Written questions by Slaughter.

What metrics determine whether a Crown Court trial is classified as ineffective.

If the trial does not go ahead on the scheduled day of listing due to action or inaction by the prosecution, the defence or the court (see list of reasons in table below), and a further listing for trial is required, it is termed ‘ineffective.’ CourtW1 - Another case over-ran W2 - Judge / magistrate availability due to illness etc. W3 - Case not reached / insufficient cases drop out / floater not reached W4 - Equipment / accommodation failure X - Insufficient jurors availableDefenceQ1 - Defence not ready: disclosure problems (inc. late alibi notice) Q2 - Defence not ready: specify in comments (inc. no instructions) Q3 - Defence asked for additional prosecution witness to attend R - Defence witness absent S1 - Defendant absent - did not proceed in absence (judicial discretion) S2 - Defendant ill or otherwise unfit to proceed S4 - Defendant absent - unable to proceed as Defendant not notified of place and time of hearing T - Defence increased time estimate, insufficient time for trial to start U1 - Defence advocate engaged in other trial U2 - Defence advocate failed to attend V - Defendant dismissed advocateOtherS3 - Defendant not produced by PECS W5 - No interpreter available Y - Outstanding cases in a Magistrates' Court Z - Outstanding cases in other Crown Court centreProsecutionM1 - Prosecution not ready: served late notice of additional evidence on defence M2 - Prosecution not ready: specify in comments M3 - Prosecution failed to disclose unused evidence N1 - Prosecution witness absent: police N2 - Prosecution witness absent: professional / expert N3 - Prosecution witness absent: other O1 - Prosecution advocate engaged in another trial O2 - Prosecution advocate failed to attend P - Prosecution increased time estimate - insufficient time for trial to startWhere a trial is not ready to go ahead, it is recorded as ineffective and listed again, either for the following day, or if not possible, for some future date agreed by the court. If the trial starts on the second day, it will then be marked as effective. However, if it is still unable to proceed on the second day, it will be marked as ineffective again.

What proportion of ineffective trials in the Crown Court started later than day one of the set trial date in 2024.

Of all Crown Court trials that were ineffective between January and September 2024, 21% were subsequently effective on a later date (up to the end of September 2024). The remainder will include trials listed for a date beyond the end of September 2024, as well as those cases no longer requiring a trial date (for example the defendant has pleaded guilty). Of all ineffective trials that subsequently started between January and September 2024, 80% had reached conclusion by the end of September 2024. These data are management information and are not subject to the same level of checks as official statistics. The data provided is the most recent available and for that reason might differ slightly from any previously published information. Recent data are especially vulnerable to quality checking and so may be subject to change.

What proportion of ineffective Crown Court trials which started after day one of the set trial date in 2024 reached completion.

Of all Crown Court trials that were ineffective between January and September 2024, 21% were subsequently effective on a later date (up to the end of September 2024). The remainder will include trials listed for a date beyond the end of September 2024, as well as those cases no longer requiring a trial date (for example the defendant has pleaded guilty). Of all ineffective trials that subsequently started between January and September 2024, 80% had reached conclusion by the end of September 2024. These data are management information and are not subject to the same level of checks as official statistics. The data provided is the most recent available and for that reason might differ slightly from any previously published information. Recent data are especially vulnerable to quality checking and so may be subject to change.

Whether her Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of supported accommodation rather than custody for (a) women and (b) their families.

HMPPS offers a three-tier structure of temporary accommodation known as Community Accommodation Service (CAS), two tiers of which provide accommodation that can be used to support community orders, releases on Home Detention Curfew, and bail. CAS1 (also known as Approved Premises) provides 24-hour staffed accommodation with a high level of monitoring, and CAS2 provides accommodation with a minimum of two hours support per week from a support worker, in addition to probation supervision.We are establishing a Women’s Justice Board, to set the vision and strategic direction to address the distinct needs of women in or at risk of contract with the Criminal Justice System and will include a focus on residential alternatives to custody.We know that, for women specifically, supported accommodation as an alternative to custody can be particularly valuable: women supported in the community are 4 percentage points less likely to reoffend than those on short custodial sentences. CAS1 can be used to fulfil a community order residential requirement, CAS2 can support individuals with temporary accommodation who are part of the current Intensive Supervision Court pilots, including the female pilot; and we are providing grant funding for dedicated residential women’s centres to build the evidence base around their use and inform future work. We are working closely with the Judiciary and Offender Managers to promote greater awareness and use of these options.

Whether her Department is taking steps to utilise supported accommodation rather than custody to reduce the impact of prison.

HMPPS offers a three-tier structure of temporary accommodation known as Community Accommodation Service (CAS), two tiers of which provide accommodation that can be used to support community orders, releases on Home Detention Curfew, and bail. CAS1 (also known as Approved Premises) provides 24-hour staffed accommodation with a high level of monitoring, and CAS2 provides accommodation with a minimum of two hours support per week from a support worker, in addition to probation supervision.We are establishing a Women’s Justice Board, to set the vision and strategic direction to address the distinct needs of women in or at risk of contract with the Criminal Justice System and will include a focus on residential alternatives to custody.We know that, for women specifically, supported accommodation as an alternative to custody can be particularly valuable: women supported in the community are 4 percentage points less likely to reoffend than those on short custodial sentences. CAS1 can be used to fulfil a community order residential requirement, CAS2 can support individuals with temporary accommodation who are part of the current Intensive Supervision Court pilots, including the female pilot; and we are providing grant funding for dedicated residential women’s centres to build the evidence base around their use and inform future work. We are working closely with the Judiciary and Offender Managers to promote greater awareness and use of these options.