Background Quality Report - NICTS Judicial Statistics
Background Quality Report - NICTS Judicial Statistics
This report provides information on the quality of the data used to produce the accredited official statistics: NICTS Judicial statistics report. It informs users about the quality of the information upon which they may be drawing conclusions and making decisions.
The report is structured around the five quality dimensions for statistical outputs (from the European Statistics Code of Practice, (PDF 458KB). The UK Statistics Authority’s Code of Practice for Statistics requires that:
Q3.3 The quality of the statistics and data, including their accuracy and reliability, coherence and comparability, and timeliness and punctuality, should be monitored and reported regularly.
Introduction
The publication entitled Judicial Statistics is produced annually by statisticians in the Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service (NICTS), an agency within the Department of Justice (DoJ). The statisticians are seconded from the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA).
The report presents statistical information in relation to the criminal, civil and family business conducted by the NICTS and the work of some associated offices. The statistics are produced using administrative data primarily sourced from the Integrated Court Operations System (ICOS), a live operating system used in each court tier to process every part of the court business from receipt of payments through to the production of final orders made.
To complete the data set, data relating to the Enforcement of Judgements Office is sourced from the Judgement Enforcement Management System (JEMS); data relating to the Office of Care and Protection and Official Solicitors Office are sourced from the OCP operating system, and manual Excel spreadsheets relating to the Coroners Service for Northern Ireland and the Social Security and Child Support Commissioners are also included.
Information is based on data extracted at June each year, for example data covering 1 January to 31 December 2021 were extracted at 3 June 2022.
More detail can be found in the associated document published on the NICTS QAAD webpage.
The reports are available to download from NICTS Judicial statistics webpage.
Relevance
The degree to which the statistical release meets user needs in both coverage and content.
The information in the publication is used by NICTS policy officials in their role assisting and advising the Minister for Justice to discharge their duties. It is also used to answer NI Assembly and Justice Committee questions and to inform requests and queries from other Government organisations, the media and the general public, including students conducting research into Justice issues.
Statistics are included for the Court of Appeal, High Court, Crown Court, County Court, Magistrate’s Court, Children Order and for the Enforcement of Judgments Office, Social Security Commissioners and Pension Appeals Tribunals and Coroners Service for Northern Ireland.
The statistical release includes a pdf report containing charts and associated commentary as well as tables. Methodology information is included within the publication and further detail on the quality assurance information checks that are undertaken can be found on the NICTS QAAD webpage. In addition, data is provided in Open Document Spreadsheets.
User needs are identified through biennial online customer surveys, which can be accessed through the DoJ user surveys webpage. Each publication also has an email address where users are encouraged to provide feedback.
Accuracy and Reliability
The proximity between an estimate and the unknown true value.
These statistics are sourced from administrative systems used in each court tier to process every part of the court business from receipt of payments through to the production of final orders made.
The information is not a sample but a complete data set of all relevant cases recorded within the time period reported on. Where records have been updated on the systems retrospectively, these updates may be missed if the data were downloaded too early. To minimise the impact of this, the data are extracted around 20 weeks after the end of the reporting period; this allows for the updating and completion of records across the systems concerned.
There is no absolute means of verifying if information has been entered incorrectly, or not at all. However, as ICOS is the main source of information used to manage day to day business within NICTS it needs to be highly accurate. Consequently, each court division has a case progression officer who is responsible for monitoring accuracy levels on ICOS and for promoting awareness of the impact that errors could have.
Numerous validation checks are carried out each quarter, by a number of parties, including NISRA statisticians, to ensure the data are fit for purpose. In relation to potential sources of bias and error, further details can also be found in the QAAD report published on the NICTS QAAD webpage.
Users should however, bear in mind that the statistics originate from various administrative data sources which have different purposes, aims and objectives and are kept for non-statistical purposes.
Users should note that some published figures may not add to the totals due to rounding.
Timeliness and Punctuality
Timeliness refers to the time gap between publication and the reference period. Punctuality refers to the gap between planned and actual publication dates.
The statisticians producing the report continually look for ways that the processes can be streamlined while at the same time maintaining or improving the accuracy of the data. The gap between the reference date and the publication date is due to the time allowed for the updating of administrative records and the time it takes to resolve various data quality issues. The annual datasets cover the calendar year.
Typically the report is published the last week in June relating to data for the previous calendar year.
Accessibility and Clarity
Accessibility is the ease with which users are able to access the data, also reflecting the format in which the data are available and the availability of supporting information. Clarity refers to the quality and sufficiency of the metadata, illustrations and accompanying advice.
The release can be accessed from the NICTS Judicial statistics webpage. It can also be accessed through the NISRA Judicial statistics publication page on gov.uk.
The statistical release includes a pdf report containing charts and associated commentary as well as tables. In addition, data is provided in Open Document Spreadsheets. All outputs are available to download free of charge.
The contact details of the responsible statistician have been included in the bulletin, as well as in the accompanying tables.
Explanatory information including sources, discontinuities and missing data have been included.
Coherence and Comparability
Coherence is the degree to which data that are derived from different sources or methods, but refer to the same topic, are similar. Comparability is the degree to which data can be compared over time and domain.
The court structure of Northern Ireland does not equate to that in England, Wales, Scotland or the Republic of Ireland. Direct comparisons between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK and Ireland therefore cannot be made.
A consultation with users was carried out regarding changing the format of the bulletin to make it more streamlined, targeted and user friendly. This resulted in a change in the format of the publication resulting in a reduction from 140 to 22 pages from 2021 onwards.
Direct comparisons can be made for data across all court tiers over an eleven year period, as the ICOS roll out was complete by 2007, except for Table 1 within the report and the Children Order worksheet in the excel tables, rows 48 to 50. The following should also be noted if comparing across publications.
Children Order Data
The recording of orders made within the Children Order courts have been reported at the participant level since 2007, and the introduction of ICOS. Children Order data in relation to orders made, is recorded on ICOS at the application level. The data is then extracted based on the participants selected on ICOS which indicate all relevant parties to whom the order applies.
Following an operational review of recording practices surrounding the selection of participants to whom orders apply in November 2013, a training program was implemented by operational colleagues. This training was delivered in early 2014 to ensure all relevant participants were being consistently applied on ICOS. This has had a knock-on effect on the numbers of own motion, interim and final orders being reported within the Children Order courts, with figures showing large increases since 2014.
Following a consultation, a change in the reporting of the orders being made within the Children Order courts from the participant level to the application level from 2016 onwards has been introduced. Final year figures for 2015 and 2016 were prepared using this new methodology. This change was implemented to overcome issues surrounding the inconsistent recording of participants to whom the orders apply and provide more user friendly data in terms of relating the orders made to the applications being received and disposed. Application level data counts distinct orders made during the court process.
This new methodology has been introduced to cover own motion, interim and final orders and will affect the numbers reported in Tables F.4, F.5 and F.6 in publications up to 2020 and in the excel Children Order worksheet in rows 48 to 50 and in the PDF report within Table 1, from 2021 onwards. The numbers of orders made will not be comparable with those published in Judicial Statistics in previous years. To assist with comparisons over time, a back series of orders data from April 2007 to the end of 2015 are available on the Court and Tribunals Childrens Orders webpage.
County Court Data
Care should be taken when comparing data trends before and after 2005, when ICOS was introduced as the source for the majority of County Court data.
Additionally, due to on-going changes to the legal jurisdiction of the County Court, users should be cautious of comparing trends in small claims and ordinary civil bills. Changes made to the upper limit of small claims in May 2011 (from £2,000 to £3,000) and in October 2022 (from £3,000 to £5,000) will have resulted in some claims that would have previously been ordinary civil bills becoming small claims. Also, changes to jurisdiction to increase the upper limit of ordinary civil bills during February 2013 (from £15,000 to £30,000) will have resulted in some cases that were previously High Court writs becoming ordinary civil bills.
High Court Data
Due to on-going changes to the legal jurisdiction of the county court, users should be cautious of comparing trends in King’s Bench writs. Changes to jurisdiction to increase the upper limit of ordinary civil bills from 21 February 2013 (from £15,000 to £30,000) will have resulted in some cases that were previously High Court writs becoming ordinary civil bills.
Magistrates’ Court Data
Changes to practice within the judicial system in general, and the Magistrates’ Court in particular, may impact upon business volumes presented in this bulletin. One example would be the introduction of Penalty Notices for Disorder on 6 June 2012. These were new diversionary disposals aimed at dealing with minor offences as a direct alternative to a prosecution before the court. The impact of this change means that offences previously dealt with by the Magistrates’ Court are no longer received in court, but are rather dealt with out of court, contributing to the decrease in Magistrates’ Court business over this period.
Trade-offs between Output Quality Components
No trade-offs applied.
Assessment of User Needs and Perceptions
The processes for finding out about users and uses, and their views on the statistical products.
User needs are identified through biennial online customer surveys, which can be accessed through the DoJ user surveys webpage. Each publication also has an email address where users are encouraged to provide feedback.
Regular meetings also take place with key users within the NICTS.
Performance, Cost and Respondent Burden
The effectiveness, efficiency and economy of the statistical output.
There is no respondent burden, since the data are held on an administrative system, and data on new cases are automatically collected as part of the Criminal Justice process.
The quarterly operational cost (staff time) of producing the report is approximately 30 days.
Confidentiality, Transparency and Security
The procedures and policy used to ensure sound confidentiality, security and transparent practices.
Data received are anonymised (name/address information removed) and standard disclosure control methodology is applied to the data. This ensures that information attributable to an individual is not identifiable in any published outputs and that the outputs are only seen by authorised staff prior to their publication.
All staff involved are trained on the protocols for protecting and maintaining the confidentiality of the data. NISRA follows the ‘National Statistician’s Guidance: Confidentiality of Official Statistics’ in the collection and dissemination of this report.
Data are held on a network that is only accessible to the few statisticians who need access. More detailed information on the processes used to produce the database and output are outlined in the QAAD report published on the NICTS QAAD webpage.
When appropriate, suppression is applied where the number of individuals in a cell is less than five. Suppression is also applied, where necessary, to the next lowest valued cell in order that identification by subtraction is not possible.
The pre-release access list for the report is reviewed on a quarterly basis. The named individuals are checked to ensure that they are the correct contact and that they are available on the day before the release of the report (if they are not then they can nominate a deputy). A guidance document is also sent to those on the revised list explaining to them their obligations about data disclosure prior to the publication of the report.