Community Justice Outcome Activity Annual Report 2024-25

Community justice is a cornerstone of public safety, fairness and social justice in Scotland. When it functions well, it prevents harm before it takes root, reduces further offending, supports victims and helps people rebuild their lives in ways that strengthen families and communities alike. When it falters, the consequences reverberate across our courts, our prisons and our neighbourhoods.

This report sets out Scotland’s performance against the four national aims of the Community Justice Strategy during 2024/25. It does so differently to previous years. It takes a more open, more challenging account of progress. It speaks directly to Scotland’s people, those who work across the system, and to Scottish Ministers and decision makers about where ambition is being realised – and where it is falling short.

The evidence presented in the report shows progress is being made. Much of it is driven by sustained collaboration, innovation and determination at a local level. Across Scotland we see growing confidence in diversion and early intervention, stronger leadership and more integrated support across housing, health, employability and though care. This matters. It reduces unnecessary justice involvement, improves outcomes for those who experience the system and delivers better value for public investment. But the picture is uneven. Progress is neither equal, nor consistent, nor guaranteed. The national aim to ensure robust, high-quality community interventions available everywhere and trusted by the courts, has not yet been achieved. In practice, someone’s access to bail support, restorative justice, structured supervision or specialist interventions still depends too heavily on where they live, the capacity of local services and whether or not short-term funding or staffing pressures can be absorbed. These variations shape real-world outcomes – whether support is available at a critical moment, whether community alternatives are used with confidence, and whether opportunities to reduce further harm are taken or missed.

We need to acknowledge the context in which this work is taking place. Workforce shortages, rising complexity of need, unreliable data, emergency prison measures and a national housing crisis all form the background of this year’s findings. This scale of effort by Community Justice Partnerships is significant, but effort alone is not enough.

If community justice is to deliver on its aims, national ambition must be matched by national alignment, sustained investment and clearer accountability. Too often, expectations are placed on local partnerships without the consistent resources, reliable data, national support or infrastructure required to meet them at pace and at scale.

This report is intentionally transparent about what the evidence tells us, and what it cannot yet tell us. Where more data is needed, we say so. Where progress is slow, we explain why. And where promising practice is emerging, we highlight it as proof that better outcomes are possible and achievable when the system is properly supported.

Crucially, the report also reflects the voices and experiences of people who live with the impact of the justice system. Their insight reinforces a consistent message: access to timely, person centred, trauma informed support changes lives and prevents future harm.

Community justice will continue to play an increasingly vital role in Scotland’s justice landscape. That makes it all the more important that progress is honest, performance is understood in context, and improvement is actively supported rather than assumed.

Community Justice Scotland will continue to challenge where change is needed, advocate for what works, and support improvement nationally and locally. This report is not the final word — it is an invitation to act, to align behind shared ambition, and to ensure community justice is consistently available, properly valued and capable of delivering the safer Scotland we all want.

The Community Justice Scotland (CJS) Outcome Activity Annual Report (OAAR) examines progress in community justice across Scotland during 2024/25, assessed against the aims and activities set out in the National Strategy for Community Justice.

The report draws on template responses submitted by Community Justice Partnerships (CJPs) and their partners. These returns describe progress, opportunities, and challenges in delivering community justice at local authority level, as required under the Community Justice (Scotland) Act 2016.

The activity described reflects partners shared responsibility to design and deliver services that promote rehabilitation and reintegration from a person’s first contact with the justice system through to their exit from it, with the aim of reducing further offending.

Community Justice (CJ) Statutory partners include local authorities (LAs); health boards; the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland (PSoS); Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS); Skills Development Scotland; Integration Joint Boards established under section 9 of the Public Bodies (Joint Working) (Scotland) Act 2014; Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS); and Scottish Ministers, through the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) and the Scottish Prison Service (SPS).

This year’s report seeks not only to describe activity, but to challenge Ministers, decision-makers and the public to think more ambitiously about the role, value and impact of community justice. It makes the case for stronger emphasis, investment and policy weighting for services that are often life-changing for individuals, families and communities, and that rely on sustained delivery across the public and third-sectors.

The report includes a horizon scan intended to prompt discussion on how community justice can be sustained and strengthened within a challenging and evolving justice landscape.

Workshops were also used to develop the report’s ‘So What?’, focusing on what the evidence tells us and how it can be translated into tangible improvements for people who experience the justice system and those who work within it.

Looking ahead, CJS will support national and local improvement activity informed by the evidence set out here. This includes continued workshops and seminars on priority themes, regular deep-dive bulletins, research and reporting, improved data sharing, partnership engagement, and support for local and national improvement projects. CJS will continue to advocate for sustained investment in community justice and greater national awareness of its impact.

The Scottish Government’s National Strategy for Community Justice sets out the national direction for community justice and highlights four overarching aims, 13 priority actions, and 9 nationally determined outcomes.

Community Justice Scotland has a legislative duty to report to Scottish Ministers its assessment of performance in Scotland as a whole in relation to the achievement of the national outcomes (as set out in S27 of the Community Justice (Scotland) Act 2016). To do so, we have used the national indicator data as set out in the community justice performance framework, coupled with local evidence collected throughout the reporting year and other publicly available information. To provide a fuller assessment of progress towards achieving the national strategy for community justice, we have looked at all priority actions even if they do not have corresponding outcomes and/or indicator data.

The 2023/24 report made four recommendations focusing on key themes: resourcing for community justice, enhanced data sharing and analysis, workforce capacity and skills, and system development in electronic monitoring.

National Indicator – Number of diversions from prosecution (assessments undertaken, cases commenced, and cases successfully completed):

Based on the national indicator data, progress has been made in regards to the number of diversion assessments undertaken (+7%), cases commenced (+7%), and cases successfully completed (+28%), compared to 23/24.

Locally, data on diversion activity shows marked variation across Scotland, indicating uneven implementation and potential gaps in local service delivery.

Locally, the number of assessments range from two to 1055. Assessments per 10,000 of the population indicate wide variation.

The number of cases commenced range from six to 516. Cases commenced per 10,000 population differ noticeably across areas:

This measure alone does not indicate success or failure. Low rates may reflect lower crime rates, effective upstream prevention, or restrictive eligibility criteria. Higher rates may indicate proactive diversion or higher local need. Without wider justice system context, including the volume of eligible cases or local offence profiles, interpretation remains limited.

Approximate commencement rates, based on the number of assessments which progress to cases commencing was ~63% nationally. Seven areas report conversion rates of 50% or less from assessment to case commencement, suggesting potential issues with capacity, eligibility criteria, awareness and/or engagement.

National Indicator – Number of arrest referrals from custody centres:

Arrest referral data does not include referrals made by healthcare staff, or those directly made between support service link workers and those in custody. Additionally, this indicator is relatively new and changes to how data was collected between 2023-24 and 2024-25 make it difficult to compare over time.

While it is not possible to present local performance data or specific variation, it is important to highlight the factors that are likely to influence it. There are a range of underlying factors that can drive variation between locations, and referral rates might differ widely as a result. These differences may reflect local processes, operational pressures, staffing approaches, or recording practices. Understanding what sits behind any variation is critical, as surface-level comparisons alone rarely provide an accurate picture of performance or need.

Areas where referral rates appear high may suggest strong processes for identifying need at the point of custody, supported by effective relationships between custody staff and community-based services. However, high referral activity may also be influenced by higher volumes of people coming through custody, which can increase referrals without necessarily indicating an improvement in how need is identified.

Areas where referral rates appear low may point to limited staff capacity, confidence, or training in recognising individuals who may benefit from support. It could also reflect inconsistencies or gaps in triage and recording processes. Lower custodial throughput might mean fewer opportunities to generate referrals. Alternatively, lower rates may indicate that upstream prevention or early intervention is working effectively and reducing the need for referral.
Differences between areas that have comparable levels of need or deprivation would suggest that local practice, staffing models, operational culture, and data-recording quality might have a greater influence on referral activity than deprivation alone.

It is important to recognise that this indicator reflects activity rather than impact. Higher referral rates do not, in themselves, demonstrate improved outcomes, and lower rates may reflect effective prevention or targeted intervention rather than poor performance

Ensure that robust and high-quality Community Interventions & Public Protection arrangements are consistently available across Scotland

National Indicator – Number of assessment reports for suitability, bail supervision cases commenced, and bail supervision cases completed:

Based on the national indicator data, the number of bail assessments undertaken rose sharply between 2022-23 and 2023-24 (+29.7%), before a slight dip in the period 2024-25 (-1.4%). There has also been progress made in relation to the number of cases commenced (+17%), and cases successfully completed (+30%) compared to 23/24.

Largest assessment volumes: Glasgow City (841), Fife (499), City of Edinburgh (425), North Ayrshire (388), Highland (358).

The national commencement rate was 26% in 2024-25, which is about a 2% increase on the previous year. Local performance in bail supervision varies considerably across Scotland. Some areas report conversion rates of up to 100%, meaning that once an assessment is completed, a large proportion of cases move into active supervision. This may indicate well-aligned local processes or effective alignment between assessment outcomes and judicial decisions. In contrast, some areas show conversion rates as low as 6%, where only a small number of assessed individuals go on to begin supervision. In terms of improvement, Dundee City and East Lothian both saw a 74% improvement in regards to their commencement rates.

Nationally, the percentage of individuals deemed as not suitable for bail was 22%. However, Aberdeenshire, Orkney, Inverness, and Highland all had figures above 50% which is significantly higher than the Scottish average. A number of factors may influence suitability including crime types, individual risk, and need profiles as well as factors such as stable housing.

Areas working with very small case volumes require careful interpretation, as just a few cases can make percentages appear unusually high or low and may not represent the wider picture. Overall, local performance cannot be understood from percentages alone. Conversion rates, caseload size, local decision making, geography, and service capacity, all influence how bail supervision operates in different areas. Recognising these differences is essential for interpreting data fairly and identifying where further support or improvements may be required.

National Indicator – Percentage of community payback orders successfully completed:

Based on the national indicator data, the percentage of CPOs successfully completed remains stable and high (~71%). Over the past decade successful completion of CPOs has remained relatively consistent and between 70 – 72%. Locally, successful completion rates range between 59% and 79% suggesting varying local operational conditions.

Highest completion rates were recorded in Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, East Lothian, East Renfrewshire, and Moray (~74% – ~78.5%)

Lowest completion rates were found in Glasgow City, West Dunbartonshire, Clackmannanshire, and Falkirk (~60% – ~64%)

Completion rates for CPOs varied across Scotland in 2024-25. 10 authorities recorded decreases, while others, such as Edinburgh, Perth and Kinross, Orkney and Shetland, saw their completion rates improve. East Renfrewshire’s rate stayed the same. These trends are not always clear-cut, as increases in completion rates may be offset by rising breach rates, and outcomes are shaped not only by caseload volumes but also the distinct operational pressures present in each area.

National Indicator – Percentage of drug treatment and testing orders successfully completed:

The number of DTTOs imposed have fallen 62% since the 2018-19 peak with only 226 DTTOs being imposed in 2024-25. In terms of the national indicator, completion rates have risen by ~2% since 2023-24.

Locally, completion rates range from 0% to ~86%. Interpreting DTTO performance requires care due to the small numbers involved. Wide variation (0% – 86%) could indicate inconsistent service models and engagement outcomes. High breach and revocation rates in major urban authorities with larger caseloads show higher churn and instability which may be due to case complexity, individual suitability, and/or service delivery challenges.

Ensure that services are accessible and available to address the needs of individuals accused or convicted of an offence

National Indicator – Number of transfers in drug/alcohol treatments from custody to community:

The number of people moving from prison into community drug or alcohol treatment showed a mixed picture. 11 areas saw decreases in 2024–25, while others increased. Some areas experienced sharp rises or falls over just one year, often based on small numbers that can fluctuate easily. These changes might reflect shifts in local processes, staffing, service capacity, or the number of people leaving custody with treatment needs. Because the totals are small, transfers alone do not show whether access to treatment is improving or worsening. To understand performance meaningfully, additional information is needed, such as how many people were eligible, whether support was arranged before release, and whether people stayed engaged with support services after their release.

National Indicator – Number of homelessness applications where prison was the property the main applicant became homeless from:

The national aim is for fewer people to become homeless immediately after leaving prison. The most recent year shows mixed trends, including long-term reductions and short-term increase. 16 areas saw increases, 10 decreased, and 6 stayed the same. Differences between areas can reflect many factors such as where people choose to settle after custody, the availability of housing, relationships between local services, or changes in how homelessness is recorded. These shifts cannot be fully understood from application numbers alone and require consideration of release patterns, pre‑release housing planning, local supply of accommodation, and how well people sustain housing once they receive it.

National Indicator – Number of those in employability services with convictions:

The percentage of people with convictions using employability services fell in around half of local areas, but the changes were small and hard to interpret without knowing the actual number of people involved. Percentages alone can be misleading, as they may reflect changes in who else is using the service rather than changes in support for people with convictions. Understanding local performance requires complete datasets, along with information on outcomes such as how many people who experience justice move into training or work, complete programmes, or face barriers like housing or health issues.

National Indicator – Number of voluntary throughcare cases commenced:

The commencement of cases has decreased in 18 areas. Falling numbers may reflect fewer referrals or fewer short prison sentences, but might also indicate issues around engagement, barriers at the point of contact, or operational pressures. Conversion rates between referral and commencement vary greatly. Understanding why people do or do not engage requires better information about referral patterns, eligibility, and what happens after someone is offered support.

Strengthen the Leadership, Engagement & Partnership working of local and national community justice partners