‘Initiative overload’ has caused case preparation at the Crown Prosecution Service to be ‘neglected to an acceptable degree’, according to the annual report from the organisation’s chief inspector.

Published this week, the report covers the performance of the CPS from April 2009 to March 2010.

In his first annual report as Her Majesty’s chief inspector, Michael Fuller said the variation in standard across the service was ‘greater than would be expected’ from a national service.

But he said the specialist business units – counter-terrorism, organised crime, and the revenue and customs prosecution office – carry out their work to ‘an exceptionally high standard’.

Fuller’s review was informed by the inspections of Surrey, Gwent, Leicestershire and Rutland, Nottinghamshire, the organised crime division, the traffic unit, 20 London boroughs and an overall assessment of CPS London.

He said the introduction of specific initiatives over the year had resulted in ‘careful and thorough case preparation being neglected to an unacceptable degree.’

Case preparation in both the magistrates’ and Crown courts were ‘weak’, with less than half of magistrates’ court cases prepared in a timely manner. In the Crown court the proportion ranged from 38-84%.

Fuller said the quality of pre-charge decision-making needs to be improved, as inspections revealed charges selected in 10-20% of cases were not the most appropriate.

There were also delays of up to several weeks before police could obtain charging advice and decisions from the CPS.

Compliance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, which sets the test for whether a case should be prosecuted, was ‘variable’ and non-compliance noted in 5-14% of cases. The inspectors also found non-compliance with the public interest test.

The report found a ‘lack of cohesion and coordination’ in the service provided to victims and witnesses, with some victims not getting appropriate support due to late applications for special measures.

However, it said prosecutors at court displayed ‘generally good’ standards of care and attention to the needs of victims and witnesses.

Fuller said he hoped the set of core quality standards launched in April 2010 would improve the quality of casework and lessen the variations in performance.