14. How many Level 3 offenders were returned to custody for a breach of their license?
15. How many Level 3 offenders were returned to custody for a breach of their SOPO?
16. If figures for the full year 2008-09 are not currently available I would welcome any 'part-year' answers to the above questions, perhaps based upon the first 6 months of the year (April 1 - September 31st, 2008).

In accordance with section 1(1) (b) of the Act our response is provided below;

In relation to Questions 1 to 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 12 to 16

The Ministry of Justice is requiring MAPPA responsible authorities (police prison and probation) to publish figures requested in these questions within Annual MAPPA reports in October 2009. Therefore this information is exempt information in accordance with:

Section 22 (1) Information Intended for Future Publication.

This exemption is class based and qualified which means that there is a to apply need for a public interest test.
As you are aware when Section 22 is engaged the public authority must consider whether it should keep to the original timetable for publication or whether the circumstances of the case, including the public interest would warrant earlier disclosure.

In this case, Cheshire Constabulary have retrieved these data (where they relate to MAPPA category 1, registered sex offenders) for inclusion in their annual MAPPA report. The MAPPA report is published to facilitate greater awareness of the progress being made by those authorities entrusted with a public protection remit. The range of information contained in the report, and the resources required to draw together and present this information, have increased substantially since its first publication in 2002. This is evidenced by the 2008 publication, which was the most comprehensive report produced to date. This is only made possible by the diversion of resources in to an annual effort.

The Freedom of Information Act legally allows members of the public to request any information held by a public authority. In order to supply this information, resources are allocated to locate and retrieve it. The Section 21 and 22 exemptions were specifically laid down by parliament to benefit those authorities who proactively publish information. To constantly produce new and up to date elements of the currently published information, in order to satisfy an additional need outside of the annual schedule, will render these exemptions less effective and remove the benefits of proactive publication.

As the decision to publish this information was made prior to the submission of this request, as well as a firm date for publication documented, in this case October, the we feel it is reasonable, having taking into account all the circumstances, to cite Section 22, and that the balance of the public interest would favour publishing the information in October within the MAPPA report which provides a full and detailed explanation for how RSOs are monitored.

Question 4

The ViSOR system does not allow the easy retrieval of the information. Retrieval will require, in effect, a complete PNC check for every level 1 managed RSO (which is how the level 2 and level 3 data is currently obtained). The majority of RSOs will be managed at level 1, so it is estimated that retrieval of the information will exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate limit is defined in the Data Protection and Freedom of Information (Fees and Appropriate Limit) Regulations 2004, which is covered by statutory Instrument Number 3244 of 2004. Furthermore, section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 allows a public authority to refuse to respond to a request for information where the cost of compliance would exceed the appropriate limit as defined by the above mentioned regulations.

Question 7

This information is not held. Can I suggest that you source this information from the probation service

Question 10

As question 7 above.

Question 11

The same consideration apply as in relation to question 4.