Conveying Complexities of Reconviction Data

An evaluation research study into the provision of accommodation support and services for prolific offenders in Devon (PORCH project - Prolific Offenders’ Resettlement through Co-ordinated Housing) was recently completed by staff at SERIO in collaboration with Jill Annison from the Criminal Justice Team at the University of Plymouth. One of the factors under investigation was whether the project could be shown to be having a positive impact in terms of reducing the re-offending of the beneficiaries who were receiving the service. The difficulties of collecting and interpreting reconviction data has long been debated within the criminological field (see for instance Maguire …). Even Home Office researchers have acknowledged the potential drawbacks of relying on this measure but it continues to hold considerably sway amongst politicians and the public. Bearing in mind these acknowledged limitations the PORCH evaluation included this measure but collided almost immediately with further constraints: despite a positive response from the police (who held the relevant data), analysis was denied at individual case level. Moreover, the lack of a shared definition of what constituted a prolific offender and the intervention approaches implemented in different locations complicated evaluation and analysis still further. While research into other projects involving prolific and persistent offenders have been reported, there has been little discussion of the problems arising from the analysis of reconviction data and the issues underlying these difficulties. This paper therefore explores the complexities of data access and analysis and the difficulties involved in endeavouring to convey these aspects to a wider audience.