A national approach to OoCRs: The quiet reform that could save the justice system

Jonathan Ley from Make Time Count argues for a more co-ordinated and effective use of Out of Court Resolutions among police forces.

It is not the glamorous end of policing, not the investigations that dominate headlines or define careers. Yet the absence of a coordinated national approach to low-level offending is placing enormous strain on the criminal justice system.

Out of Court Resolutions (OoCRs) are intended to allow police to deal with lower-level offences without resorting to the courts. They allow officers to resolve cases earlier, engage victims meaningfully and direct offenders towards interventions that reduce chance of reoffending.

In practice usage varies dramatically between forces. In the police force using OoCRs most frequently, around 47% of cases are resolved without going to court. In the force using them least, up to 85% of cases are sent to court.

Justice should not depend on postcode, yet, in reality, two individuals committing the same offence may experience completely different outcomes.

The inconsistency extends to the type and quality of interventions offered. In some areas, resolutions involve meaningful interventions such as restorative justice, educational programmes or behaviour-change courses. In others, the process remains largely administrative, with limited attention to address underlying causes of offending.

Alarmingly the use of OoCRs has declined steadily over the past decade, despite evidence of their effectiveness. Today they account for roughly one third of outcomes, a significant drop from the levels even ten years ago.

At the same time, public confidence in the system is fragile. Policing budgets remain stretched, officer time is increasingly absorbed by administrative and magistrates courts face significant backlogs..

Against this backdrop, the case for a clear national approach to Out of Court Resolutions has never been stronger.

A consistent framework would ensure eligibility rules are applied uniformly across the country, decision-making thresholds are standardised and victims receive consistent opportunities to engage. It would generate better national evidence about which interventions are most effective at reducing reoffending.

Such an approach would align directly with the strategic priorities of the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), which emphasises productivity, prevention and public confidence.

It would also support the recommendations emerging from the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, led by Sir Brian Leveson. That review highlighted the urgent need to reduce unnecessary demand on the courts and identified pre-court diversion as a key mechanism for doing so.

The financial case for reform is compelling. Through two projects funded by Innovate UK, Make Time Count examined how the justice system currently handles lower-level offending and what might be achieved through greater use of OoCRs.

The findings were striking. Around 75% of low-level magistrate court cases ultimately result in fines or compensation orders of less than £250. Yet the combined cost to the police and the courts of processing these cases is estimated to be around £4,000 per case. The system is spending sixteen times the value of the sanction simply to administer it.

Operational data suggests that even a straightforward case can require around 40 hours of police time from investigation through to case preparation and court attendance. Resolving the same case earlier through an Out of Court Resolution can save roughly 20 hours of police time, equivalent to about £1,100 per case.

If just 20% of magistrate cases were managed as OoCRs, policing could save around £85 million, while the courts could avoid £160 million in unnecessary costs.

A second Innovate UK project, explored how digital tools could support this shift. By creating an end-to-end platform for managing OoCRs, including eligibility checks, victim engagement, partner referrals and compliance monitoring, the project demonstrated how administrative overhead could be significantly reduced, releasing the equivalent of 551 police officers from admin, representing around £35 million in additional policing capacity. A national approach to providing digital interventions would further reduce overall cost for all forces.

Taken together, these changes deliver around £280 million in combined savings across policing and the courts.

A national approach to Out of Court Resolutions allows policing to redirect officer time towards neighbourhood policing and serious crime. Courts could focus on the serious cases. Offenders could receive interventions such as access to Red Snapper’s Intervention hub earlier.

This is not about being “soft” on crime. It is about being smarter in how the justice system responds to it.

The opportunity is not merely to process cases differently but to rethink how the system deals with lower-level offending. Offering digital interventions and diverting cases from court addresses negative behaviour earlier, justice becomes faster, fairer and more effective.

A national approach to Out of Court Resolutions may not make headlines. But it could prove one of the most important reforms available to a justice system under growing pressure.