What new diversion data tells us about cutting crime and protecting the public

For many years, youth justice services (YJSs) and their partners have been quietly reshaping how we respond to children who get into trouble - not by drawing them deeper into the justice system, but by working with them earlier, more constructively, and in ways that reduce future offending. 

This new data gives us, for the first time, a national picture of that work. Published on 28 May, ’The use of diversionary outcomes with youth justice service involvement – 2025 England and Wales’ marks an important milestone. While these are official statistics in development and represent only a partial picture, they allow us to clearly and confidently see the scale at which diversion is now operating. And what they show is striking.

Diversion is now a central part of how we cut crime 

In 2025, around 13,500 outcomes involving YJSs were diversionary - accounting for 43% of all outcomes for children they worked with. That figure is likely to be an underestimate. It does not include diversion delivered solely by the police or through wider local partnerships. The true scale of this work is therefore greater still. What this tells us is simple: diversion is no longer peripheral. It is not a pilot or a programme. It is core business. Across the country, YJSs, police, local authorities and voluntary sector partners are already delivering a prevention-first approach - intervening early, addressing the causes of behaviour, and steering children away from further offending. 

This matters because the ‘Child First’ evidence base is clear. Research consistently shows that formal criminal justice intervention can increase the likelihood of reoffending, particularly for children. In contrast, well-delivered diversion reduces reoffending and reduces demand on the system over time. The Youth Endowment Fund, among others, has brought together strong evidence that early, proportionate diversion is one of the most effective ways to cut crime. Put simply: this is about doing what works to prevent more serious offending and protect the public. 

A system already delivering at scale 

Much of the recent national conversation has understandably focused on new Government pilots and programmes and new investment. That is welcome. But this data reminds us that, alongside that, there is an established system already working at significant scale. Assuming that volumes remain largely the same over the next three years, nearly 50,000 children will be dealt with through diversionary approaches involving YJSs. That is far beyond the reach of any single funding stream. This is day-in, day-out work, delivered through local partnerships, often with limited fanfare, but with significant impact. It reflects years of professional practice aligning with the evidence: understanding what drives behaviour, working with families, ensuring reparative approaches for victims, and intervening at the earliest opportunity. There is more to do, but this is a strong foundation - and one that deserves recognition. 

Variation across the country 

The data also shows that how diversion is used varies significantly. For example, in the East Midlands region 56% of diversionary outcomes with YJS involvement are diversionary whereas in London, that figure is 17%. In Wales an impressive 63% of total outcomes are diversionary. Different areas are using different mechanisms, shaped by local policy choices and operational models. Some of this variation reflects context - including offence profiles and policing approaches - but not all of it can be explained that way. The result is that access to diversion can look very different depending on where a child lives. That matters. A system that is effective at reducing offending should operate consistently enough that children receive similar opportunities for early intervention, regardless of geography. Closing that gap is a priority, and one that requires continued collaboration between YJSs, police forces, inspectorates and central government. 

Fairness and the “explain or reform” challenge 

Alongside geography, the data also points to differences in outcomes between groups of children. 

White children are more likely to receive a diversionary outcome than Black children (53% compared with 27%). While geography plays a role -including lower overall diversion rates in areas with more diverse populations - it does not fully account for the difference. 

This is precisely the kind of issue identified in David Lammy’s review nearly a decade ago. His challenge to the system was clear: where disparities exist, we must either be able to explain them, or we must reform the system. This data helps us with the first part of that task. It gives us a clearer picture of where differences exist and prompts the right questions about why. We know, for example, that some diversionary routes depend on a child accepting responsibility for an offence. Emerging evidence suggests that levels of trust in authorities can shape how children respond in those situations. We also know that decision-making frameworks, local policies and thresholds all play a role. 

But explanation alone is not enough. Where differences cannot be justified, reform must follow. 

That means continuing to strengthen consistency in decision-making, improving the tools practitioners use, and ensuring that every child is assessed based on their needs and risks - in a way that supports public protection and reduces further offending. 

From evidence to practice 

One of the most encouraging aspects of this data is what it says about the sector. For years, YJSs and their partners have worked to translate evidence into practice - often ahead of policy or data catching up. This includes developing structured approaches to assessment, strengthening joint decision-making with police, and building partnerships that can respond quickly and effectively when a child comes to attention. This is what it looks like to operationalise evidence at scale. It is also what a preventative system looks like in practice: not abstract, but delivered through real decisions, every day, by professionals working with children, families and victims. 

Looking ahead 

This first publication is not the final word. It is the starting point for better understanding, better accountability and better practice. It confirms that diversion is already a central part of how we reduce offending and protect communities. It highlights the vital role played by YJSs and their partners across England and Wales. And it shows where further work is needed - particularly in ensuring consistency, effective interventions and fairness. 

As we move forward, the Youth Justice Board will continue to work alongside the sector to build on this foundation: strengthening the evidence base, supporting continuous improvement, and ensuring that the system delivers what it should. Just this month, the sector saw the launch of  Basecamp: Diversion and Youth Justice Policing. This initiative is specifically designed to bring police forces and YJSs together onto a unified platform, sharing best practices, standardising informal police-led approaches, and ensuring that professional curiosity is applied equally to every child, regardless of their background. To help tackle geographical disparity and subjective biases in decision-making, the sector has seen widespread implementation of the Prevention and Diversion Assessment Tool (PDAT), developed by the YJB alongside the sector, and recently evaluated by Cordis Bright. By structuring how we assess a child’s strengths and unmet needs early on, PDAT helps practitioners ensure that objective safeguarding, rather than preconceptions, drives the outcome. 

Crucially, this momentum is further reinforced by the government’s recent  youth justice white paper. This document firmly embeds early intervention into the national policy agenda. By codifying diversion as a priority framework, the white paper provides the statutory backing required to bridge these systemic divides and establish a standardised, nationwide approach. 

Because at its heart, diversion is not just about avoiding formal outcomes. It is about making the right intervention, at the right time, to prevent further harm - and that is central to any effective approach to public protection.