Thousands of offenders not wearing electronic tags, report says
Almost 9,000 people in England and Wales required to have an electronic monitoring tag did not have one, a report by the National Audit Office (NAO) has found. They are likely to include violent offenders and prisoners released from jail who need to be checked on. The NAO said, as of March 2026, prison authorities were reviewing around 8,900 cases of individuals recorded as having an active monitoring order but no tag.
However, the Ministry of Justice has disputed the figure, saying its own review puts the number of unmonitored individuals at 5,450. It said the NAO figure referred to the total number of cases they are checking to see if they need monitoring.
The NAO called the current system "inefficient".
Electronic monitoring, also known as tagging, is used in England and Wales as a way of monitoring curfews and conditions of a court or prison order.
Criminals and people deemed to pose a potential risk are sometimes fitted with an ankle tag so that their movements can be monitored. These individuals can include serious offenders such as rapists and murderers. There are three types of tags: curfew tags, location tags, and alcohol tags.
A total of 28,700 people were recorded as being tagged in England and Wales as of March 2026. The NAO said some of the 8,900 cases in its report would include people who were registered as being tagged by mistake. But it also said the real number of those slipping through the system could be "significant".
People can be identified as being "unmonitored" for a number of reasons. These can include errors in the system, refusal to wear a tag, a delay in the fitting of the tag, or an arrest where the tag is removed. But it can also include people who haven't been tagged when they should have been.
Responding to the NAO's report, the Ministry of Justice said: "Public protection is our priority, which is why we're investing £100m in electronic monitoring, tagging offenders before release for the first time and strengthening victim protections via new alert systems – all of which will help cut the number of unmonitored offenders."
The National Audit Office argues the current monitoring system is not fit for purpose.
"Electronic monitoring is central to managing pressures on prisons, but it is not working effectively, creating risks to public protection," NAO chief Gareth Davies said. "Improvements are required to ensure that those who should be monitored are monitored and that breaches are responded to effectively," he added. The report also says police and probation staff often lack information or capacity to respond quickly to breaches.
People tagged are placed under strict conditions as part of their punishment. This can include having to remain in a specific area or sticking to a curfew. If someone breaches their conditions, it can result in a formal warning, being taken back to court, or an immediate return to prison.
Earlier this year, the Ministry of Justice announced plans to significantly expand electronic monitoring as part of the Sentencing Act 2026, which aims to ease prison pressures by managing more offenders in the community.
Thousands more prisoners may be released early from autumn this year as part of the new law. Reports suggest killers, rapists and sex offenders could be among them. Most will require tagging.
Several probation officers have told the BBC they are worried about how they will cope.
Probation officers are responsible for checking offenders are following the terms of their release from prison. This could include things such as wearing ankle tags or not taking drugs.
"The report makes clear we're overworked. And it's only going to get worse with more people set to do their punishment in the community," one probation officer said. "There aren't enough of us, and we have no idea how the government is going to make it work so that nobody is at risk. Because something bad will happen, someone who is dangerous and isn't monitored will kill someone," the probation officer added.
The NAO says that part of the problem is a shortfall of around 2,200 full time probation officers, which the government expects to reduce to around 1,500 by September of this year.
The watchdog also says even though the security contractor Serco - which manages the tagging system for the government - met its 95% timeliness target for tag fitting visits, "it was only successful in fitting tags on 62% of the individuals it visited within its two attempts".
In a statement, Serco told the BBC it had made "significant improvements" and was "tagging a record number of people" and "consistently" meeting key contractual measures, as recognised by the Ministry of Justice and NAO report. It added that efforts to fit tags "rely on us receiving the correct information" from relevant authorities and partners. "We attempt to fit a tag to every person who should be wearing one. Where, for reasons beyond our control, we are unable to do so, we report those breaches to the relevant authorities."
The NAO is calling on the government to improve data quality and management of the monitoring system. It added the government had been working with Serco to improve performance and reduce the backlog in fitting tags. Ministers estimate a further 22,000 people per year will need to be tagged from 2027.
"The government needs to improve the service's resilience and efficiency, otherwise expanding electronic monitoring risks wasting public money and puts public safety at risk", said Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, chair of the Committee of Public Accounts.
The Ministry of Justice said the government inherited "a failing tagging system with record backlogs". "As this report shows we have worked hard to fix this, with install rates up by nearly 50% since 2024," it said. "This is in addition to our record £700m investment in probation, recruiting 2,300 trainee probation officers over the last two years, and recruiting a further 1,300 this year - making sure the Probation Service has the resource it needs to keep dangerous offenders under closer surveillance than ever before."
The only good news in this shambles is that sex offenders are to be included in this early release scheme given they are the cohort least likely to reoffend. I would also hazard a guess that far too many are being tagged when there's no need to. So basically SNAFU.
ReplyDeletesox
Yes of course. It was blindingly obvious to me that about 80% of my RSO caseload were of little or no risk to the public, (20% seriously dangerous and the trick is to identify which is who) but try having that conversation in any room where there are bosses, politicians, press... too early for this conversaton which is a bloody shame for over monitored, over restricted and cruelly treated.
DeleteWhether you think tags or good or bad, the fact is pretty much all we do for breaches eg they've forgotten to charge it etc or late back for a curfew, is to send warning letters again and again and again. Recalls just aren't authorised for technical licence breaches anymore, you need to have disappeared or have been charged with a new offence. Again, it's not whether not recalling them is good or bad, its the pointless of it all, the 700million being invested is probably largely taken up by the increase in 1st class stamps we use.
ReplyDeleteOn that logic ex prince Andrew will get an award
ReplyDeleteMillions of pounds siphoned to private companies to push a system we know is flawed…..I wonder if any of the erstwhile board members on these companies have friends in high places and are continuing to push this as a ‘solution’. Ladies and gentleman, some news for you….a tag is very unlikely to prevent an offence taking place whereas a probation officer can….yet millions are thrown at these companies as though they are the answer to the relentless release of individuals just to prevent a prison disturbance in the summer months.
ReplyDeleteDrop the incessant red tape on an officers caseload, give them autonomy to do their jobs properly, establish professional relationships………stop the reliance on AI as some sort of universal panacea…..let officers do their jobs, SPOs used to in place to support their staff not wear them down with useless directives from the centre…..Heads of cluster believe that their decisions are saving the public……no, they are not, hard working probation staff be it PSO or PO or PQUips are effectively the sticking plaster on a system that is creaking at the seams……for once trust your staff and let them get on with it………
Yes they are friends of those who pay contracts is a dirty club as we understood from the corruption in the sell off to tr a chief officer in a county was angrily responding to a persistent Napo rep who coughed up in rage it won't stop these people are friends of the administration .
DeleteMeanwhile the architects of this omniclusterfuck continue to bask in glory, plenty of cash & shiny gongs & not one of them held to account for the damage & distress they have caused to thousands of lives on both sides of the desk.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.gov.uk/government/people/michael-spurr
https://www.gov.uk/government/people/amy-rees
https://www.gov.uk/government/people/antonia-romeo
+ their lieutenants - poree, allars, barton, kte, mjh, etc etc
I wish politicians and the public understood that tagging is a tool. It is not probation.
ReplyDeleteA tag can't build a professional relationship. It can't recognise when someone is beginning to unravel, becoming more manipulative, disengaging from supervision, escalating in their thinking or presenting risks that no GPS coordinate will ever reveal. It can't exercise professional judgement. Technology should support probation practice, not replace it.
What concerns me is that the public narrative increasingly suggests that expanding tags, AI and digital systems somehow compensates for the loss of experienced PP's or excessive workloads. It doesn’t. If anything, it risks creating a false sense of reassurance.
The irony is that while millions are invested in technology, many of the conditions that enable good probation practice are being weakened: manageable workloads, protected learning time, reflective supervision, meaningful CPD and the professional autonomy needed to make difficult decisions.
None of those things make headlines. None come with glossy press releases or impressive investment figures. Yet they are the foundations of public protection.
This is why the current Napo ballot matters. It isn’t simply about pay. It’s about whether PP's have the capacity, support and professional conditions to do the job safely. Without that, technology just becomes another sticking plaster over a system that is asking more of its staff while steadily giving them less time, less autonomy and fewer protections. Public protection has never depended on who has the most sophisticated tag. It's always depended on whether experienced PP's have the time, skills and professional space to recognise when the technology isn’t enough.
the perpetual shitshow rolls on, regardless... victims & collateral damage in its wake while the fuckwit architects remain free of accountability & responsibility, revelling in the comfort of financial security.
ReplyDeleteOn top of these concerns, probation hostels are being forced to shut down because of staffing issues.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jul/11/probation-hostels-prisons-england-wales-closure-staffing-crisis
'Getafix
Nearly one in ten probation hostels where England and Wales’ most dangerous offenders live after leaving prison have been closed after a staffing crisis.
DeleteAs ministers prepare the early release of thousands of inmates in September, a leaked memo revealed that “staffing challenges” have led to temporary closures of the heavily-supervised “approved premises”.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has confirmed that nine out of 105 approved premises are currently closed. Untrained security guards are sometimes having to fill in for probation staff, officials have confirmed. It is not clear when any of the closed hostels will reopen.
The developments come after the government refused to rule out the early release of violent rapists and paedophiles among 6,000 men to be released in early September.
In response to the findings, Martin Jones, the HM inspector of probation, said the public was being put in danger by closures of approved premises and failing to ensure they had properly trained staff.
“Approved premises are the place where the highest risk individuals go after release and it is vital that as many places are there for them and you have to get the right staff in place.
“If you have security guards doing their jobs, there is a big risk of things going wrong and the public being put in danger. The government has to get this right,” he said.
Approved premises, or probation hostels, supervise about 2,000 criminals across England and Wales considered too dangerous to release back into the community.
Residents often have drug and alcohol problems and complex mental health needs. They live in the hostels for about eight to 12 weeks, and can be recalled to prison if they refuse to submit to drug and alcohol tests or have their rooms searched.
Staff are required to monitor residents with rapid enforcement action needed to stop violent incidents, self-harm and overdoses.
Insiders, however, said high stress levels coupled with the expiry of contracts with private companies Sodexo and OCS, which provided overnight staff cover at the hostels, had led to a staffing crisis.
A probation manager said: “They’ve known this was coming for 18 months, we’ve not been supported to put staffing in place. The closures mean dangerous men don’t get beds, somewhere someone will get hurt because they didn’t get a hostel bed.”
Another insider said: “There is no room for mistakes, you are surrounded by high-risk people, many of whom are trying to harm themselves or others. It is stressful and leads to many staff taking time off with stress-related illnesses.”
Senior civil servants have been made aware of staffing problems at approved premises. In an email sent to staff in May, Michelle Jarman-Howe, the interim director general of operations at His Majesty’s Prison and Probation service (HMPPS) wrote: “I want to acknowledge the recent staffing challenges which, at times, have led to the temporary closure of some approved premises. I know how hard colleagues have worked through this period often stepping in at short notice and going above and beyond to maintain safe services.”
The probation officers’ union Napo sent a questionnaire to 21 staff working in hostels last month. They found that 16 had witnessed security guards covering work usually conducted by probation staff.
DeleteNapo’s general secretary, Ian Lawrence, said: “We are seeing further closures due to an estate not fit for purpose, lengthy delays in vetting new staff and a badly managed process to bring private provider staff in house.
“Our approved premises estate needs significant investment if it is to provide the very much needed accommodation for high risk of harm people coming out of prison.
“The use of security guards to fill gaps in staffing numbers is totally unacceptable as these people are neither trained nor employed on the basis to work with people on probation.”
Recent inspections by the probation watchdog have uncovered serious problems in approved premises.
It raised raised “serious safeguarding concerns” at Weston AP in Weymouth, Dorset, because staff were not completing checks on residents at higher risk of overdose, key processes to tackle suicide and self-harm were not being followed, and there was faulty CCTV.
A MoJ spokesperson confirmed that the probation service continues to use security guards at the last minute to fill staffing gaps.
They said: “While a handful of premises are temporarily closed, we have increased the total number of beds available in approved premises so we can accommodate more of the highest risk offenders and keep the public safe.
“Approved premises is just one way in which we manage offenders in the community. We have invested a record £700m into probation and community services so we can ramp up tough supervisions on offenders released from custody, including punitive restrictions on their movements and round-the-clock monitoring through tags.”
Ian Lawrence well knows that employers can hire anyone they determine to cover from any security company. The act provides for it and Ian Lawrence signed up for that mess in the TR agreement. He also must appreciate rounding words mean nothing to employers because Lawrence does not signal what acion he is utilise to protect staff roles. The employers know full well he cannot and will not rIse any formal action. He would be better off trying to agree a process by which a bank of former but qualified employees might return to cover that could be agreed to protect role demarcations. There are many good retired staff who would cover roles if approached properly. Paid accordingly and respected. The current union approach is so stained by the same old same old drip feed survival than modernising itself to combat the absorption. Napo needs new direction me thinks at the least.
DeleteGiven how cheap mobile technology has become, one could argue that the solution may be to tag them before they leave prison, with satellite data providing their whereabouts at all times.
ReplyDeletePp’s? Corporate nonsense
ReplyDeleteWhen did Probation become an arm of the prison estate?(2014, arguably before that but TR was the watershed). MOJ spokesperson, what a job! ...A couple of cue cards and its done, and s/he has clearly been there for a while, sollid employment and I bet its well paid. "Public Protection is our Priority"... really? That old chestnut. Add in , "recruiting thousands of new probation staff", - they dont stay for long, and "investing millions" -but in the wrong things: just separate Probation from Prisons, set up some decent training and better wages. The ability of the MOJ to believe if they keep repeating the same mistakes, and the same straplines, that eventually it will all go away, is almost heroic, if delusional
ReplyDeleteYours aye, Jim
Pearly Gates
For me, probation became an extention of the prison service when everyone leaving custody became subject to post custody supervision. That turned probation into "HMP Oudoors", in effect creating a nationwide open prison.
DeleteProbation was never intended to be so universal. Probation works by consent. When it's not by consent, it becomes an agency of enforcement, and nothing more then an extension of custody all be it in the community.
TR added the 12mth and under cohort aswell. This group really has no business being subjected to post sentence supervision. It brings no benefit to anyone, actually harmful to many on supervision, and just a huge waste of resource.
'Getafix
Stood in an office arguing with young po Femal why she should not be taking part in training prison staff or seeking to open joint case working in the estate. Yet here we are po in custody and and community all done by anyone. We opened it up
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jul/12/scrapping-early-release-sex-offenders-no-capacity-jails-england-wales-david-lammy
ReplyDeleteThis article highlights the impossible position the justice system now finds itself in.
DeleteDavid Lammy says it is “hugely important” that perpetrators of these offences can be sent to prison. I doubt anyone would disagree. But what would his answer be to that same father if the man who groomed his daughter was then released months earlier than the sentencing judge intended because there simply wasn’t enough prison capacity?
That isn’t a criticism of early release in isolation. It is a reflection of the choices successive governments have created through years of underinvestment and reactive policymaking.
What also seems to be missing from the debate is that early release doesn’t make risk disappear, it transfers much of the responsibility for managing that risk into the community. That means probation services need sufficient experienced staff, manageable workloads and the time to exercise professional judgement. Without those things, the pressure doesn’t disappear; it simply shifts elsewhere.
The public deserve honesty. This is no longer a choice between prison and probation. It is a choice about where an overstretched system carries its risk.
I do honestly think tagging every prisoner for a period of time on release would cut reoffending down, on top of their licence restrictions.
ReplyDeleteIt certainly helps, but not in isolation, you still need human input to ensure change beyond the tag period. The gripe that I and most Officers I work wit have, is that the tagging system is still woefully inadequate, from the initial tag installation to ongoing battery issues, dealing with frequent address changes (very usual with released Offenders), communication etc, EMS is bad enough but Probation itself has also added there own layer of bureaucracy on top because Managers love to endlessly measure, collate, and have a spreadsheet to beat us with.
DeleteApart from that yeah, they can help
A few points They are licence conditions not restrictions. Tagging everyone released is unnecessary and disproportionate and will stop many people from getting jobs and reintegrating back into their communities. Tagging is no substitute for good supervision. With right wing media stirring up trouble those on tags could be mistaken for sex offenders and face physical assault.
DeleteI couldn’t deal with any more EMS admin
ReplyDeleteFrom Napo News 8th July 2026:-
ReplyDeleteProbation members are standing at a fork in the road.
One path is silence and inaction. It is the path where workloads keep rising, vacancies remain unfilled, experienced colleagues continue to leave, and those who stay are slowly worn down until there is hardly anything left to give to the clients they serve, to the colleagues who rely on them, or to the families waiting for them at home.
The other path is to stand up and fight. To say clearly, collectively and without apology that enough is enough, and that something has to change.
That is the choice before members now in the indicative ballot on workloads.
Nobody needs to persuade probation staff that workloads are high. You know it because you live it. You know what it means to work through lunch, to stay late, to log back on after dinner, to miss family time and to carry the pressure home long after the working day should have ended.
You also know what it does to people. Colleagues become exhausted, detached and diminished. They leave the profession, or they remain in it as empty shells of the practitioners they once were.
And now, more pressure is coming.
The Sentencing Act in September will bring further demand into a service that is already stretched beyond safe limits. At the same time, practitioner access to the Workload Measurement Tool is being removed, taking away a system that has helped demonstrate the work is too much, and the staffing is not enough.
But the truth is this: it will not be the Workload Measurement Tool that ultimately proves the point. It will not be your negotiators alone. It will not even be the risk to the public when overstretched systems mean cases fall through the cracks.
It will be members.
It will be your decision, your voice and your vote that tells the employer whether probation staff are prepared to keep absorbing the damage, or whether they have reached the point where they are ready to act.
That is why turnout in this ballot matters so much.
A strong turnout says that members understand the choice in front of them. It says they are not prepared to let workloads continue to destroy their health, their professionalism and their lives outside work. It says that if things do not change, then members will.
An underwhelming turnout sends the opposite message.
It tells the employer that, however serious the workload crisis feels to members, the workforce is not ready to fight over it. It allows them to assume that things cannot be that bad, that staff are coping, that unpaid overtime and personal sacrifice can continue to hold the system together.
That does not mean workloads are not important. It means the employer will draw conclusions from what members do, or do not do.
This ballot is a test of whether members want to fight, or whether they are prepared to be beaten down.
Because the path of silence has a destination. It leads to more late nights, more skipped lunches, more cancelled plans, more stress carried home, more colleagues walking away and more pressure dumped on those left behind.
The path of collective action has no easy guarantees, but it is the only path that offers the possibility of change.
It starts with members saying: no more.
No more late nights to make an impossible workload look manageable.
No more working through lunch to cover gaps the employer refuses to fill.
No more missing family time to paper over the cracks of a broken system.
No more giving everything to an employer that does not seem to care how much damage has already been done.
Members now need to decide which road they are willing to take.
Do you want to fight for change, or do you want to keep being beaten down by a workload crisis that everyone can see but only members can force the employer to confront?
The ballot runs 10 July to 10 August. For more information about voting, how to attend an all members meeting or to find out the latest updates, visit https://www.napo.org.uk/confidence-broken
Nice warmly feel to that but Napo under Mr Lawrence has only ever delivered a walk down the garden path. He will sell us out as usual the pay modernisation agreed the last round no napo position farcical but let's try anyway what choice is there.
Deletecan't post because of some kind of block: "failed to publish" message for last two weeks.
ReplyDeleteoh! and now its unblocked! Huzzah!
Deleteand blocked again
DeleteSo, common thread to the blocking seems to be when I use the letters h m p p s together.
Deletehttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a54e7951228eb26a4cab851/PI_02_-2019_-_Health_And_Safety_Arrangements_For_Workplace_Inspections_.pdf
Deletepublished 13 july 2026
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czrxrlydyzzo
ReplyDeletePPE failures left NHS staff poorly protected and wasted billions, Covid inquiry finds
£millions spent on inquiry to tell us what we already knew. Its the same with probation's journey... £hundreds-of-millions wasted on failed vanity projects & organisational vandalism.
But the taxpayer keeps on paying for it: mod, moj, hmpps, nhs, dhsc, banks, post office, etc etc etc. £billions upon £billions syphoned off into the pockets of chums with no accountability, no repercussions & no shame on the part of publicly funded arseholes who claim to be the "responsible officer" or similar.
We truly are a nation of fuckwits, allowing this to happen year after year after year.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jul/13/the-wider-impact-of-releasing-prisoners-early
ReplyDeleteWhether people have confidence in Napo’s leadership or not is a separate question from whether the workload crisis is real.
ReplyDeleteEmployers don’t just listen to the outcome of ballots they look at participation. A low turnout can easily be interpreted as a workforce that isn’t prepared to act, regardless of how loudly individuals complain online. A strong turnout, whatever the eventual result, sends a very different message: that staff recognise the scale of the problem and are engaged with it.
What worries me is that too many people are understandably focused on surviving today. But by September the Sentencing Act, OFPS changes, continued staffing shortages and the loss of practitioner access to the WMT are all likely to place further demands on a service that many already believe is operating beyond safe capacity.
If people believe workloads are damaging their mental health, undermining professional practice and affecting public protection, then this is one of the few opportunities to collectively demonstrate that concern.
Vote yes or vote no, that is entirely a matter for each individual. But don’t confuse frustration with the union with silence. Silence has consequences too, because employers draw conclusions not only from what we say, but from what we do.
I’m following NAPO’s efforts via facebook and Napo.org and sharing those via X. Simply wanted to acknowledge the above and hope/pray even that Probation can indeed find a collective voice. The concluding two paragraphs are truly very powerful and I hope in some small way you are able to send a very robust/clear message to your employer and indeed Government. Can only share my best wishes and care/concern as staff arrive at a difficult decision iangould5
DeleteMy MP Cat has finallly re-engaged after 15 months and is reading the NAPO updates. Including, todays which have been DM and tweeted to 20 Labour MP’s. May I suggest that all JB followers share some of the powerful messages which are coming out of NAPO right now. Iangould5
DeleteStrong indications now that Lammy, not regarded by anyone as the sharpest tool in the box, is heading towards the back benches or even out of government entirely. Game over. Will the Justice shakeup see ministers such as Kiers buddy Timpson also ousted? Very likely. It is currently unconfirmed who will replace Lammy, or if he will be retained in Burnham's government at all. While some say he’ll be one of the first to get his marching orders on 20/07 others say his future at the Ministry of Justice is a subject of heavy speculation regarding how fast he is removed so he may be left hanging about whilst negotiations regarding his replacement proceed or policies are scrapped as a fall guy. Burnham is reportedly planning to scrap some of Lammy's recent policies, including the curbs on the right to trial by jury and the early release scheme aimed at easing prison capacity. Better to remove him rather than force him into humiliating U-turns.
ReplyDeleteGiven these policy clashes, a change in leadership at the Ministry of Justice seems highly likely. The incoming cabinet appointments will be critical to watch, as they will undoubtedly signal a significant shift in the department's strategic and operational direction. The approach to AI and technology may see significant changes with much hyped MoJ Justice Digital and Justice AI being seen as expensive failed centralised projects the very opposite of the new decentralised approach. Burnham is for example is said to favour devolved more locally accountable Probation Services developing their own initiatives as appropriate that may see prison and probation regions playing more of a role. What is certain is that he will want to get a firmer grip on Justice with Thornberry rumoured to be first among several people being considered as a smarter upgrade who will want to have a good clear out. Streeting and Jarvis also mentioned as possible options if they do not land plum jobs elsewhere. You heard it here first.