Written questions by Johnson.

Whether his Department has assessed the potential impact of recent changes to planned core education hours in public sector prisons on its compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty.

The Department complies with the ongoing Public Sector Equality Duty to have due regard to the potential equality impacts of decisions to make changes to the provision of education in prisons at both a national and local level. Changes to planned core education hours vary across different prisons because the national funding formula for prison education has been refreshed, to ensure that allocations are a fair reflection of prison population, function and regional cost differences. Governors and Heads of Education, Skills and Work undertake needs analysis to understand the characteristics and needs of their local prison population, and commission education based on this information. New Core Education contracts also have strengthened requirements around Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. Providers are required to adhere to the Public Sector Equality Duty, and must continuously maintain an Equality, Diversity and Inclusion action plan to ensure equity of access to learning.

How many Risk Assessed Recall Review applications on behalf of prisoners serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection have been (a) submitted, (b) accepted, and (c) directed for release, in each month since November 2024.

Since 1 November 2024, officials in the Public Protection Casework Section (PPCS) in HMPPS has on behalf of the Secretary of State considered the suitability of every newly recalled IPP prisoner for re-release under RARR. That means that the recalled offender does not need to make an application for RARR. In each case, officials in PPCS will have regard to any recommendation made by the offender’s community offender manager. The number of recalled IPP offenders re-released via RARR in each month from 1 November 2024 to 30 September 2025 is given in the table below.YearMonthRelease Decisions2024November02024December32025January82025February52025March82025April42025May42025June82025July72025August12025September2Note:Data quality: The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.We have provided the RARR release data up to 30 September 2025 as we have only published general release data up to 30 September 2025.

What progress the Government has made on strengthening the operation, consistency and availability of Out‑of‑Court Disposals, further to the recommendations on OOCDs set out by Sir Brian Leveson in Part 1 of his Review of Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings; and what assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the analysis that a more effective OOCD framework could improve outcomes for racialised communities.

This Government is committed to improving early intervention and proportionality in the justice system, and Sir Brian Leveson’s Independent Review of the Criminal Courts has been an important part of shaping that direction. The Independent Review highlights the significant potential of Out of Court Resolutions to secure better outcomes by addressing the underlying causes of crime before offending can escalate. This subsequently benefits the community as it reduces the risk of reoffending, preventing future crime, and delivers quicker justice for victims. We are working with the Home Office as we consider the best options for strengthening the use of Out of Court Resolutions and will respond to the recommendations in the Review in due course.

Which prison rehabilitative projects have been (a) assessed, (b) approved and (c) refused by the National Frameworks Intervention Panel in each year since 2023.

The Ministry of Justice does not disclose the scores awarded by the National Frameworks Intervention Panel. These scores are commercially sensitive, both in relation to the Ministry of Justice’s own interests, and to those of third‑party providers, who are entitled to expect that any assessment of their performance will remain confidential.It is not possible, without incurring disproportionate cost, to confirm which prison rehabilitative projects have been assessed, approved or refused. Details are not held in a single national record. Under the National Framework for Interventions, proposals are predominantly assessed at regional level, with only regionally approved proposals submitted for central consideration.

What scores were most recently awarded by the National Frameworks Intervention Panel for (a) the Time4Change programme and (b) the Sycamore Tree programme.

The Ministry of Justice does not disclose the scores awarded by the National Frameworks Intervention Panel. These scores are commercially sensitive, both in relation to the Ministry of Justice’s own interests, and to those of third‑party providers, who are entitled to expect that any assessment of their performance will remain confidential.It is not possible, without incurring disproportionate cost, to confirm which prison rehabilitative projects have been assessed, approved or refused. Details are not held in a single national record. Under the National Framework for Interventions, proposals are predominantly assessed at regional level, with only regionally approved proposals submitted for central consideration.

What proportion of cases in the Crown Court backlog are either way cases that would be no longer eligible for jury trial under proposed reforms.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information about cases in the open caseload at both the magistrates’ courts and at the Crown Court. This includes breakdowns of volumes and durations as part of the Crown Court open caseload published as part of Criminal Court Statistics Quarterly: Criminal court statistics quarterly.     The Ministry of Justice does not publish data relating to the progression of cases or defendant elections in the open caseload. As such we cannot provide volume or timeliness estimates regarding the decision of the defendant to elect mode of trial within the disproportionate costs limit.

What proportion of cases in the court backlog are pending the decision of the defendant to elect mode of trial.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information about cases in the open caseload at both the magistrates’ courts and at the Crown Court. This includes breakdowns of volumes and durations as part of the Crown Court open caseload published as part of Criminal Court Statistics Quarterly: Criminal court statistics quarterly.     The Ministry of Justice does not publish data relating to the progression of cases or defendant elections in the open caseload. As such we cannot provide volume or timeliness estimates regarding the decision of the defendant to elect mode of trial within the disproportionate costs limit.

What proportion of the Crown Court backlog comprises the cohort of up to three years’ imprisonment cases and would go before a Judge only court under proposed reforms.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information about cases in the open caseload at both the magistrates’ courts and at the Crown Court. This includes breakdowns of volumes and durations as part of the Crown Court open caseload published as part of Criminal Court Statistics Quarterly: Criminal court statistics quarterly.     The Ministry of Justice does not publish data relating to the progression of cases or defendant elections in the open caseload. As such we cannot provide volume or timeliness estimates regarding the decision of the defendant to elect mode of trial within the disproportionate costs limit.

What estimate he has made of the number of either-way cases in the Crown Court backlog yet to elect mode of trial.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information about cases in the open caseload at both the magistrates’ courts and at the Crown Court. This includes breakdowns of volumes and durations as part of the Crown Court open caseload published as part of Criminal Court Statistics Quarterly: Criminal court statistics quarterly.     The Ministry of Justice does not publish data relating to the progression of cases or defendant elections in the open caseload. As such we cannot provide volume or timeliness estimates regarding the decision of the defendant to elect mode of trial within the disproportionate costs limit.

Whether his Department holds information on the median age of cases yet to elect mode of trial.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information about cases in the open caseload at both the magistrates’ courts and at the Crown Court. This includes breakdowns of volumes and durations as part of the Crown Court open caseload published as part of Criminal Court Statistics Quarterly: Criminal court statistics quarterly.     The Ministry of Justice does not publish data relating to the progression of cases or defendant elections in the open caseload. As such we cannot provide volume or timeliness estimates regarding the decision of the defendant to elect mode of trial within the disproportionate costs limit.

How many prison education staff were employed in January (a) 2025, and (b) 2026, by prison.

We are committed to ensuring that prisoners can access high-quality education and skills provision that supports rehabilitation and reduces re-offending.The curriculum delivered through core education contracts is decided at local level, as is the number of education staff employed. It would not be possible to obtain this information from each prison without incurring disproportionate cost. It should be noted that the majority of teaching staff are employed by external providers.In the interests of transparency, we intend to publish figures for changes to core education delivery volumes at individual prison level in the coming weeks.

For a breakdown of what prison education courses, according to annual delivery plan data, were provided in January (a) 2025, and (b) 2026, by prison, level of qualification and duration.

We are committed to ensuring that prisoners can access high-quality education and skills provision that supports rehabilitation and reduces re-offending.The curriculum delivered through core education contracts is decided at local level, as is the number of education staff employed. It would not be possible to obtain this information from each prison without incurring disproportionate cost. It should be noted that the majority of teaching staff are employed by external providers.In the interests of transparency, we intend to publish figures for changes to core education delivery volumes at individual prison level in the coming weeks.

How many prison education staff, according to annual delivery plan data, were employed in January (a) 2025, and (b) 2026, by prison.

We are committed to ensuring that prisoners can access high-quality education and skills provision that supports rehabilitation and reduces re-offending.The curriculum delivered through core education contracts is decided at local level, as is the number of education staff employed. It would not be possible to obtain this information from each prison without incurring disproportionate cost. It should be noted that the majority of teaching staff are employed by external providers.In the interests of transparency, we intend to publish figures for changes to core education delivery volumes at individual prison level in the coming weeks.

How many and what proportion of Parole Board recommendations on moving (a) prisoners serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection sentence and (b) other prisoners to open conditions were rejected by his Department in each of the last 12 months.

For many years, the Secretary of State has asked the independent Parole Board for advice on whether a prisoner serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) or a life sentence is suitable for transfer to open conditions. Where the Parole Board recommends that a prisoner is suitable, the Secretary of State is not bound to accept the recommendation, and it is the Secretary of State who is ultimately responsible for determining whether a life or IPP prisoner is safe to be managed in an open prison. In making that decision, the Secretary of State takes account of the Parole Board’s recommendation and needs evidence to justify rejecting the recommendation.The following tables provide the number and proportion of recommendations made by the Parole Board which were rejected in each month between 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025 for prisoners serving (a) an IPP sentence and (b) a life sentence.Number and proportion of rejected open condition recommendations involving IPP prisoners, 1 April 2024-31 March 2025Table 1: YearMonthAcceptedRejected% Rejected2024April8111%2024May9431%2024June10533%2024July17935%2024August8433%2024September19521%2024October17935%2024November14836%2024December12737%2025January10217%2025February7750%2025March6225% Number and proportion of rejected open condition recommendations involving life prisoners, 1 April 2024-31 March 2025Table 2: YearMonthAcceptedRejected% Rejected2024April14733%2024May15317%2024June1019%2024July4836%2024August34717%2024September25311%2024October20829%2024November17832%2024December27618%2025January19727%2025February23312%2025March23312% These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. Data has been provided for the period 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025 to align with the publication of the Parole Board’s data on recommendations for open conditions.Public protection remains the priority and prisoners will only be approved for a move to open conditions if it is assessed that it is safe to do so.

Pursuant to the Answer of 14 March 2025 to Question 37323 on Prison Sentences, how many people serving imprisonment for public protection sentences in Category A prisons on 1 January 2026 were classified as Category (a) A, (b) B, and (c) C prisoners.

Data on the prison population are published as part of the Department’s Offender Management Statistics Quarterly (OMSQ) release. The most recent publication includes prison population data as at 30 September 2025.The information requested—relating to the prison population as at 1 January 2026—cannot be provided at this time, as doing so would provide an early indication of the data underpinning a future iteration of these Accredited Official Statistics, scheduled for publication on 30 April 2026.

What assessment his Department has made of the impact of section 1 of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 on individuals with mental health conditions or neurodivergent profiles.

The Ministry of Justice routinely publishes data on the number of convictions at criminal courts for an assault on an emergency worker by age and ethnicity in England and Wales. This data can be found in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, which can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal Justice Statistics. This data is part of a range of data produced by the Ministry of Justice which includes a broader review of ethnicity and the criminal justice system.Data on those with a mental health condition or a neurodivergent profile is not collated centrally by the Ministry of Justice. Where an individual is convicted, sentencing guidelines stipulate that the court must consider issues of neurodiversity at sentencing, taking an individualistic approach, recognising that the levels of impairment caused by any condition will vary significantly between individuals.

What data his Department holds on the ethnicity of individuals convicted under section 1 of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018; and what steps are being taken to monitor and address any disparities.

The Ministry of Justice routinely publishes data on the number of convictions at criminal courts for an assault on an emergency worker by age and ethnicity in England and Wales. This data can be found in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, which can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal Justice Statistics. This data is part of a range of data produced by the Ministry of Justice which includes a broader review of ethnicity and the criminal justice system.Data on those with a mental health condition or a neurodivergent profile is not collated centrally by the Ministry of Justice. Where an individual is convicted, sentencing guidelines stipulate that the court must consider issues of neurodiversity at sentencing, taking an individualistic approach, recognising that the levels of impairment caused by any condition will vary significantly between individuals.

How many individuals over the age of 18 have been convicted under section 1 of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 in each year since its introduction.

The Ministry of Justice routinely publishes data on the number of convictions at criminal courts for an assault on an emergency worker by age and ethnicity in England and Wales. This data can be found in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, which can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal Justice Statistics. This data is part of a range of data produced by the Ministry of Justice which includes a broader review of ethnicity and the criminal justice system.Data on those with a mental health condition or a neurodivergent profile is not collated centrally by the Ministry of Justice. Where an individual is convicted, sentencing guidelines stipulate that the court must consider issues of neurodiversity at sentencing, taking an individualistic approach, recognising that the levels of impairment caused by any condition will vary significantly between individuals.

What estimate he has made of the current total amount of (a) compensation and (b) civil claim payments made to families of prisoners who have died in custody while serving a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection.

The information requested is not held centrally. Information relating to payments relating to civil claims following the death in custody of prisoners is not broken down by sentence-type. It remains a priority for the Government that all those on IPP sentences receive the support they need to progress towards safe release from custody or, where they are being supervised on licence in the community, towards having their licence terminated altogether. Guidance has been provided to all prison staff and partner agencies to raise the importance of recognising the heightened level of risk of self-harm and suicide amongst IPP prisoners and an IPP Safety Toolkit has been developed, with a range of resources to promote learning and to help front-line staff support and engage those serving the IPP sentence effectively.

How many applications for the termination of IPP licences have been refused in each of the past 12 months; and what proportion of total applications that represents.

The process of terminating an IPP licence does not require an application to be made. Rather, the Secretary of State for Justice has a statutory obligation to refer an offender serving an IPP sentence to the Parole Board once three years have elapsed since first release (the qualifying period), in order for the Board to consider whether to terminate the licence. If the licence is not terminated by the Parole Board at the end of the qualifying period, it will be terminated automatically after a further two years, provided the offender is not recalled to custody.The changes introduced by the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 have reduced the number of people serving IPP sentences in the community by around two thirds, including over 1,700 IPP licences being automatically terminated on 1 November 2024.The Parole Board published its annual report for 2024/2025 on 10 July this year. The report provides the number of IPP licence terminations and refusals for those cases considered by the Parole Board for the 12-month period 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025. The report covers IPP termination numbers on page 16 and is available here: Parole Board for England and Wales Annual Report and Accounts 2024-25.The Parole Board will terminate an IPP prisoner’s licence except where it judges that the continued supervision of the offender on licence is necessary for the purposes of public protection.