Cassia Rowland

@cassiarowland

Associate director in public services @Instituteforgov. Passionate about crime.

1355 Siguiendo4023 Seguidores1165 Publicaciones

Bluesky

¿Es tu perfil?Reclámalo y cassiarowland.dirty.social es tuyo.Reclamar perfil

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· 8d

Once he announced the 'pause' on first becoming PM, he had to make some kind of change. But his room for manoeuvre was seriously limited by prison capacity. And the real problem for capacity is people on long sentences for serious crimes. You can't free up enough space with low-level offenders.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· 8d

So what is actually changing come October? People who are serving standard sentences will be released after 33%, rather than 40% or 50% as now. They then get supervised by probation for the next third, and are not monitored. For other sentences, it's much more complicated.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· 8d

Until c2020, everyone spent at least 50% of their sentence in prison. Most people were then automatically released & served the other half on probation. Some v serious offenders had to apply for release. From October, this is what the sentencing regime will look like. Super straightforward, right?

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· 21d

I'm extremely pro-reducing administrative recalls! And I know the service is working on this, though without much luck so far. Recalls have skyrocketed in the last few years, even relative to growing numbers on licence, but the number that are for further offences has stayed almost flat

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· 21d

Crime rates are lower than they've ever been - and we're still locking up more people than ever! (And no, the reason crime has fallen is almost certainly not because we're locking more people up - the pattern doesn't fit.)

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· 21d

The most important way to keep the public and victims safe is through high-quality supervision by probation after release, not longer in prison. But this isn't currently happening. Risk assessment is inadequate in *two-thirds* of probation cases and not a single probation unit is classed as 'good'.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· 25d

Burnham is apparently considering scaling back prison releases planned for September, which are core of gov's long-term plan to get prison capacity on a stable footing. This would be a really risky move: there is a bit of breathing room in prisons right now, but that could v easily be swallowed up.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Jul 15

Really great data vis in this morning's London Centric from @jim.londoncentric.media! Clear, fun and eye-catching - @philipnye.bsky.social one for our IfG data vis training? And as always well-worth a read, today on tipping culture in London open.substack.com/pub/londonce...

A chart/graphic from London Centric showing the impact of an additional £1 on the price of a coffee to raise staff wages. The chart is a mosaic/stacked bar chart, showing the amount taken by the worker vs paid in tax, but each 'bar' looks like a coffee cup with different layers in. With a £1 increase in headline price, the worker gets 42p and HMRC gets 48p in various taxes, while with a £1 optional service charge, the worker gets 80p and HMRC takes 20p.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Jul 2

Those are the lessons. We’ve also drawn up a framework of key success factors as a useful tool to guide programmes. What are the strengths & weaknesses? Where & when are problems likely to crop up? Identifying these in advance will let you set your programme up for the best chance of success.

An infographic from the Institute for Government of key success factors in digital transformation. Please get in touch for an accessible version.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Jun 25

Really positive sign that the backlog of cases in the crown court is stabilising - very much contrary to expectations! The number of open cases held steady at around 80,000 cases from Dec 2025 to March 2026. Suggests removing the cap on how many days courts are in session is having a real impact.

A line chart from the Institute for Government showing open cases in the Crown Court, from Q1 2016 to Q1 2026. The number of actual cases declined gradually from around 48,000 in 2016 to 33,072 in 2019 Q1, before rising sharply during the pandemic to over 60,000 in 2021 and continuing to increase to 80,000 by the end of 2025. In the last quarter, the number of open cases has held steady at 80,000, the first time since the beginning of 2023 it has not risen.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Jun 24

Staff shortages & *inexperience* are major problems across public services (no surprise considering this chart). Other services should be looking at similar innovative schemes to bring numbers and experience back into the workforce.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Jun 21

Had a real ‘omg how was that only last week’ moment here, before I realised that no, the Guardian just messed up, it was five weeks ago

Screenshot from the Guardian reading ‘Wes Streeting, the former health secretary, who resigned last week in frustration at Starmer’s leadership, has pledged to seek the top job and says he has sufficient backers, but allies of Starmer and Burnham are sceptical. His candidacy will become less likely if wavering Labour backbenchers conclude that they would prefer to back a likely winner and swing behind Burnham.’

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Jun 3

There is a lot of variation across crime type and different police forces, but broadly the number of arrests and of charges, cautions etc tracks the number of crimes. It’s much smaller, because loads of crimes are never solved! But the overall rate has stayed roughly similar

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· May 31

Here are some things we do know: 1) number of children arrested & no. in prison have both fallen ~80% since c2007. 2) criminal damage, theft, ASB (all commonly committed by children) have also fallen massively. 3) crime in general is down a lot (yes, really).

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· May 20

I find the framing of Married at First Sight as an ‘accident waiting to happen’ frankly disgusting (not just coming from BBC). Rape is not an ‘accident’! Like many reality tv shows, it was a blatant safeguarding risk ignored because it was profitable. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

Screenshot from a BBC article entitled ‘Was Married at First Sight UK an ‘accident waiting to happen’?, dated 20 May 2026

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· May 11

This may be my favourite argument ever advanced by a politician:

Screenshot from The Guardian liveblog, which reads ‘In a separate interview on Sky News, Kyle said that he had dinner with Streeting at the weekend and they went to see a movie, The Devil Wears Prada 2, together. He said this showed Streeting was not plotting to oust Starmer.

“Somebody who is planning to pull the plug and launch a leadership bid in a couple of days’ time doesn’t go to the cinema with a friend.“‘

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Apr 18

Hmm, this is not right on either count! Teen pregnancies fell from 1970s-90s, but were rising again in late 1990s. Blair gov missed their target of halving rate but it dropped by about a third 1998-2010 and has since fallen off a cliff. See www.beds.ac.uk/tpke/data/

A line chart from the University of Bedfordshire of England under 18 conception, maternity and abortion rates, 1998 - 2022, where conception and maternity rates decline slowly from 1998 to 2008, then all three fall rapidly and substantially to 2020 before flatlining or ticking up slightly. Overall conception rate for under-18s has fallen from mid-40s per 1,000 under-18s in late 90s to around 14 in 2022.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Apr 1

We saw more attempted murders than homicides for the first time in 2014/15, and that's been consistently true since. The gap has also widened since then. This is probably a medical care/first aid effect.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Apr 1

I have a chart for this! Basically: no, murder & attempted murder have both dropped. Probably is true tho that improvements in medical care & especially first aid training (eg for police) has made a difference over the last 10 ish years.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Mar 10

In terms of other solutions, I'd focus on doing everything they can to drive up productivity, esp driving up hours per day spent actually hearing cases, which has fallen substantially. And listing cases likely to plead guilty on the day early, to clear them out the backlog

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Mar 10

Nice reference to my new report in the Guardian liveblog! You can read the whole thing here www.theguardian.com/politics/liv...

A screenshot from the Guardian politics liveblog on 10.03.2026, which reads 'Some interesting research has been carried out by the Institute for Government (IfG) thinktank which says the reforms remove a number of important legal safeguards for many defendants, including the right to choose a jury trial and the automatic right of appeal from magistrates courts.

In the government’s own impact assessment of the bill, it suggests that in the third quarter of 2025, 41% of appeals against conviction (at magistrates) were (at least partly) successful.

Cassia Rowland, report author and IfG senior researcher, said restricting an individual’s right to appeal seriously risked undermining justice. She said:

The dire situation in the criminal courts requires action. But the government’s current proposals risk prioritising speed over justice by restricting people’s right both to a jury trial and to appeal.

Having serious cases involving two years in prison decided by two or three volunteer magistrates would make England and Wales an outlier among our peers and pose a risk of miscarriages of justice.'

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Mar 10

Courts are in real crisis & gov is right to consider all options. But the need for swifter justice must be balanced with the need for fair justice. An 18-month or 2-year prison sentence is life-changing & courts must both deliver the right outcomes in individual cases & maintain public confidence.

A screenshot from the Institute for Government, which reads, 'A balance must be struck between swift and fair justice
The scale of the problem in the criminal courts is immense, and the government is right to consider a wide range of potential solutions. For victims, defendants, and their families, the delays in the courts can be devastating. But the need for swifter justice must be balanced with the need for fair justice. An 18-month or two-year prison sentence is life-changing, and it is crucial that the court system is set up and resourced both to deliver the right outcomes for individual cases, and to maintain public confidence in the system.'

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Mar 10

This is esp concerning given simultaneous big increase in mags’ sentencing powers & restrictions on right to appeal. Automatic right of appeal is being abolished & defendants will need permission to appeal. MoJ estimates only ~20% of applicants will get it, though ~40% of appeals are successful now!

A screenshot from the Institute for Government which reads, 'Currently, any adult facing more than six months in prison has a right to a jury trial if they want to exercise it, though most do not do so.

Almost all of them will lose that, and instead face the faster and potentially ‘rougher justice’ of magistrates’ courts12 – where the verdict is decided on by one, two or three people, rather than 12, after a much shorter trial in which most defendants’ have more limited access to legal advice. It is hard to argue that this offers an equally robust form of justice as a jury trial in the crown court.

The stakes will also be higher – given magistrates’ increased sentencing powers and defendants’ much restricted right to appeal.'

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Mar 10

But this is also where biggest risks are. Magistrates’ courts can’t cope with 10–15% increase in demand when backlog is already ballooning. And justice in mags’ courts is frankly less robust: decision is made by 1–3 people, rather than 12, after a short trial w/ more limited access to legal advice.

A line chart from the Institute for Government of outstanding cases in magistrates' courts, Q1 2019 to Q3 2025, where the number of outstanding cases rises sharply in Q2 of 2020 from just over 200,000 to around 350,000, slowly falls back to around 250,000 in 2023 and since then has been climbing rapidly and is approaching 400,000.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Mar 10

Gov estimates reforms will save ~13% of court time (-19% saving in crown court, +6% in magistrates' courts). Approach is sound but (inevitably) relies on a lot of assumptions and is v uncertain. Just 2-3.5% will be saved by judge-only trials: real time-saver is hearing cases in magistrates’ courts.

A table from the Institute for Government showing estimated change in court demand as a result of court reform proposals, according to the IfG's initial estimate and the MoJ central projection

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Feb 20

Our point is more basic: the potential benefits from efficiency gains vastly outweigh those from structural reforms. Ministerial time & attention, funding, political capital & workforce goodwill all have their limits & should be focused where they will have greatest impact: driving up productivity.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Feb 20

On 2), we don’t assume you could quickly get court productivity back to 2016 levels! We highlight workforce problems as a source of poor productivity & note they’re not quick or easy to fix. We even say some nice things about efforts gov is making in this area (& suggest what else they could do):

Screenshot from an IfG report, which reads: Our recent Public Services Performance Tracker 2025 explored some of the reasons behind the widening productivity gap that has opened up in the crown court in recent years. These include a shortage of criminal lawyers, poor court administration and a long-running lack of investment in court buildings and physical and technological infrastructure. These are not quick or easy problems to fix, but even so there are opportunities for meaningful improvements before 2029. These could be done alongside more moderate proposals to handle some more cases in magistrates’ courts, which would be less likely to provoke backlash.

Screenshot from an IfG report, which reads: Initial steps like matched funding for criminal pupillages14 (barrister trainee positions) and increasing criminal legal aid fees15 are welcome and should help to restore criminal lawyer numbers. Similarly, increased maintenance funding16 should reduce time lost to broken fire alarms and flooded court rooms.
But more can be done. The government should focus on understanding what is driving differences in court productivity around the country, with crown courts in Liverpool and much of Wales consistently cited as high performers.17 Are there particular approaches to how cases are listed for trial or judicial behaviour that could be applied elsewhere? What explains the wide variation in the proportion of trials rescheduled at the last minute?

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Feb 20

Our analysis of the likely impact of the gov’s jury trial reforms has got some attention! This is the courts minister's response to the justice select committee asking about my figures. Here’s why I don’t think it’s a fair assessment: (report here www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/...)

A screenshot from a letter from the courts minister, Sarah Sackman MP, to the chair of the justice select committee, Andy Slaughter MP, which reads:
The Institute for Government Report
The Institute for Government’s Report on the court reforms referenced at the panel by Cassia Rowland is a useful contribution to the debate. However, we take issue with the report in two key respects. First, as the Department’s modelling, to be published with the Bill, will show, the IfG has understated the savings that can be achieved by the proposed reforms. This is understandable given they lack the complete data picture.
Second, and perhaps more significantly, the IfG’s analysis assumes that court productivity could be restored to 2016 levels in a short space of time and that the backlog could be resolved without making significant reform. That is neither realistic nor does it account for the ways in which the system has changed over the last decade, with a backlog set to hit 100,000 open cases in a year from now.
For example, Ms Rowland identified cancelled trials, resulting in wasted sitting days, as a major source of inefficiency. That reflects the workforce challenges and the lack of sufficient lawyers and judges in the system which I described above. That is a workforce issue which requires long term investment and will take years to resolve. The Government has begun to make that investment but it is not an issue which can be addressed in the short term.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Jan 22

To be fair, a lot of that has already happened! Spending on all courts in 2024/25 was ~10% below 2010/11, but big increases are planned. Crown court funding has done relatively well — dip more about declining demand 2016-19.

Cassia Rowland@cassiarowland· Jan 22

Forgot my fave chart! This shows how demand on the crown court (in terms of ‘sitting days’, days the court is hearing cases) breaks down by case type, and also what the savings would be from the different elements of reform. The large bulk of demand is unaffected.