Subject to notification requirements 2019-2023
Response
Our data are not organised in such a way as to allow us to provide this information within the appropriate (cost) limit within the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act (see ‘Reason for Decision’ below).
Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires South Yorkshire Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which:
(a) states that fact,
(b) specifies the exemption in question and
(c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.
The following exemptions apply to the disclosure of the information:
Section 12(1) – Exemption where cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit
I approached South Yorkshire Police’s ViSOR Team. They advised that this report is not available from ViSOR, and it would require them having to look individually at over 2500 records. At a conservative 4 mins per check this would take more than 166 hrs.
In essence, we would have to review and manually check all relevant incidents to extract the level of detail of the cases that met the criteria of your request; this process would take much longer than 18 hours’ work.
The Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees)
Regulations 2004 provide that the cost limit for non-central government public
authorities is £450. This must be calculated at the rate of £25 per hour, providing an effective time limit of 18 hours.
Guidance from the Information Commissioner to public authorities is that where one part of a request is reasonably estimated to exceed the appropriate limit then the authority is not obliged to consider or comply with the remainder of the request up to the point at which the appropriate limit has been reached. Please note point 30 of the below link:
Section 16 - Duty to Provide advice and Assistance
Under Section 16 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, my duty to provide advice and assistance to anyone making a request for information.
Although excess cost removes the force's obligations under the Freedom of Information Act, as a gesture of goodwill, I have supplied information, relative to your request, retrieved or available before it was realised that the fees limit would be exceeded.
I trust this is helpful, but it does not affect our legal right to reply on the fees regulations for the remainder of your requester neither does it bind South Yorkshire Police to any commitment that it will release information in such a manner in the future.
I approached South Yorkshire Police’s ViSOR’s Team, who provided us with information for A2, C1, C2, C3, D1, D2, E1, E2, F1, 1 & 2. South Yorkshire Police’s Finance Team provided answers for A1 & B1:
Request - 24.011308
(A1) How many "working hours" have the department responsible for managing those those subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 spent doing so within the years 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019?
| Year | Working hours for staff responsible for managing those subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 |
| 2019 | 86008 |
| 2020 | 81692 |
| 2021 | 79768 |
| 2022 | 92092 |
| 2023 | 97822 |
| Total | 437382 |
A2) Of those "working hours" how many were spent on managing those individuals classed as "low risk", and “no risk”, individuals specifically for all of the years mentioned?
Unable to answer, data not collated regarding time spent on different risk levels – No Information Held.
(B1) What was the financial cost to the Police Force relating to managing individuals subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 in 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019?
| Financial Year | Costs relating to managing individuals subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (£) |
| Apr-19 to Mar-20 | 1,823,958 |
| Apr-20 to Mar 21 | 1,717,213 |
| Apr-21 to Mar-22 | 1,697,809 |
| Apr-22 to Mar-23 | 2,109,648 |
| Apr-23 to Mar-24 | 2,351,902 |
| Total | 9,700,528 |
Please note - We only have average salary costs going back to 2021 so those figures have been used for previous years.
(B2) What was the financial cost to the Police Force in managing both "low risk" and "no risk" individuals specifically for all of the years mentioned?
Unable to answer this information is not collated – No Information Held.
(C1) For the years 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019 – how many applications were made by those subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 for removal from indefinite notification requirements pursuant to Part 2, sections 88 and 91 of that act?
2019 - 7
2020 - 9
2021 - 16
2022 - 14
2023 - 20
(C2) Of those applications, for all of the years mentioned, how many were successful vs how many were unsuccessful?
2019 - 4 successful
2020 - 4 successful
2021 - 9 successful
2022 - 9 successful
2023 - 9 successful
(C3) What was the breakdown of the risk level, for all of the years mentioned, of the offenders who were granted permission to have their notification requirements removed?
2019 - 4 x low risk
2020 - 4 x low risk
2021 - 9 x low risk
2022 - 9 x low risk
2023 - 9 x low risk
(D1) For the years 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019 – how many individuals monitored by your police force, who are subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, reoffended within the period that they are subject to those notification requirements e.g. what is the recidivism rate?
Please see exemption.
(D2) Of the individuals that did reoffend whilst subject to notification requirements, what was their risk level prior to reoffending for all of the years mentioned?
Please see above.
(E1) What is the force’s classification of a “historical sex offence” e.g. conviction takes place two / five / ten / twenty / thirty years prior to conviction?
As a force we don’t have a classification, we call them non recent. All will be investigated, albeit the older the allegation is, it is probably more difficult to investigate.
(E2) Of the individuals that reoffended in the years 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019 whilst subject to notification requirements, how many had been convicted of crimes that would be classed as historical offences by your force?
Please see D1 / D2.
(F1) How many individuals subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, that were classed as “low risk” / “no risk” by your force, AND had committed an offence that took place over ten years prior to their conviction, reoffended within the years 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019?
Please see above.
Request - 24.011314
(1) What reasonable adjustments, if any, are provided, in relation to the management of offenders subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, to those suffering with a disability as defined by the Equality Act 2010?
The managers ask if there are any needs, or anything that we can do to assist their understanding of the requirements – we then react to their needs. This will be a case-by-case basis.
• Accessibility to prescribed Police stations.
• Home registrations in exceptional circumstances for those unable to get to the station.
(2) For those with neurodiversity issues such as Autism, ADHD, or other mental health issues which could make it more difficult for an individual to either understand the notification requirements or manage their compliance with those notification requirements, what reasonable adjustments are made for them by your force?
• Notifications at home for those unable to get to the station
• 256 (notification requirements) on different coloured paper
• Notification requirements provided in different languages
• We have previously provided a picture / symbol version of the requirements to help someone understand the requirements
• We ask if there is an intermediary / appropriate adult / carer that can be present so they have a support who knows the requirements.
Please note, every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that data has been extracted from data sources used by this force for police purposes. The detail collected to respond specifically to your request is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording systems and information assets.
The figures provided therefore are our best interpretation of relevance of data to your request, but you should be aware that the collation of figures/data for any requests may have limitations, and this should be taken into account when those data are used.
Police forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures for capturing the data. For these reasons this response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with responses you may receive from other police forces.