Diversion

The backfire effect of formal processing

Many years of large-scale criminological research have determined that there are clear patterns of offending tied to levels of maturity.¹ This body of research has observed that, across a wide range of jurisdictions, offending behaviour (both detected and self-reported) peaks in the mid-teens before dropping steeply at the onset of young adulthood, then declining more slowly. This phenomenon is known in the research literature as the age-crime curve. While a small number of children’s offending will continue long into their adulthood, the vast majority are essentially law-abiding children who are temporarily drawn into adolescent delinquency and who quickly grow out of this phase as developmental maturity proceeds and self-control improves.

In other words, children tend to grow out of crime. However, evidence shows that formal criminal justice system processing can arrest this process, leading to more crime. An international meta-analysis, based on a major systematic review of 29 outcomes studies involving more than 7,300 children over 35 years represents the most comprehensive analysis to date of the impact of formal justice system processing. This study concluded that formal processing ‘appears to not have a crime control effect, and across all measures, appears to increase delinquency. This was true across measures of prevalence, incidence, severity, and self-report.’ It highlighted that, ‘rather than providing a public safety benefit, processing a juvenile through the system appears to have a negative or backfire effect.’²

Turning to the British evidence base, The Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime, an ongoing research programme involving more than 4,000 children in Scotland, found that children brought to a court hearing are nearly twice as likely to admit engaging in serious offending in the following year as children (with matched backgrounds and comparable prior self-reported offending behaviour) who did not face a court hearing.³ This is complemented by a research study of youth offending in Northamptonshire which found that prosecution increased the likelihood of reoffending, even when controlling for personal and offence characteristics.⁴

The evidence for youth diversion

The evidence consistently shows that when similar groups of children, comparable in demographics, offences and offending histories, are matched, and one group is formally processed while the other is diverted, the diversion groups do better. Systematic reviews have found that children who were processed had higher reoffending rates than those who were diverted, even after controlling for differences between these populations.⁵ Petrosino et al (2019), for example, found that diversion schemes reduced the prevalence, severity, and frequency of both official offending and self-reported reoffending.⁶

This reduction in reoffending is seen in the UK evidence base too. The Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime states that the best approach to reducing reoffending by children is a policy of ‘maximum diversion’ – an approach featuring the minimum possible formal intervention coupled with diversion to programming outside the justice system.⁷ Indeed, one of the ‘key facts’ about youth crime this landmark study demonstrates is that ‘diversionary strategies facilitate the desistance process’.⁸

Youth diversion works because it avoids children feeling labelled as ‘criminals’ by the justice system and because it seeks to minimise and, in many cases, eliminates children’s contact with negative peer pressure. If not avoided, these contacts may imprint impressionable children with new negative attitudes and behaviours, and may increase the risk of continued offending.¹⁰ Additionally, youth diversion avoids the collateral consequences of formal processing, such as interference with education, training and employment (including school exclusion, and future labour market consequences of carrying a criminal record). These collateral consequences can impede rehabilitation well beyond the end of the direct punishment imposed. Finally, by facilitating access to interventions and support services designed to address the underlying reasons behind children’s offending, diversion can tackle reoffending.

Practice development publications

Guidance on how to deliver diversion effectively for children and young people- this guidance published in 2025 supports police forces to embed robust and transparent decision-making, effective partnership working and evidence-based support.

Inspection Frameworks: Youth diversion and out of court disposals- this 2024 briefing examines the frameworks in place to monitor diversion delivery by YJSs and the police.

Valuing youth diversion: A toolkit for practitioners- this is our flagship youth diversion publication, with the sixth edition published in 2024. It is designed to help practitioners implement and improve diversion schemes in their area. 

This short video explainer, created in 2022 by Reality Art with children in mind, details what diversion is, the benefits it offers and what the process involves.

Research publications

How is youth diversion working for children with special educational needs and disabilities?- This 2024 research report explores, and seeks to improve, how diversion is working for children with SEND. The accompanying literature review is Exploring the Responsiveness of Youth Diversion to Children with SEND.

Children and young people’s voices on youth diversion and disparity- This 2022 research report builds on the previous report, below, crucially centring the experiences of children and young people. 

Equal diversion? Racial disproportionality in youth diversion- This 2021 research report explores the unequal playing field that exists for children in terms of access to, and engagement with, youth diversion.  The accompanying literature review is Disparities in youth diversion – an evidence review.

Mapping youth diversion in England and Wales- In 2019, we systematically mapped youth diversion across England and Wales to provide a clearer picture of the realities of, and gaps in, its provision. 

Evidence and practice briefings on: minimising labelling, eligibility criteria, effective referral, and understanding youth diversion in London.

Policy publications

Data on youth diversion- this briefing, published in 2024 and commissioned by the Youth Endowment Fund, provides an overview of youth diversion data; who collects this data and what it includes, an assessment of the current data available and recommendations for improvement.

Six steps forward for diversion in the youth justice system- this 2022 briefing reflects on the incremental but important changes in the youth justice system since we published our 2020 briefing ‘Strengthening youth diversion’.

Mainstreaming youth diversion- this 2021 briefing summarises discussions from a meeting of leading figures from the justice system on how to put youth diversion on a more mainstream footing.

As well as the Centre’s diversion publications, see also, for example:

The effectiveness of diverting children from the criminal justice system: meeting needs, ensuring safety, and preventing reoffending- This inspection by HM Inspectorate of Probation and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services was published in October 2025. It points to a fragmented and inconsistent system and calls for stronger governance, clearer guidance, and more consistent practice in the use of out of court resolutions for children.

YJB Case Management Guidance- this guidance on the use of out of court resolutions covers diversion, including a section on why you need to focus on diversion.

Informal approaches to Pre-court diversion- this toolkit technical report by the National Children’s Bureau reviews the evidence on the effectiveness of informal pre-court diversion programmes as a strategy to prevent violence, crime and offending among children and young people. It was published in September 2025.

Diversions from the criminal justice system in London- This analysis by the Behavioural Insights Team was published in June 2025 and draws on a substantial Met Police dataset. Key findings include that diversion is associated with reduced reoffending and that black children and young people are diverted less often, even when controlling for the seriousness of offences.

Diversion Practice Guidance- this Youth Endowment Fund guidance- co-authored by us at the Centre for Justice Innovation and published in April 2025 – sets out seven recommendations to effectively implement diversion practices for children.

Understanding referral pathways and diversionary support for children within the criminal justice system in England and Wales- this research by Cordis Bright highlights the highly variable decision-making around diversion, with differences in local eligibility criteria, use of informal resolutions, and the availability of evidence-based support services. It was published in April 2025.

Exploring racial disparity in diversion from the Youth Justice System- This Nuffield-funded study by academics at the University of Bedfordshire and Manchester Metropolitan University, published in April 2025) found that racial disparity increases as the severity of diversionary outcomes rises.

Prevention and Diversion Project Final Report- this two-year review of youth justice services’ prevention and diversion work (published in 2023) was conducted by the YJB in collaboration with the Probation Service and Association of YOT Managers.

Diversion in Gloucestershire

Diversion has been operating in Gloucestershire since 2018 and is referred to as Children First. This includes Community Resolutions, and Outcome 22 (Deferred Cautions and Deferred charge).

This is a partnership between: 

•Police

•Youth Justice Service 

•CAMHS

•Children's Social Care 

•Restorative Gloucestershire

The team in diversion follows clear written guidance that is constantly updated and reflects both changes in practice and legislation, and there is a strong professional working relationship between decision makers. 

Efforts are made to ensure:

• The YJS will bring children back to the panel where there are concerns about engagement/compliance
• The reoffending of children diverted in measured and reported to the partnership on a quarterly basis
• There is consideration of the victims' views both at the decision and review stage.

Between Jan and Dec 2024;

• 93 children were diverted, meaning these children had support but without the associated criminogenic stigma of a formal outcome.
• Around 70% of children are receiving outcomes in under 3 months; this also means victims get a timely response.
• Between April 2022 and March 2023, 103 children were diverted using Outcome 22.
• 13 children reoffended (inc. subsequent diversion), a binary rate of 12.6%.
• The 13 children committed a total of 24 reoffences, an average of 2.67 per child
• 87.4% of children diverted did not reoffend within 12 months.

Key takeaways:

• Clear and shared objectives with regularly updated guidance owned by the partnership
• With deferred outcomes, use the review process and be transparent where there are challenges around engagement / participation
• Monitor the reoffending and include subsequent diversions in this measure

Continue to evolve and innovate to achieve the best outcomes for children and victims