How the Crown Prosecution Service is understanding and tackling racial disproportionality in our work

Phase One

In 2021, we commissioned independent research from the University of Leeds to examine the outcomes of our decision making by sex, age and ethnicity.

The study looked at around 195,000 cases from January 2018 to December 2021. The study found that defendants from minority ethnic backgrounds were significantly more likely to be charged for a comparable offence than White British defendants. White British suspects had the lowest charge rate of 69.9% of cases resulting in a charge. By contrast Mixed ethnicity suspects had the highest charge rate of between 77.3% and 81.3%. The research told us that these disparities existed but it didn’t tell us why.

Phase Two

To better understand what was driving this disparity and what actions we could take to tackle this, we wanted to look our cases and processes in more depth.

In 2023, we began this work with scrutiny from an independent Disproportionality Advisory Group comprised of academics, legal professionals, and third-sector partners.

This stage looked at how our decisions may be impacted by things like previous offending history, the language used in evidence files and the processes we follow when reviewing them.

We used a variety of research methods in this phase. We looked at a sample of 400 like-for-like cases of white British and mixed ethnicity suspects (as these groups had the highest disparity in our original research.)  We also carried out interviews and a survey with our staff.

Overall, the research found that the underlying causes are complex, but reinforced that disproportionality existed.

Our research was made up of a series of research questions – each aimed to test a possible reason for disproportionality. The findings are set out below:

Suspect and case characteristics  

Could certain case or suspect characteristics explain the disproportionality? For example was disproportionality caused by previous convictions or socio-economic status, rather than race?

The research found no significant differences in characteristics that could have explained the disparity. This included that previous convictions and socio-economic status were not a factor.  

We did find differences in the age of the suspects, with mixed ethnicity suspects being younger than white British suspects. We also found that white suspects were expected to plead guilty more often than mixed ethnicity suspects.

Information provided in case files

Does the amount of information and evidence provided by the police and prosecutors vary depending on suspect ethnicity? As this could be influencing the final charging decision.  

We looked at the word count on documents provided by the police to the CPS as well as the number of evidential files passed on to us – there was no difference in the amount of information provided.

We also looked at the word count of our charging decisions, which is the information CPS prosecutors provide when reviewing the case. On average, there was a higher word count provided for mixed ethnicity suspects than white British suspects.

Language used in case files

Is the language used to describe suspects and cases different for white suspects and mixed ethnicity suspects? As this could also be influencing the final charging decision.  

We commissioned Aston University to carry out this piece of research. They analysed large samples of text to uncover implicit patterns in the language used. They compared like-for-like cases with similar crime types and levels of harm.

The study found a clear difference in the language used by both police and prosecutors. We did not find explicit racism or biases in the texts, however more direct and definitive language was used in respect of mixed ethnicity suspects, their actions were described in more negative terms and more references to the violent nature of their offences.  

Workforce demographics

Does the CPS’ workforce demographics contribute towards disproportionality in decision making?

We looked at CPS workforce demographic data in comparison to the general working-age population of England and Wales – we looked at ethnicity, age and sex. We broke our research down by individual CPS Areas.  

• Local CPS Areas with more ethnically diverse general working-age populations showed lower levels of disproportionality. The same pattern was seen for Areas with more ethnically diverse workforces, although to a lesser extent
• There was no significant relationship between the mean age and levels of disproportionality
• Likewise, there was no significant relationship when looking at the male/female split and levels of disproportionality.

Working practices

Do the CPS’ practices and processes contribute towards disproportionality in decision making?

For this part of the research, we conducted a series of surveys and interviews with staff around equality and diversity initiatives, legal training and how the Code for Crown Prosecutors is applied.  

Research with staff identified:

• Workloads were seen as a barrier for staff to prioritise equality and diversity initiatives or challenge unconscious bias
• Senior leadership will be pivotal in championing equality and diversity, and driving change
• CPS legal training supports prosecutors in making fair decisions, however more could be done to warn against making disproportionate decisions
• Research on how the Code for Crown Prosecutors is applied revealed the potential for unconscious bias to have an impact.

Download and read the full report (PDF document, 372kb). This document may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

Our action plan

Our action plan - developed collaboratively with colleagues and external partners - will enable us to develop an anti-racist culture and practices, eliminating racial bias in our decision-making and working with other criminal justice partners to address race disproportionality across the system.

We will carry out a comprehensive review of the Code for Crown Prosecutors – the guidance prosecutors follow when making legal decisions - and amend it to ensure that identifying and addressing bias is considered by prosecutors in all their casework decisions.

We will develop extensive learning and development, training and new digital tools for our staff, and specifically prosecutors.

We will also prioritise working closely with our partners across the criminal justice system. This includes establishing a Joint CPS and National Police Chiefs' Council Race Disproportionality Board, which allows for continuous check and challenge between prosecutors and police.

We will identify ways of further strengthening our stakeholder and community engagement channels, including involving experts in addressing disproportionality.

The diversity of our workforce – one of the most diverse in the Civil Service and criminal justice system – is one of our strengths and the plan will help us to build on this further. We will focus on improving recruitment, retention and development of ethnic minority staff to drive better representation of the communities we serve.

Read the  full action plan