The Evaluation found that these courts were effective, and had many benefits compared to traditional courts, including improved outcomes such as: a higher proportion of cases in which there was a guilty plea at some stage (81% compared to 73%); a higher proportion of guilty pleas at the first appearance (21% compared to 18%), a higher proportion of pleas changed to guilty at or before the intermediate diet (54% compared to 45%), a higher conviction rate (86% compared to 77%).