Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 24, 2024 Wed
Time: 1:59 pm
Time: 1:59 pm
Results for collaboration
74 results foundAuthor: Wijs, Rutger de Title: Improving Knowledge Transfer in Public-Private Partnerships that Confront Dutch Road Freight Transport Related Crime Summary: Because road freight transport safety in the Netherlands is a rising concern, the Dutch police and the affected Dutch transport sector, along with a number of other public and private stakeholders, have joined forces in the form of public-private partnership initiatives directed toward confronting road freight transport related crime in the Netherlands. As all parties involved possess unique but relevant knowledge, transferring this knowledge between partners is important. However, it is also difficult to achieve. Therefore the problem statement of this research is: how can knowledge transfer be improved in Public-Private Partnerships that confront Dutch road freight transport related crime? The knowledge transfer environment is shaped by the way Public-Private Partnerships are organised as well as the way people within them interact with each other and the knowledge to be transferred. This environment consists of 10 factors, which are all interrelated. To investigate how knowledge transfer occurs in these Public-Private Partnerships and to offer recommendations on how this can be improved, 18 semi-structured interviews were held with the most relevant and available people from five Public-Private Partnerships. The recommendations on how to improve knowledge transfer in Public-Private Partnerships that confront Dutch road freight transport related crime are organised in terms of how to improve structure and interaction. Structural recommendations refer to increased interaction by strategic and operational level partnerships, care for the ideal organisational structure, the inclusion of an operational field lab as well as a knowledge securing software system and the screening of potential partners as well as the optimal amount of partners and their preferred organisation size. The interaction recommendations refer to increasing empathy between partners, stimulating open communication, ensuring that the people who represent a partner stay on for the long-term and selecting the people who represent partners based on a number of individual competences. Details: Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University, Department of Organization, and Strategy, 2010. 103p. Source: Internet Resource: Master Thesis: Accessed July 11, 2011 at: http://www.rpcgelderland-midden.nl/uploads/tx_rpcinfo/Onderzoek_-_het_verbeteren_van_kennisdeling_in_PPSen.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Netherlands URL: http://www.rpcgelderland-midden.nl/uploads/tx_rpcinfo/Onderzoek_-_het_verbeteren_van_kennisdeling_in_PPSen.pdf Shelf Number: 122018 Keywords: Cargo Theft (Netherlands)CollaborationPublic-Private PartnershipsTheftTransport IndustryTransport TheftTransportation Security |
Author: Hartmann, Tracey A. Title: Moving Beyond the Walls: Faith and Justice Partnerships Working for High-Risk Youth Summary: This report examines the development of partnerships among faith-based institutions and juvenile justice agencies in a national demonstration intended to provide mentoring, education and employment services to young people at high risk of future criminal behavior. Given the range of services — and the needs of the young people — collaborations are critical to the communities' efforts. The report addresses the following questions: Can small faith-based organizations work together effectively? Can they develop effective partnerships with juvenile justice institutions? What are the benefits and challenges of both types of partnerships? Details: Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures, 2003. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 11, 2011 at: http://www.ppv.org/ppv/publications/assets/22_publication.pdf Year: 2003 Country: United States URL: http://www.ppv.org/ppv/publications/assets/22_publication.pdf Shelf Number: 122025 Keywords: CollaborationFaith-Based InitiativesJuvenile OffendersMentoringPartnerships |
Author: Cordis Bright Consulting Title: Research into Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs) Summary: MARACs are multi-agency meetings where statutory and voluntary agency representatives share information about high risk victims of domestic abuse in order to produce a coordinated action plan to increase victim safety. The role of the MARAC is to provide a forum for effective information sharing and partnership working amongst a diverse range of adult and child focussed services in order to enhance the safety of high risk victims and their children. There are currently around 250 MARACs in operation across England and Wales. This study was commissioned by the Home Office as part of a wider review of MARACs which aimed to improve understanding of how MARACs are working and potential areas of development, including the case for putting MARACs on a statutory basis. The full review can be accessed at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/research-statistics/publications/home-office-research-reports/ (Home Office Research Report 55 “Supporting high risk victims of domestic violence: a review of Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs)”) This report presents: Findings from the national survey of MARACs. A summary of key findings from the case study research. Details: London: Cordis Bright Limited, 2011. 109p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 15, 2011 at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr55/horr55-technical-annex?view=Binary Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr55/horr55-technical-annex?view=Binary Shelf Number: 122069 Keywords: CollaborationDomestic Violence (U.K.)Family ViolenceRisk AssessmentVictims of Domestic Violence |
Author: Nicholas, Sian Title: Supporting High-Risk Victims of Domestic Violence: A Review of Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs) Summary: Multi-agency risk assessment conferences are multi-agency meetings where statutory and voluntary agency representatives share information about high-risk victims of domestic abuse in order to produce a co-ordinated action plan to increase victim safety. The agencies that attend MARACs will vary but are likely to include, for example: the Police, Probation, Independent Domestic Violence Advisers (IDVAs), Children's Services, health and housing. There are approximately 250 MARACs currently in operation across England and Wales. This report brings together evidence from a range of sources in order to explore: existing evidence for effectiveness and cost effectiveness of MARACs; how the MARAC model currently operates within the wider response to domestic violence; variation in current practice amongst MARACs; and potential areas for future development. Details: London: Home Office, 2011. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report 55: Accessed July 15, 2011 at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr55/horr55-report?view=Binary Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr55/horr55-report?view=Binary Shelf Number: 122073 Keywords: CollaborationDomestic Violence (U.K.)Family ViolenceRisk AssessmentVictims of Domestic Violence |
Author: Janetta, Jesse Title: Promoting Partnerships between Police and Community Supervision Agencies: How Coordination Can Reduce Crime and Improve Public Safety Summary: The past two decades have witnessed a period of revitalization for the field of law enforcement, marked by the emergence of a new paradigm of policing that embraces data-driven decision-making, emphasizes partnerships with the community, and underscores the belief that policing can be effective in making neighborhoods safer. During the same period, community supervision agencies have experienced a parallel shift in focus and philosophy, suggesting the potential for such agencies to enhance their role in improving public safety. The reenergizing of community supervision could not come at a more opportune time because it is needed to meet the challenges of the tremendous volume of people sentenced to probation or returning from prison. At any given time, 4.2 million adults are on probation supervision in the United States. Approximately 735,000 prisoners are released from state and federal prisons annually, and more than 500,000 are released to parole supervision. Adjudicated juveniles place an additional strain on community supervision agencies because approximately 42 percent of all petitioned cases result in an order of probation supervision. Moreover, 47,000 individuals (39,100 probationers and 7,900 parolees) were under community supervision in tribal areas in 2008, equaling a 7.9 percent increase from 2007. The potential impact that these supervisees have on public safety is undeniable: over two-thirds of released adult prisoners are arrested for a new crime within three years of release. While supervised populations may pose significant challenges for police and community supervision agencies, a partnership between the two can help them improve public safety. A community policing orientation, with a focus on building partnerships and engaging in problem-solving efforts to address crime, social disorder, and the fear of crime proactively, provides a strong foundation for collaboration between police and community supervision agencies. The two are allies and partners in the work of reintegrating parolees into their communities and managing probationers so that they refrain from criminal activity. Each agency can bring its skills, competencies, resources, and knowledge to a partnership. Police understand crime prevention and neighborhood dynamics; this knowledge can be valuable to community supervision agencies as they shift their focus toward preventing supervisees from committing a violation of their probation or parole conditions (as opposed to simply responding to violations once they occur). In turn, community supervision agencies know their supervisees, including the risks they present, potential triggers to reoffending, and interventions necessary to keep them in compliance. Building on the distinct strengths of both police and community supervision agencies, such partnerships can aid in the prevention of crime and enhance public safety. This guidebook is intended for all levels of police and community supervision personnel, as agency executives, supervisors, and line officers all have an opportunity to contribute to and benefit from partnering. The first section of this guidebook discusses why police and community supervision agencies should be interested in developing partnerships and what each partner can contribute to them. The second section discusses the key elements of partnership, specifically intelligence and information sharing, case planning and supporting behavior change, problem-solving approaches, targeted interventions for special populations, and focused deterrence efforts. Throughout the guidebook, examples of partnerships in the field are provided to offer tangible illustrations of how police/community supervision collaboration can be structured. While many of these examples focus on urban areas, the principles discussed throughout this guidebook are equally relevant for police and supervision agencies in rural areas where large agency boundaries can pose significant challenges for supervising probationers and parolees. These challenges only increase the need for interagency coordination and partnerships. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2011. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 19, 2011 at: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412362-promoting-partnerships-police-community-supervision-agencies.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412362-promoting-partnerships-police-community-supervision-agencies.pdf Shelf Number: 122113 Keywords: CollaborationCommunity Corrections (U.S.)Community-Oriented PolicingLaw EnforcementOffender SupervisionParoleesPrisoner ReentryProbationersPublic Safety |
Author: San Francisco. Mayor's Office of Criminal Justice Title: SF Safe City: A Report on Ongoing Initiatives to Reduce Crime and Violence in San Francisco Summary: In the summer of 2006, San Francisco launched SF Safe Summer 2006, a coordinated effort amongst City departments, law enforcement, the courts and the community to combat the high rate of violence plaguing San Francisco. Together, these efforts created new job opportunities for at risk youth and adults, advanced new strategies to combat gun and gang violence, and bolstered social services for families impacted by violence. The summer passed but the city's efforts to stop violence continue to grow. The Mayor's Office prepared SF SAFE CITY to report on San Francisco's ongoing violence prevention and reduction strategies moving forward. These efforts are organized into five key elements: collaboration, prevention, intervention, enhanced criminal justice system effectiveness, and community policing. In 2005, homicides in San Francisco reached a ten-year high, with 96 people slain. So far this year, San Francisco continues to see high numbers of lives lost to violence. Homicides from gun violence constitute the majority of homicides in San Francisco. The violence and homicides disproportionately affect low-income communities of color. Victims of violence need support services to help them heal. Perpetrators must be prosecuted and held accountable for their actions. Youth and young adults need access to positive and productive activities as alternatives to crime and violence. Residents need to be safe in their communities. San Francisco launched SF Safe Summer 2006 to advance the kind of collaboration and innovation needed to solve this intolerable problem. Among other accomplishments, the Juvenile Probation Department and the Department of Children, Youth and their Families spearheaded the most ambitious effort in San Francisco history to provide jobs to youth on probation. The Mayor's Office of Economic and Workforce Development expanded its CityBuild Academy to provide job-training services in the construction field. The Department of Children, Youth and their Families commenced an effort to expand the Community Response Network crisis response program in the Mission and bring this model to the Bayview and Western Addition neighborhoods. The Department of Public Health initiated a new citywide Crisis Response Team to assist family members and witnesses of violent incidents. Operation Ceasefire, a collaboration among local and federal public safety agencies to combat gun and gang violence, began extensive data collection and planning. The District Attorney and Public Defender continued their efforts to improve outcomes for people exiting jail, and Police District Stations carried out violence reduction plans to tackle the unique crime problems in each neighborhood. These initiatives have laid the foundation for change, but a tremendous amount of work lies ahead. The ongoing violence must be stopped through a combination of intensive prevention, intervention, and suppression strategies that can both respond to the immediate crisis on the streets and begin to deal with the underlying social and economic conditions that contribute to instability, violence, and crime. This report, SF SAFE CITY, describes San Francisco's ongoing violence prevention, intervention, and reduction efforts. Details: San Francisco: Mayor's Office of Criminal Justice, 2006. 89p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 22, 2011 at: http://sfmayor.typepad.com/sf_mayor/files/SFSafeCity.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://sfmayor.typepad.com/sf_mayor/files/SFSafeCity.pdf Shelf Number: 122152 Keywords: CollaborationCrime Prevention (San Francisco)GangsGun ViolenceHomicidesViolenceViolent Crime |
Author: van Staden, Lauren Title: Tackling Organised Crime Through a Partnership Approach at the Local Level: A Process Evaluation Summary: Existing research suggests that multi-agency approaches can be particularly effective in tackling complex crime and disorder problems (Berry et al., 2011; Rosenbaum, 2002). However, our understanding of what can be achieved by tackling organised crime through multi-agency working is limited; a recent review of the evidence on the effectiveness of partnership working in tackling crime did not identify any studies which focused primarily on organised crime and criminal activity (Berry et al., 2011). In England and Wales a partnership approach to tackling crime and disorder at the local level has been present in various guises since the 1960s, and has been a statutory requirement since the Crime & Disorder Act (1998). While the predominant focus of Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) is crime and disorder, they are unlikely to regularly share information on, or develop a multi-agency action plan against, organised crime, unless it is identified as a priority through their local strategic assessment. A partnership approach to tackling organised crime has recently been evident at both the national and regional level. The Organised Crime Partnership Board (set up in 2008) brings together a range of national agencies with the aim of strengthening the co-ordinated response to organised crime across the law enforcement and criminal justice community. At the regional level, multi-agency task forces have been in place since 2009. The aim of these groups is to address cross-border serious and organised crime in a more systematic way (HMIC, 2009). However, this has not extended through CSPs to the local level where tackling organised crime is still considered, in the main, to be the role of the police. In February 2010 the Home Office set up an initiative to explore whether or not local partnership working could contribute to tackling organised crime. The initiative was developed in response to a recommendation included in the Cabinet Office (2009) review of organised crime ‘Extending Our Reach’ which focused on the development of a better understanding of the role that CSPs can play in tackling lower-level organised crime. Although not prescribing the mechanisms involved, the review proposed a partnership approach to tackling organised crime involving the sharing of relevant information between agencies for the purposes of targeting criminals and/or criminal activity. The review suggested that while not all those identified as being involved in organised crime would be suitable for targeting through a partnership approach, it was likely that a proportion would be known to both the police and partner agencies and could therefore potentially be tackled more effectively by co-ordinating activity (Cabinet Office, 2009). This study presents the findings from a process evaluation of 12 pilot sites set up as part of this initiative jointly run by the Home Office Community Safety Unit and the Home Office Strategic Centre for Organised Crime. Details: London: Home Office, 2011. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report 56: Accessed August 5, 2011 at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr56/horr56-report?view=Binary Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr56/horr56-report?view=Binary Shelf Number: 122305 Keywords: CollaborationOrganized Crime (U.K.)Partnerships |
Author: Wood, Jason Title: The Operation and Experience of Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) Summary: This research was undertaken as part of the Home Office’s review of the way in which offenders convicted of sexual offences against children are managed. The research had two primary aims. 1. To identify and assess specific operational practices in relation to sexual offenders subject to Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) Level 2 and 3 in terms of risk assessment, supervision, surveillance, interventions, enforcement, compliance, breach, recall and so on. 2. To identify and assess the experience of subjection to MAPPA Level 2 and 3 and the impact of this on offending-related behaviour of Registered Sexual Offenders (RSOs) convicted of offences against children. To be explored from the viewpoint of both offenders and those working within those agencies represented at MAPPA Level 2 and 3. The study was qualitative in nature and included interviews with a range of practitioners involved in the MAPPA process, and offenders, and a number of focus groups with members of Level 2 and 3 panels and Strategic Management Boards. The study was small-scale, conducted within three MAPPA Areas and therefore does not represent a comprehensive examination of MAPPA effectiveness. Rather, it is an exploration of current practices within MAPPA across the three Areas and how these are understood and experienced by those involved. Details: London: Home Office, 2007. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Home Office Online Report 12/07: Accessed August 8, 2011 at: http://www.caerdydd.ac.uk/socsi/resources/MAPPA1207.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.caerdydd.ac.uk/socsi/resources/MAPPA1207.pdf Shelf Number: 122319 Keywords: CollaborationCommunity Based CorrectionsSex Offenders (U.K.) |
Author: Crime and Justice Institute Title: Implementing Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in Community Corrections, 2nd Edition Summary: Building an evidence-based community corrections system requires more than just the research on "what works." It requires a commitment to fundamentally changing the way organizations do business, and the way they work together. In 2002, the Crime and Justice Institute at CRJ partnered with the National Institute of Corrections to develop the Integrated Model, which approached implementation with an equal focus on Evidence-Based Policies and Practices (EBP), Organizational Development, and Collaboration. The Model provides guidance not just on what practices to implement, but also on how to create long-term commitment to measurable reductions in recidivism. Original publications on the Integrated Model were disseminated widely, and the Model was put into practice throughout the country. This updated version incorporates the foundational information on EBP, Organizational Development, and Collaboration that was presented in the original 2004 publications, along with the latest research. It is essential reading for community corrections leaders and managers looking to implement EBP. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2009. 91p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2011 at: http://cjinstitute.org/files/Community_Corrections_BoxSet_Oct09.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://cjinstitute.org/files/Community_Corrections_BoxSet_Oct09.pdf Shelf Number: 122321 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCollaborationCommunity-Based Corrections (U.S.) |
Author: Senior, Paul Title: Process Evaluation of Five Integrated Offender Management Pioneer Areas Summary: A qualitative process evaluation of five Integrated Offender Management (IOM) pioneer areas was undertaken to assess implementation of IOM, identify approaches to implementation and capture the lessons learnt. The findings indicated that IOM enabled structural changes, transforming the delivery of offender management. There was considerable commitment and enthusiasm for IOM at the sites, whilst acknowledging barriers to development such as definition, resourcing, governance and clarity of agency roles. Since the evaluation took place, the political and criminal justice landscape has changed somewhat, supporting a more locally driven approach which can draw on the learning directly from the pioneers which were shaped and delivered locally. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2011. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Series 4/11: Accessed August 8, 2011 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/evaluation-integrated-offender-mgt-pioneer-areas.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/evaluation-integrated-offender-mgt-pioneer-areas.pdf Shelf Number: 122322 Keywords: CollaborationOffender SupervisionPrisoner RehabilitationRepeat Offenders (U.K.) |
Author: Hughes, Diane K. Title: A Comparison of Paterson Juveniles Under Probation Supervision Before and After Implementation of the Paterson Juvenile Justice Village Initiative. Are Probation/Police Collaborations Effective Models for Probation Supervision? Summary: New Jersey Superior Courts have been unified for a number of years, but state assumption of funding didn’t occur until 1995. Funding for the courts previously rested with each county, resulting in significant disparities between counties. The focus for the first few years after the state assumed funding for all superior courts throughout the 15 vincinages was on budget issues such as attaining equitable resource allocation; standardization of purchasing; uniform job titles; and equalization of pay. The Administrative Office of the Courts has recently begun to look toward standardization of practices throughout the state. Probation, as a division of the superior court, has been exploring options to improve efficiency, effectiveness and accountability. The Conference of Chief Probation Officers has been looking at operations and activities in the vicinages to identify those that are “best practices” which may be implemented statewide. Probation services in New Jersey are not alone in seeking ways to reinvent themselves. Probation throughout the country has been grappling with the notion of reinventing itself to best serve the court, the offender and the community. This paper will focus on the movement of probation toward collaborations with police and explore specifically the Paterson Juvenile Justice Village Initiative. Collaborations between probation and police are proliferating at a fast pace. It may be that such collaborations are, in fact, a “best practice”. There are, however, some issues and concerns, which will be addressed. This paper will look briefly at probation’s past and focus on some of the more recent efforts of probation to view work differently. A review of literature relevant to the collaborative approach will be discussed. Almost all such approaches are patterned after a collaboration between probation and police in Boston, Massachusetts known as Operation Night Light. The Paterson Juvenile Justice Village Initiative is also based on the Boston partnership. In fact, staff from Boston and Paterson spent time with each other both in Paterson and in Boston. A description of juvenile probation practices in the Passaic Vicinage is offered as well as a full description of the Paterson Village Initiative field activities and approach. Problems and issues arising from collaborations between court administered probation divisions and law enforcement are discussed. The methodology section will enumerate what was evaluated; explain how data was collected and discuss the problems of gathering data by utilizing cumbersome mainframe systems and conducting surveys. The collected data will be presented and an analysis will follow. This writer’s conclusions will be presented as well as a discussion of the need for future research. Details: Denver, CO: Institute for Court Management, Court Executive Development Program, 2000. 87p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2011 at: http://contentdm.ncsconline.org/cgi-bin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/famct&CISOPTR=81 Year: 2000 Country: United States URL: http://contentdm.ncsconline.org/cgi-bin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/famct&CISOPTR=81 Shelf Number: 233426 Keywords: CollaborationJuvenile Offenders (New Jersey)Juvenile Probation |
Author: Taxman, Faye S. Title: Proactive Community Supervision in Maryland: Changing Offender Outcomes Summary: With over 70,000 adult offenders under community supervision in the late 1990s, and more than 100 offenders assigned to each probation/parole agent, Maryland faced challenges similar to other states regarding the most effective strategy for supervising offenders in the community. In response to the 2000 Joint Chairmen’s Report, the Maryland Division of Parole and Probation (MDPP) developed a strategy to reengineer supervision by integrating research-based findings pertinent to protecting community safety and returning offenders to a more prosocial lifestyle. The strategy, called Proactive Community Supervision (PCS), has three goals: protect public safety; hold offenders accountable to victims and the community; and help offenders become responsible and productive (Sachwald, 2000). These goals are accomplished through the five major components of PCS: 1) identify criminogenic traits using a valid risk and need tool; 2) develop a supervision plan that addresses criminogenic traits employing effective external controls and treatment interventions; 3) hold the offender accountable for progress on the supervision plan; 4) use a place-based strategy wherein individual probation/parole office environments are engaged in implementing the strategy; and 5) develop partnerships with community organizations who will provide ancillary services to supervisees. Collectively, these five tenets are based on findings from research studies identifying crime reduction strategies over the last 30 years. Funds to implement the PCS strategy were appropriated for State Fiscal Year 2002. To allow MDPP to change the context of supervision, caseload sizes for intensive supervision by probation/parole agents were to be reduced from 100 to 55 in four areas: Mondawmin in Baltimore City, Hyattsville in Prince George’s County, Silver Spring in Montgomery County, and all of Caroline County. With PCS, probation/parole agents are armed with a research-based strategy regarding how to address the criminogenic traits that propel individuals to continue their involvement in criminal behavior. PCS offers a holistic approach for probation/parole agents to facilitate offender change while emphasizing accountability and public safety. This report presents an overview of the impact of the PCS strategy on key offender outcomes--rearrest rates, warrants for violation of probation, and adherence to offender supervision plans. To determine whether the PCS process achieves the intended goals, a team of researchers from the University of Maryland and Virginia Commonwealth University evaluated the impact of the PCS process on offender outcomes. The evaluation study used an individual match design that compares the outcomes of 548 offenders — 274 randomly selected offenders supervised in PCS areas with 274 matched offenders in areas that use the traditional supervision model. The researchers found that participation in PCS had a positive effect on offender outcomes. In particular, regardless of the criminal history of the offender or risk level, the rates of rearrest and warrants filed for technical violations were significantly lower for offenders that were supervised under the PCS strategy. The PCS model has shown to have statistically significant outcomes for offenders compared to traditional methods of supervision. Details: College Park, MD: University of Maryland; Richmond, VA: Virginia Commonwealth University, 2006. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2011 at: http://www.dpscs.state.md.us/publicinfo/publications/pdfs/PCS_Evaluation_Feb06.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.dpscs.state.md.us/publicinfo/publications/pdfs/PCS_Evaluation_Feb06.pdf Shelf Number: 122327 Keywords: CollaborationCommunity-based CorrectionsOffender Supervision (Maryland)ParoleProbationRecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: Sims, Barbara Title: An Evaluation of the PCCD-Funded Police-Probation Partnerships Projects Summary: In April, 2002, the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) began funding three Police-Probation Partnership (PPP) projects in Lackawanna, Lehigh, and Mercer Counties. These programs are modeled after the Operation Night Light (ONL) program that began in Boston, Massachusetts in 1992. The goals of the PPP projects are to reduce recidivism among selected juvenile and/or adult probationers, to reduce police calls for service and criminal activity in the target areas, to increase public perceptions of safety in the neighborhoods where PPP projects are operating, and to strengthen linkages between the police departments and county probation departments. The PCCD sought to award a subgrant to support a process and outcome evaluation of the PPP programs in the three funded counties. The purpose of such a study would be to determine: (1) whether the three funded sites have implemented the program according to the specified goals and objectives of the program; (2) whether the sites are meeting the expectations of the PCCD related to the goals and objectives of PPP programming in general; and (3) the nature and extent of the impact of PPP programming in the targeted areas. Details: Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania State University, 2006. 119p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2011 at: www.portal.state.pa.us Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 122447 Keywords: CollaborationJuvenile ProbationersPartnershipsPolice/Probation PartnershipsProbationers (PennsylvaniaRecidivism |
Author: Gojkovic, Dina Title: Scoping the Involvement of Third Sector Organisations in the Seven Resettlement Pathways for Offenders Summary: The role of the third sector in the resettlement of offenders has become a prominent issue in recent years, and is increasingly recognised as being essential to efforts to reduce re-offending. A reasonable amount of knowledge already exists about public sector organisations which engage in work with offenders through the seven ‘pathways’ of resettlement: accommodation; education, employment and training; health; drugs and alcohol; finance, benefit and debt; children and families; and attitudes, thinking and behaviour. Determining the number and nature of third sector organisations involved in work with offenders is more complex. This paper aims to map out the landscape and extent of third sector involvement in the resettlement of offenders, with a specific focus on the seven pathways. Using existing datasets, it looks at the properties of third sector organisations working with offenders, more specifically their size, number, geographic area of operation and total income. It is estimated that nearly 20,000 third sector organisations work with offenders in England and Wales, and that they rely predominantly on public sector funding for survival. Compared to the figures for all third sector organisations there is over representation of organisations providing accommodation services, health care and family-support services to offenders. The implications of these and other findings are also discussed. Details: Birmingham, UK: Third Sector Research Centre, University of Birmingham, 2011. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper 57: Accessed August 23, 2011 at: http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=JnJy2cVtYx0%3d&tabid=500 Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=JnJy2cVtYx0%3d&tabid=500 Shelf Number: 122468 Keywords: CollaborationOffendersPartnershipsPrisoner Reentry (U.K.)Rehabilitation |
Author: Bond, Brenda J. Title: Facing the Economic Crisis: Challenges for Massachusetts Police Chiefs Summary: Police chiefs across Massachusetts are embroiled in an extraordinary management struggle – balancing unrelenting public safety demands while adapting to drastic reductions in resources. The general public may not instinctively think of local police chiefs as executive-level managers engulfed by the financial and operational effectiveness of their organizations, but the exceptional financial state of the Commonwealth and municipalities requires a new level of human and financial management by police chiefs and local administrators. There remain high expectations from the community and local officials as a result of community policing and increased community participation in public safety and increased pressures for transparency and accountability. The interplay between these factors calls for a more sophisticated system for managing the contemporary police organization. More than simply “top cops,” today’s police chiefs must serve as a public safety executive, identifying ways to maintain and improve public safety in the face of rapidly declining resources, increasing costs, and limited flexibility in this time of economic adversity. To understand the experiences and challenges of local police chiefs, we interviewed six (6) Massachusetts police chiefs who represent the Commonwealth’s “Middle Cities.” In-depth interviews offered insight into the operational, strategic and community challenges facing police chiefs as a result of the state’s current economic crisis. Police chiefs reported on the significant management resources directed towards developing and revising budgets, an inescapable side-effect of the constantly changing financial environment. While their experiences and strategies mimic many in the private and non-profit sectors, the pressures surrounding budgetary decision making are decidedly different for public safety managers. Investments in community policing strategies are being tested, and increasing expectations to demonstrate value to citizens and civic leaders alike create additional pressures on public safety leaders. The chiefs interviewed expressed frustration with two common and reasonable demands: to engage with the public in a meaningful and valuable way and direct sufficient resources to emergency calls for service. While the chiefs have been able to balance these proactive and responsive services, they report that it is increasingly difficult to do. Financial predictions for the coming fiscal years are dismal, and chiefs are holding on to those strategies which allow them to get the biggest bang for their buck. These chiefs believe that safe and thriving communities require continued investment in proactive work and emergency response strategies, and they believe community economic development is directly linked to public safety. As a result, the chiefs are being strategic in the way that they address resource shortfalls. Grant programs from state and federal governments allow the chiefs to address technology or equipment shortcomings, among other gaps, and their agencies aggressively pursue these resources. Further, they are committed to partnerships with local, state, federal, non-profit organizations, and the community. Through these partnerships they work to sustain the many gains achieved through the adoption of community and problem-oriented policing. The community connections, innovative and proactive engagement, and resource multiplication that have been realized through these partnerships have helped them get through this time of financial shortfall. This paper provides a brief account of experiences and challenges facing police chiefs in several midsized cities in Massachusetts, the factors which impact their decision making and the strategies they utilize, and discusses the various ways in which chiefs are adapting to changing financial and social contexts. Details: Boston: Pioneer Institute, 2010. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: White Paper, No. 58: Accessed September 2, 2011 at: http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/pdf/100426_facing_economic_crisis.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/pdf/100426_facing_economic_crisis.pdf Shelf Number: 122617 Keywords: CollaborationCosts of Criminal JusticeEconomicsPartnershipsPolice AdministratorsPolicing (Massachusetts) |
Author: O'Connell, John P. Title: Evaluation of Price's Run Weed and Seed Summary: The Weed and Seed Law Enforcement Subcommittee, made up of representatives from the U.S. Attorney and state Attorney General’s offices, Wilmington PD, U.S. Marshals, FBI, DEA, ATF, state and federal probation offices, was responsible for developing crime reduction strategies in the Price’s Run Weed and Seed area. Weed and Seed grant funds were used to pay police overtime for safety checkpoints and enforcement of quality of life crimes. In anticipation of the Weed and Seed grant, the Wilmington Police Department assigned 2 additional police officers to the Price’s Run neighborhood starting in October 2005, months before the initial Weed and Seed grant was awarded. From October 2005 to May 2006, officers assigned to the Weed and Seed area made 101 drug related arrests, 45 arrests for quality of life crimes, 10 arrested for weapon offenses, and 18 guns seizures. From March to May 2006, police handled 390 complaints, made 132 community contacts, made 90 pedestrian stops, and handled 470 special attention assignments. Starting in 2006, a Weed and Seed law enforcement grant was used to pay for police overtime operations that resulted in 98 vehicle stops, 8 traffic summons, 2 capias arrests, 49 warrant attempts, and 6 executed warrants. In 2009, a dedicated probation officer from the Delaware Department of Correction was hired part-time with Weed and Seed funds to conduct curfew checks and warrant attempts for probationers residing in Census Tract 6.02. Weed and Seed officers also held educational seminars to inform the public about the police department and distributed informational literature to resident of Census Tract 6.02. Fugitive Safe Surrender, a successful and well publicized weeding operation in Price’s Run, took place at New Destiny Fellowship Church from April 29 to May 2, 2009. Led by the U.S. Marshals Service and Delaware courts, this 4-day operation allowed persons with outstanding warrants to surrender to law enforcement in a non-threatening environment. Participants were able to meet with an attorney, be seen by a judge, and have their cases adjudicated on-site. While the program did not provide amnesty, participants were offered favorable consideration for turning themselves in voluntarily. A total of 1,073 fugitives surrendered to law enforcement (including 101 felons) and 4,131 warrants were cleared as a result of Fugitive Safe Surrender. Details: Dover, DE: Delaware Statistical Analysis Center, 2010. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 29, 2011 at: http://sac.omb.delaware.gov/publications/documents/weed_and_seed_evaluation_110810.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://sac.omb.delaware.gov/publications/documents/weed_and_seed_evaluation_110810.pdf Shelf Number: 122960 Keywords: CollaborationCommunity Crime PreventionCommunity PolicingProbationersWeed and Seed Programs (Delaware) |
Author: Rhodes, William Title: Evaluation of the Multijurisdictional Task Forces (MJTFs), Phase II: MJTF Performance Monitoring Guide Summary: State and local law enforcement is the first line of defense in reducing the availability of illegal drugs on American streets. Recognizing the critical role of local agencies, federal and state agencies augment local enforcement funding with grants and transfers. However, with increased frequency those federal and state agencies are requiring local accountability of the use of funds—hard evidence that grants and transfers are worthwhile. As a result, programs that are unable to provide solid evidence of their activities and effectiveness are more vulnerable to having their resources cut or diverted to programs that can better demonstrate success. Multijurisdictional Task Forces (MJTFs) are not immune to this new accountability in government, but like many other law enforcement programs, MJTFs lack a history of collecting performance measures and using them to justify program operations. Consequently, MJTFs are disadvantaged in the new competition for federal and state funding. Overcoming that disadvantage requires developing a performance monitoring system. Performance measurement is a system for gathering information about how programs operate and what they accomplish. Performance monitoring refers to the periodic analysis and use of the data collected through performance measurement to track program implementation and execution, making changes as necessary based on subjective and objective assessments of the information. Performance evaluation is a subset of performance monitoring that requires application of rigorous research protocols to make conclusions about program performance. A performance monitoring system is a set of procedures for integrating performance measurement and performance monitoring into a framework that supports public decision making. A performance monitoring system, including its performance measurement and performance monitoring components, is the focus of this guide. Details: Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, 2009. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 4, 2011 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/228942.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/228942.pdf Shelf Number: 118719 Keywords: CollaborationDrug EnforcementMultijurisdictional Task ForcesPolice Policies and Procedures (U.S.) |
Author: Burke, Peggy Title: The Future of Parole as a Key Partner in Assuring Public Safety Summary: New research is providing lessons about how the criminal justice system in the United States can reduce recidivism, prevent crime and victimization, and better use precious public resources. One of the fundamental principles of this new body of knowledge is that all components of the justice system must target new, more effective solutions to the right offenders.This paper will argue that paroling authorities can lead change efforts in this transformation, because they are uniquely positioned to target interventions to the appropriate offenders. By strengthening and focusing their decisionmaking regarding release, setting of conditions, and responding to violations, paroling authorities can help the system do what has proven effective and discontinue past practices that have proven ineffective. The paper will also make the case that strong, collaborative partnerships with and support from other key stakeholders—including chief executives, prison officials, and parole supervision agencies — are another essential ingredient to realize parole’s leadership role in the criminal justice system. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2011. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Parole Essentials: Practical Guides for Parole Leaders No. 5: Accessed October 20, 2011 at: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/024201.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/024201.pdf Shelf Number: 123062 Keywords: CollaborationParole (U.S.)Parole OfficersParoleesPartnerships |
Author: Law Enforcement-Private Security Consortium Title: Operation Partnership: Trends and Practices in Law Enforcement and Private Security Collaborations Summary: This report was produced to help law enforcement and private security organizations develop and operate effective partnerships. It provides guidelines and analysis—supported by examples from partnerships throughout the nation—of trends, innovative practices, obstacles, lessons learned, and results. The law enforcement-private security (LE-PS) partnerships featured here were formed or expanded to address a range of critical needs: to avert or respond to a terrorist attack, support urban downtown revitalization, marshal resources to combat financial crimes, compensate for law enforcement budget cuts, improve safety at special events, improve security for the nation’s infrastructure, and bring community policing approaches and new resources to bear on crimes against residents and businesses. Many of the partnerships have been able to measure success not only by meetings and exchanges of information but also by crimes prevented and solved. Key Issues and Questions Many in law enforcement and private security are already convinced, at least in a general sense, that greater collaboration is needed. To initiate a partnership or take one to a higher level, though, they need more information about what is involved and what results they can expect from their investments of time and effort. For example: How are effective LE-PS partnerships formed, organized, and sustained? How can leadership and responsibilities best be shared in LE-PS partnerships? How can partners and potential partners address the trust and legal issues that challenge the exchange of vital information? What factors make the greatest contributions to partnership success? What are the most important lessons to be taken from partnerships that are meeting and exceeding their goals and from those that are not? What remains to be done to continually improve communication, professionalism, and results? This report is geared toward law enforcement managers and security directors who want to develop new partnerships or enhance existing ones. It is organized to let readers quickly turn to the issues, examples, and resources most relevant to them. At the same time, it strives for a comprehensive treatment of the topic. It includes diverse partnership models, with enough detail to understand their objectives and operating environments, and often the challenges. The underlying message is that the challenges are worth tackling. Many LE-PS partnerships have achieved impressive results. The report is also intended for government and private-sector policymakers at the local, state, and national levels, and for leaders and members of associations that support law enforcement and security professionals. Their commitment to LE-PS collaboration has a direct bearing on what the partnerships can accomplish. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2009. 138p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 2, 2011 at: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/ric/ResourceDetail.aspx?RID=534 Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/ric/ResourceDetail.aspx?RID=534 Shelf Number: 123218 Keywords: CollaborationLaw Enforcement PartnershipsPrivate Security |
Author: McCampbell, Michael S. Title: The Collaboration Toolkit for Community Organizations: Effective Strategies to Partner with Law Enforcement Summary: The goal of this toolkit is to help community organizations accomplish the following objectives: - Strengthen partnerships between the community and law enforcement; - Further the community's role as a partner in crime reduction efforts; - Identify and address social issues that diminish the quality of life and threaten public safety in communities; - Link those in need to services and resources that currently exist in the community. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2010. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 9, 2012 at: http://www.ojp.gov/fbnp/pdfs/Collaboration_Toolkit.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.ojp.gov/fbnp/pdfs/Collaboration_Toolkit.pdf Shelf Number: 124911 Keywords: CollaborationPartnershipsPolice-Community Relations |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Profile of the DuPage County Metropolitan Enforcement Group Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the ICJIA profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the DuPage County Metropolitan Enforcement Group (DUMEG), which covers DuPage County with an estimated total population of 932,541 in 2010. In 2011, 23 local police agencies participated in DUMEG. These agencies served more than two-thirds, or 69 percent, of the population in DuPage County. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Twelve officers and one State’s Attorney Inspector were assigned to DUMEG in 2011, nine of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and three from the Illinois State Police (ISP).These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 9, 2012 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/DuPage_MEG_Profile_042012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/DuPage_MEG_Profile_042012.pdf Shelf Number: 125230 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Braga, Anthony A. Title: The Effects of Summary: A number of American police departments have been experimenting with new problem-oriented policing frameworks to prevent gang and group-involved violence generally known as the “pulling levers” focused deterrence strategies. Focused deterrence strategies honor core deterrence ideas, such as increasing risks faced by offenders, while finding new and creative ways of deploying traditional and non-traditional law enforcement tools to do so, such as directly communicating incentives and disincentives to targeted offenders. Pioneered in Boston to halt serious gang violence, the focused deterrence framework has been applied in many American cities through federally sponsored violence prevention programs. In its simplest form, the approach consists of selecting a particular crime problem, such as gang homicide; convening an interagency working group of law enforcement, social-service, and community-based practitioners; conducting research to identify key offenders, groups, and behavior patterns; framing a response to offenders and groups of offenders that uses a varied menu of sanctions (“pulling levers”) to stop them from continuing their violent behavior; focusing social services and community resources on targeted offenders and groups to match law enforcement prevention efforts; and directly and repeatedly communicating with offenders to make them understand why they are receiving this special attention. These new strategic approaches have been applied to a range of crime problems, such as overt drug markets and individual repeat offenders, and have shown promising results in the reduction of crime. Details: Oslo, Norway: The Campbell Collaboration, 2012. 91p. Source: Internet Resource: Campbell Systematic Review 2012:6: Accessed May 9, 2012 at: www.campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/1918/ Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 125231 Keywords: CollaborationCrime PreventionFocused Deterrence StrategiesGang ViolenceProblem-Oriented Policing (U.S.)Pulling LeversViolent Crime |
Author: Schmitz, Connie C. Title: The Ramsey County All Children Excel (ACE) Program: A Comprehensive Process Evaluation. Interim Report Summary: The Ramsey County ACE program is a long-term intervention program for children under 10 who are found to be at high risk for serious, violent, and chronic juvenile delinquency. Founded in late 1999, ACE serves our society’s most vulnerable population of children: that is, those who have committed a chargeable offense at a very young age and who come from multi-generational, multi-problem families. Such children are estimated to have a 50% base rate of risk for becoming chronic juvenile offenders. In working with ACE children and their families, ACE takes a broad public health, intensive case management approach. Through an inter-agency service delivery team, the resources of multiple county departments, police, schools, and community agencies are coordinated on an individual basis. Child and family case management is provided weekly by community workers from the time of the child’s initial screening until age 18. The goals of ACE are to reduce problem behaviors, to increase school bonding and success, and to prevent the children from entering the juvenile justice system. Research and evaluation has long been a core feature of the ACE program. This current evaluation was undertaken in order to help the ACE program further refine the community agency portion of the ACE long-term intervention and develop a Healthy Development Curriculum and Staffing Guide. The evaluation was considered important and timely for a number of reasons: The ACE intervention had been implemented by several different community agencies and case workers since 1999. Over time, substantive differences had emerged between the programs as implemented by the two main agencies (the YWCA and St. Paul Youth Services). This led to important questions about the comparative efficacy of their two approaches. Case management is believed to constitute the “heart of the ACE intervention.” Yet the widely varying skills of case workers and the “un-chartered waters” of case management itself called for greater examination. After three years of operation and data collection, the ACE program was better positioned to look at preliminary youth outcomes. While program staff believed strongly that case management (when done well) “works,” they sought more tangible evidence of that belief. This report describes the work of an evaluation team, hired in January of 2004, to conduct a comprehensive process evaluation. Using qualitative and quantitative methods of inquiry, the evaluation team structured their work into five components. The five components were to: 1. Describe the ACE long-term case management model in terms of its history, current status, and underlying model. 2. Integrate all of the available data on ACE youth and program implementation in order to conduct subsequent sub-studies of interest. 3. Assess the psychometric properties of the ACE Risk Factor Profile (the initial screening tool and placement procedure). To do this, the team analyzed data on youth who were placed into short-term interventions (STI) as well as data on youth who were placed into the ACE long-term intervention (LTI). 4. Compare the YWCA and the St. Paul Youth Services in terms of their program implementation and youth outcomes. 5. Determine the extent to which ACE case management reduces delinquency outcomes, after taking initial risk factors and demographic characteristics into account. In these analyses, “delinquency outcomes” was defined as charged offenses that youth committed six or more months after their initial screening and placement into the short or long-term intervention. Details: Minneapolis: Professional Evaluation Services and Professional Data Analysts, Inc., 2004. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 10, 2012 at: http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/NR/rdonlyres/82A097AE-978C-4F63-9C68-30B6829A7A2F/1750/ACE_Interim_Report.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/NR/rdonlyres/82A097AE-978C-4F63-9C68-30B6829A7A2F/1750/ACE_Interim_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 125241 Keywords: Case Management, JuvenilesCollaborationDelinquency Prevention (Minnesota)Juvenile Offenders |
Author: Turley, Caroline Title: Delivering Neighbourhood Policing in Partnership Summary: This report describes the nature of neighbourhood policing partnerships between neighbourhood policing teams (NPTs), partner agencies and residents in six local areas which were identified as having a strongly embedded partnership approach. The research is based on interviews with local partners and focus groups with residents conducted in these six areas between January and August 2010. The report sets out the perceived benefits of delivering neighbourhood policing in partnership and offers some advice to practitioners on how to work effectively in partnership, and how to overcome key barriers. The findings may also be informative for Police and Crime Commissioners in thinking about how local policing can best be delivered. Details: London: Home Office, 2012. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report 61: Accessed May 23, 2012 at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr61?view=Binary Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr61?view=Binary Shelf Number: 125315 Keywords: CollaborationNeighborhood Policing (U.K.)PartnershipsPolice-Community Relations |
Author: Charlton, Michelle Title: Practitioners' Perceptions of the Role of Neighbourhood Crime and Justice Co-ordinators Summary: Thie study provides findings from interviews held with community safety and criminal justice practitioners in 9 of the 60 local authority areas where Neighbourhood Crime and Justice co-ordinators were introduced. The purpose of the study was to identify what benefits the Neighbourhood Crime and Justice co-ordinators had delivered, and what made the role effective. In general, the research has suggested that the role was perceived as having a positive effect, with practitioners identifying a range of benefits of the role, though this was not a universal view. Whilst central funding for the role is no longer available, some partners suggested that the most useful aspects of the role could continue by being absorbed into other posts. A number of recommendations emerge from the study, which may help to inform local areas and Police and Crime Commissioners on how best to set up an NCJ co-ordinator or a similar role to maximise its effectiveness. Details: London: Home Office, 2012. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report 62: Accessed May 23, 2012 at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr62?view=Binary Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr62?view=Binary Shelf Number: 125316 Keywords: CollaborationPartnershipsPolice-Community Relations |
Author: DeMichele, Matthew Title: APPA's C.A.R.E. Model: A Framework for Collaboration, Analysis, Reentry, and Evaluation: A Response to Street Gang Violence Summary: Recognizing the continued prevalence of crime in local communities, the U.S. Department of Justice implemented the Project Safe Neighborhoods Initiative (PSN). Previous results from Boston’s Operation Ceasefire, Richmond’s Project Exile, and New York’s Compstat confirmed that crime control is not something that the justice system can accomplish alone. Instead, strong interagency collaborations are needed to incorporate law enforcement, prosecution and the courts, probation and parole, universities, community leaders, and faith-based organizations (McGarrell et al., 2009). These earlier initiatives found that as much as 50 percent of homicides in Boston, Chicago, and Los Angeles were gang related (Blumstein, 1995; Braga, Pierce, McDevitt, Bond, & Cronin, 2008; Pritchard & Evans, 2001), with over 90 percent of these homicides involving a firearm (NGIC, 2009). Interestingly, up to 80 percent of homicide offenders and 56 percent of victims were shown to be probationers and parolees (Bowman, 2005). To assist community corrections agencies in this collaborative endeavor, the American Probation and Parole Association (APPA) created the PSN-inspired C.A.R.E. (collaboration, analysis, reentry, evaluation) model (DeMichele & Matz, 2010; Matz, Lowe, & DeMichele, 2011). APPA provides several policy and practice recommendations to assist probation and parole agencies as they pursue collaborative interventions using the C.A.R.E. framework; whole or in part. Details: Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association/Council of State Governments; Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 2011. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2012 at: http://www.appa-net.org/psn/docs/PSN_CARE_Model.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.appa-net.org/psn/docs/PSN_CARE_Model.pdf Shelf Number: 126557 Keywords: CollaborationGang ViolenceGangs (U.S.)Reentry |
Author: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspection Title: Anti-Social Behaviour: An Inspection of the Criminal Justice System's Approach to Addressing Anti-Social Behaviour in Northern Ireland Summary: Anti-social behaviour can vary in scale from simply being a source of irritation, to being the bane of people’s lives. In its worst form it can lead to the victimisation and intimidation of individuals, families and whole communities, and as such will require a full and rigorous response from the criminal justice system. Equally, there can be times when the behaviour falls short of a breach of criminal law and a more thoughtful problem solving approach is called for. The police have become more focussed on this issue as our society normalises, and the strengthening of Neighbourhood Policing Teams together with the integration of Youth Diversion and Community Safety Officers, has improved the effectiveness of police response. Early and targeted interventions can make a real difference and we have already reported on the need for a clearer, more cohesive strategy in dealing with young people who are at risk of coming into contact with the criminal justice system. The proportionate use of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) has continued, though we make a recommendation to ensure that in so far as they are applied to young people, they should be subject to review every six months. A partnership approach is advocated, and with responsibilities and action now vested in the new Policing and Community Safety Partnerships, we believe that there is an opportunity to build on the previous good work of their predecessors, the Community Safety Partnerships. It is too early to assess how effective they can be without the glue of a statutory duty for public bodies, though we make a strategic recommendation to the Department of Justice (DoJ) to continue to encourage the fulsome participation of both justice and non-justice agencies in helping deliver the Community Safety Strategy. There are some innovative, effective individual schemes operating in parts of Northern Ireland, and it is important that they become exemplars of best practice in order that they can be replicated in other areas. We make a small number of operational recommendations for the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), the Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service (NICTS) and, under the auspices of the DoJ, the Policing and Community Safety Partnerships. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2012. 95p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 11, 2012 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/3e/3e02e6eb-f2bd-446e-a3fe-5b72d4ee8a85.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/3e/3e02e6eb-f2bd-446e-a3fe-5b72d4ee8a85.pdf Shelf Number: 126670 Keywords: Antisocial Behaviour (Northern Ireland, U.K.)CollaborationDisorderly ConductIncivilitiesNuisance Behaviours and DisorderPartnerships |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Profile of the Quad Cities County Metropolitan Enforcement Group Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the ICJIA profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the Quad Cities Metropolitan Enforcement Group (QCMEG), which covers Rock Island County with an estimated total population of 147,546 in 2010. In 2010, 5 local Illinois police agencies and 5 agencies from Iowa participated in the QCMEG. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Twelve officers and one office manager and one criminal analyst were assigned to the QCMEG in 2010, seven of the officers were assigned by participating agencies from Illinois and five from Iowa. These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/QCMEG_092012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/QCMEG_092012.pdf Shelf Number: 126769 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Multi-jurisdictional Task Forces: A Profile of the Blackhawk Area Task Force Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the ICJIA profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the Blackhawk Area Task Force (BATF), which covers Carroll, Henry, Ogle, and Whiteside Counties with an estimated total population of 177,868 in 2010. In 2010, five local police agencies participated in BATF. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Nine officers were assigned to BATF in 2010, six of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and three from the Illinois State Police (ISP).These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/BATF_Profile_082012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/BATF_Profile_082012.pdf Shelf Number: 126770 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Multi-jurisdictional Task Forces: A Profile of the State Line Area Narcotics Team Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the ICJIA profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the State Line Area Narcotics Team (SLANT), which covers two Illinois counties (Stephenson and Winnebago), as well as one Wisconsin county (Green) with an estimated total population of 342,975 in Illinois and 36,842 in Wisconsin in 2010. In 2010, 6 local police agencies participated in SLANT. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Eleven officers were assigned to SLANT in 2010, seven of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and four from the Illinois State Police (ISP). These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/SLANT_Profile_082012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/SLANT_Profile_082012.pdf Shelf Number: 126771 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Multi-jurisdictional Task Forces: A Profile Task Force 6 Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the ICJIA profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the Task Force 6, which covers DeWitt, Livingston, and McLean counties with an estimated total population of 225,083 in 2010. In 2010, six local police agencies participated in Task Force 6. These agencies served more than two-thirds, or 69 percent, of the population in the region. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Six officers were assigned to Task Force 6 in 2010, five of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and one from the Illinois State Police (ISP).These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/TaskForce6_MEG_Aug2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/TaskForce6_MEG_Aug2012.pdf Shelf Number: 126772 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Multi-jurisdictional Task Forces: A Profile of the Multi-County Narcotics Enforcement Group Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the ICJIA profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the Multi-County Narcotics Enforcement Group (MCNEG), which covers Knox, Marshall, Peoria, Stark, Tazewell, and Woodford counties with an estimated total population of 432,105 in 2010. In 2010, eight local police agencies participated in MCNEG. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Ten officers were assigned to MCNEG in 2010, eight of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and two from the Illinois State Police (ISP).These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/MCNEG_092012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/MCNEG_092012.pdf Shelf Number: 126773 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Multi-jurisdictional Task Forces: A Profile of the West Central Illinois Task Force Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the ICJIA profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the West Central Illinois Task Force (WCITF), which covers Adams, Brown, Fulton, Pike, Schuyler, and Warren Counties (WCITF counties) with an estimated total population of 152,790 in 2010. In 2010, six local police agencies participated in WCITF. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Fifteen officers were assigned to WCITF in 2010, eight of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and seven were from the Illinois State Police (ISP).These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/WCITF_MEG_Aug2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/WCITF_MEG_Aug2012.pdf Shelf Number: 126775 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Reichert, Jessica Title: Examining Multi-Jurisdictional Drug Task Force Operations in Illinois Summary: Local police departments across the country struggle to fight drug crime without dedicated resources. Drug task forces were designed to combine resources of many local police departments and provide services across jurisdictions. Illinois’ metropolitan enforcement groups (MEGs) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces are charged with combating mid-level drug crime, including drug distribution and sales. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Officers often work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests. In Illinois in the 1970’s, MEGs were developed through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards play an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer (or their designees) from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to enforcing drug laws and certain weapons offenses, as well as the investigation of street gang-related crimes (Adams, 2012). Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s through the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Drug task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations the way MEGs are (Adams, 2012). In this report, MEGs and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces will be referred to as “drug task forces.” Twenty-two drug task forces operate in Illinois. The Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA) supports these task forces with federal Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grants. In state fiscal year 2011, ICJIA funded 19 drug task forces (Figure 1). In 2011, ICJIA funded 208 drug task force officers and 19 support staff. Three drug task forces receive the majority of their funding through the Illinois State Police. In order to study drug task force operations, ICJIA researchers conducted two focus groups comprised of officers working on ICJIA-funded drug task forces. The goals of the focus groups were to: Provide general information on drug task forces in a published report; and, Identify programmatic issues that can help establish performance measures and strategic priorities. Focus group participants offered information on drug task force goals and priorities, the identification of drug trends, operations, funding, collaboration, and success. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at http://www.icjia.org/public/pdf/ResearchReports/Examining_multi-jurisdictional_drug_task_force_operations_Aug2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.org/public/pdf/ResearchReports/Examining_multi-jurisdictional_drug_task_force_operations_Aug2012.pdf Shelf Number: 126777 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Multi-jurisdictional Task Forces: A Profile of the Vermilion County Metropolitan Enforcement Group Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the ICJIA profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the Vermilion County Metropolitan Enforcement Group (VMEG), which covers Vermilion County with an estimated total population of 8,625 in 2010. In 2010, 2 local police agencies participated in VMEG. This is the only narcotics unit serving Vermilion County. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Eight officers and two support personnel were assigned to VMEG in 2010, four of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and four from the Illinois State Police (ISP).These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2012 at http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/VMEG_Aug2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/VMEG_Aug2012.pdf Shelf Number: 126778 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: von Boemcken, Marc Title: Dealing with Private Security Companies: Options for Development Cooperation in Timor-Leste, Liberia and Peru Summary: Private security industries challenge development cooperation in two ways. On the one hand, they constitute a significant part of the economy and the security sector of many developing countries. Private security thus immediately has an impact on a number of development-related factors, i.e. economic growth, social welfare and overall feelings of public safety. On the other hand, development agencies themselves increasingly rely on the services of private security companies. In some partner countries, missions of the United Nations (UN), bilateral donors, and international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) are even among the principal customers of commercial security services. Hence, they are directly implicated in the wider social and economic effects of the private security industry. How should development actors deal with private security companies? This BICC publication summarizes the main findings from field research on private security companies in three developing countries: Timor-Leste, Liberia and Peru. Each summary focuses on the specific relations between development cooperation and private security. The particular challenges, which the private security industry presents to development agencies, vary from case to case. Based on the country-specific findings, this publication concludes by outlining different options for how development cooperation can successfully align private security companies with more general developmental objectives. Details: Bonn, Germany: Bonn International Center for Conversion, 2012. 7p. Source: BICC Focus 11: Internet Resource: Accessed November 3, 2012 at http://www.bicc.de/uploads/tx_bicctools/BICC_Focus_11.pdf Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www.bicc.de/uploads/tx_bicctools/BICC_Focus_11.pdf Shelf Number: 126864 Keywords: CollaborationEconomic Development (Timor-Leste) (Liberia) (PeruLaw Enforcement PartnershipsPrivate Security (Timor-Leste) (Liberia) (Peru) |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to Fight Drug Crime: Multi-Jurisdictional Task Forces. Profile of the South Central Illinois Drug Task Force Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties. Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests. There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois—metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970’s through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Multi-jurisdictional drug task forces began in the 1980’s using the organizational authority from the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act [5 ILCS 220/1]. Task force policy boards are not governed by legislated structure or composition requirements or restricted by statute in their scope of operations. Periodically, the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA) profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. All current and previous profiles can be accessed on the ICJIA’s website: http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This profile focuses on the South Central Illinois Drug Task Force (SCIDTF), which covers Bond, Calhoun, Greene, Jersey, Macoupin, and Montgomery Counties with an estimated total population of 137,597 in 2010. In 2010, 2 local police agencies participated in SCIDTF. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Seven officers and one office manager were assigned to SCIDTF in 2010, five of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and two from the Illinois State Police (ISP).These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 24, 2013 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/SCIDTF_112012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/SCIDTF_112012.pdf Shelf Number: 127375 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Enforcement (Illinois)Partnerships |
Author: Celeste, Gabriella Title: The Bridge to Somewhere: How Research Made its Way into Legislative Juvenile Justice Reform in Ohio: A Case Study Summary: In 2011, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed House Bill 86, landmark legislation that established juvenile justice reforms based on evidence-based practices and adolescent development research. This legislative achievement, which includes significant cost savings, was the result of a collaborative policy change model that relied upon critical engagement among experts, practitioners, key stakeholders, advocates, and policymakers. The case study, “The Bridge to Somewhere: How Research Made its Way into Legislative Juvenile Justice Reform in Ohio,” explores what led to passage of House Bill 86. On January 14, the Schubert Center published this case study describing the partners, the collaborative model, and key elements in achieving this major policy change. The case study is meant to be a learning tool for those interested in understanding a collaborative approach to policy change and potentially pursuing similar efforts in the future. The intended audience includes scholars and students in the areas of public policy and political science, researchers, practitioners, philanthropic organizations, public agencies, advocates, lobbyists, and policymakers. The center hopes its partners and colleagues will find the case study useful when considering strategies to promote compelling, research-based, cost-effective policy change with positive outcomes for young people, families, and communities. Details: Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve University, Schubert Center for Child Studies, 2012. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2013 at: http://schubert.case.edu/Case_Study_Release.aspx Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://schubert.case.edu/Case_Study_Release.aspx Shelf Number: 128014 Keywords: CollaborationEvidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice Systems (Ohio, U.S.)Partnerships |
Author: Hipple, Natalie Kroovand Title: Project Safe Neighborhoods Case Study Report: District of Nebraska Summary: Unlike the other initiatives which were created in local jurisdictions, Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) was created as a national program. PSN was designed in 2001 by officials in the U.S. Department of Justice. PSN was coordinated through 93 U.S. Attorneys’ Offices that encompass the United States and its territories. United States Attorneys are federal prosecutors who are considered the chief law enforcement official within each federal jurisdiction. In designing PSN, the U.S. Department of Justice emphasized five core components: partnerships, strategic planning, training, outreach, and accountability. PSN proposed to increase partnerships between federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies through the formation of a local gun crime reduction task force. Additionally, PSN encouraged establishing partnerships with other sectors of local government, social services, community groups, and citizens to increase resources for gun crime prevention components as well as to increase the legitimacy of interventions. The strategic planning and problem solving component of PSN was designed to help jurisdictions tailor PSN to the local context. Specifically, PSN provided resources for the inclusion of a research partner. The research partner would work with the PSN task force to analyze the local gun crime problem and to share the findings with the task force for the development of a proactive plan for gun crime reduction. And, the research partner would assist in the ongoing assessment of the program implementation and provide feedback to the task force. Finally, PSN included a significant commitment of resources to support training and community outreach. Although there was variation across the 93 PSN task forces,2 the provided training emphasized several common features. First, it was a focused deterrence model. Rather than increasing the threat of sanctions for all offenders, this program was highly focused on reducing gun crime. Additionally, emphasis was placed on understanding the patterns of gun crime in the local jurisdiction so that enforcement and prevention resources could be directed to the people, places, and contexts generating gun crime. One example of an intervention that emerged in several communities was the use of a data driven approach to identify high risk, high volume, violent offenders for whom enforcement resources would be concentrated (Bynum et al., 2006). Second, resources were provided to communicate the deterrent message to those at risk for engaging in gun crime as both offenders and victims. This included a media campaign of risk messages through a variety of outlets (e.g., radio, television, billboards, posters in jails and community centers). Third, resources were provided for the development of intervention and prevention programs. Again, there was wide variation across the various PSN sites in terms of the nature of these programs. Following the Boston and Indianapolis programs described above, a number of sites attempted combine a deterrence message with social support opportunities specifically tailored to high risk offenders. This was a common PSN strategy using direct communication to at-risk individuals through what has become known as offender notification meetings (McDevitt et al., 2006). In addition to providing support (e.g., mentoring, vocational training, job preparation) these meetings were intended to increase the sense of fairness and legitimacy of the overall approach. Not only were these individuals being told to stop carrying guns and to stop the violence but they were being offered support and the hope for an alternative set of choices. The current repon focuses on the District of Nebraska. Similar to PSN in the Eastern District of Missouri and in the District ofMassaehusetts, PSN in Nebraska built upon prior experience with multi-agency strategic problem solving through the district's panicipation as an informal participant in the SACS I initiative. Details: East Lansing, MI: School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University, 2007. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Case Study 9: Accessed April 22, 2013 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/241727.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/241727.pdf Shelf Number: 128426 Keywords: CollaborationGun Violence (Nebraska)Media CampaignsPartnershipsProject Safe NeighborhoodsViolence PreventionYouth Violence |
Author: Jain, Sonia Title: Systems Change Across Sectors: A Collaborative Community-Based Approach to Improving Outcomes for Reentry Youth in Oakland Summary: The City of Oakland in Alameda County, California, confronts some of our nation’s most critical juvenile crime and recidivism challenges. In response, key city, county, state and community partners have developed and initiated three phases of Juvenile Justice Reform since 2005. For phase 1, these partners designed and built a new juvenile facility, the Juvenile Justice Center (JJC), and implemented innovative programming. In phase 2, they created a transition center at the JJC. For Phase 3, they developed and implemented a comprehensive system of community reentry support for juvenile offenders. This report highlights results and recommendations from a process evaluation of the Phase 3 implemented juvenile reentry system in Oakland. Details: Oakland, CA: City of Oakland Department of Human Services; WestEd, 2013. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2013 at: http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Second-Chance-Process-Eval-Report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Second-Chance-Process-Eval-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 129447 Keywords: CollaborationJuvenile CrimeJuvenile GangsJuvenile Offenders (California, U.S.)Juvenile Reentry |
Author: Baker, David Title: A Snapshot of the Policing Practitioner and Academic Nexus: The Search for Enhanced Public Safety and Security Summary: This article explores how policing practitioners and academics at the 2011 IPES meeting shared collaborative reflections and creative responses in order to improve public safety and security. Debate focused on how best to establish safer communities, but participants conceded that this will always remain a work-in-progress. This article argues that community trust and confidence in police and police having trust in communities are essential ingredients for nurturing police-community partnerships and public safety. A range of issues is discussed: evidence-based policing, research and practice interconnection, citizen surveys and observations, best practice in public order policing, global security, and crime prevention initiatives. Details: Geneva, SWIT: Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), 2013. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper no. 47: Accessed July 22, 2013 at: http://www.dcaf.ch/Publications/IPES-DCAF-Working-Paper-Series Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://www.dcaf.ch/Publications/IPES-DCAF-Working-Paper-Series Shelf Number: 129482 Keywords: CollaborationPolice OfficersPolice-Community RelationsPublic Safety and Security |
Author: Kopak, Albert M. Title: Innovations in Information Sharing: An Overview of an Initiative at Sarasota County Florida Sheriff’s Office Summary: Advancements in computer technology have benefitted police with a wealth of information, but they are often still ineffective in their practices because much of this information goes unused. The Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office is on the forefront of the information sharing movement among law enforcement agencies with their adaptation of Microsoft SharePoint®. This application gives the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office an innovative way to provide actionable information to strategically guide their law enforcement activities. This overview details how the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office has collaborated with surrounding law enforcement and legal agencies to enhance the entire region’s police practices. Details: International Police Executive Symposium, 2013. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper no. 48: Accessed August 8, 2013 at: http://www.ipes.info/WPS/WPS_No_48.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.ipes.info/WPS/WPS_No_48.pdf Shelf Number: 129603 Keywords: CollaborationInformation Systems (U.S.)Information TechnologyPolice Technology |
Author: Campbell, Rebecca Title: Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) Implementation and Collaborative Process: What Works Best for the Criminal Justice System Summary: Historically, community services for sexual assault victims have been uncoordinated and inadequate (Martin, 2005). Sexual Assault Response Teams (SARTs) were created to coordinate efforts of the legal, medical, and mental health systems, and rape crisis centers, in order to improve victims' help-seeking experiences and legal outcomes. SARTs are espoused as best practice and have been adopted widely across the U.S. (DOJ, 2013; Ledray, 2001). Descriptive research (using convenience sampling) suggests that how SARTs are structured varies from community to community (Zajac, 2006). However, studies have not yet examined how differences in SARTs' structure relate to their effectiveness (Greeson & Campbell, 2013). To address this gap, Study 1 sought to (1) use random sampling methods to identify a nationally representative sample of 172 SARTs; (2) understand the structure and functioning of U.S. SARTs; (3) identify patterns of SART implementation; and (4) examine how these patterns relate to SARTs' perceived effectiveness at improving victim and legal outcomes. Consistent with prior studies of domestic violence coordinating councils, this study examined SART members' perceptions of their SARTs' effectiveness. Specific features of SARTs' structure that were examined included: membership breadth (the number of different stakeholder groups that participated in the collaboration) and implementation (their formalization and use of recommended collaborative activities). Findings confirmed that U.S. SARTs vary in their structure. Using cluster analysis, three types of SARTs were identified. SARTs in the "Low Adopters" cluster (38% of the sample) utilized fewer formal structures, were less likely to institutionalize multidisciplinary trainings and policy/protocol review into their collaboration, and did not engage in program evaluation. The "High Adopters except Evaluation" cluster SARTs (47%) used more formal structures and had greater institutionalization of multidisciplinary trainings and policy/protocol review; however, none of them engaged in program evaluation. The "High Adopters plus Evaluation" cluster (16%) also used more formal structures and had greater institutionalization of multidisciplinary trainings and policy/protocol review, and in addition, engaged in program evaluation. These clusters, and other features of the SARTs and their communities, were examined as predictors of SARTs' perceived effectiveness. The "High Adopters plus Program Evaluation" cluster was perceived as more effective than the "Low Adopters" cluster on all four effectiveness measures. SARTs in the "High Adopters plus Program Evaluation" group perceive themselves as more effective on one of the four domain of effectiveness than SARTs in the "High Adopters except Evaluation" cluster. In addition, active membership from a greater number of sexual assault stakeholder groups was associated with higher perceived effectiveness on all three forms of legal effectiveness. These findings suggest that formalization, regular collaborative processes, and broad active membership from diverse stakeholder groups are key components of successful SARTs. SARTs in the Study 1 "High Adopters plus Evaluation" cluster--the most effective cluster--were then selected to participate in a study of model SARTs. Specifically, in Study 2, we used social network analysis to examine the structure of inter-organizational relationships within model SARTs. Within each SART, all organizations were asked about their relationships with all other organizations that participated in their team (specifically, frequency of communication, the extent to which they felt that other organizations valued their role, and the extent to which they felt that other organizations were a resource to their own organization's work). Findings are based on the three SARTs that fully participated. Results revealed a high degree of connection between organizations both within and across sectors (criminal justice vs. not) in model SARTs. However, findings also revealed occasional stratification of relationships within SARTs. Finally, there was evidence that inter-organizational relationships tended to be mutual, and the three types of relationships were positively correlated with one another. Details: East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, 2013. 226p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 27, 2014 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243829.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243829.pdf Shelf Number: 131810 Keywords: CollaborationInteragency CooperationRapeSexual AssaultSexual Assault Response TeamsVictim Services |
Author: Alpert, Geoffrey P. Title: Building Bridges Between Police Researchers and Practitioners: Agents of Change in a Complex World Summary: The present study uses a mixed-methods research strategy to examine police practitioner-researcher partnerships. The study has two primary research objectives: (1) examine the prevalence of police practitioner-researcher partnerships in the United States; and (2) examine the factors that prevent or facilitate the development and sustainability of police practitioner-researcher partnerships. The subsequent goals to be accomplished through these objectives are as follows: (1) identify the current level of participation in partnerships with researchers among law enforcement agencies; (2) identify the characteristics of agencies who participate in these partnerships; and (3) gain an understanding of the important lessons learned from practitioners and researchers for forming these partnerships in order to inform future participants in these efforts. The study employs three data-collection strategies to accomplish these objectives and goals. First, a nationally-representative sample of law enforcement agencies was surveyed to capture the prevalence of police practitioner-researcher partnerships and associated information. Second, practitioner and researcher representatives from 89 separate partnerships were interviewed, which were identified through the national survey. The interviews were the primary data-collection effort for gaining insight into the barriers to and facilitators of the development and sustainability of these partnerships, as well as the benefits of partnering. Third, four case studies were conducted on model partnerships that were identified during interviews with practitioners and researchers. While these case studies provide a detailed look at sustainable partnerships, the primary purpose of the case studies is to support a multimedia component of this study. The videos that represent this multimedia component convey important information from one peer to another. This strategy is directed to the practitioner community in order to facilitate dissemination of these important relationships by credible sources. This strategy is directed to the practitioner community in order to facilitate dissemination of these important relationships by credible sources. The national survey revealed that the level of participation in partnerships with researchers by law enforcement agencies is low overall, with only 32% of responding agencies reporting involvement in these relationships. Further examination of the characteristics of these partnerships shows overall participation in formal, short-term and long-term partnerships were less common, 18% and 10% respectively. Participation in either of these formal partnerships is correlated with the size of the agency. Partnerships are also more common among municipal police departments and state law enforcement agencies compared to county agencies. Lastly, agencies which report they use information sources produced by the research community are more likely to engage in partnerships, particularly for those agencies who reported the use of information provided by the National Institute of Justice. The practitioner and researcher interviews provided important lessons and informal rules necessary to engaging in successful partnerships, which can be grouped into three general areas. First, there are structural characteristics that partners have to negotiate, such as how the partnership will be supported, geographic proximity of partners, permanency of key participants, and the institutional demands for both partners. Second, both parties need to have values that orient them to partnership participation. The agency and its members need to see value in the incorporation of research and involvement of outside researchers, as well as being open to changing the way they do business. The researcher has to emphasize the desire to help and not judge the agency, have a shared stake in improving the agency and community, and value the knowledge of practitioners. Third, both parties have to effectively manage their interpersonal relationship. This involves establishing trust between partnership members and effective and ongoing communication about the expectations, roles, and products of the partnership process. Details: Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2013. 297p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 19, 2014 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244345.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244345.pdf Shelf Number: 132080 Keywords: CollaborationInteragency Cooperation Police Administration Police Research |
Author: Braga, Anthony A. Title: SMART Approaches to Reducing Gun Violence Summary: Despite significant decreases in crime nationwide, America continues to experience criminal gun violence at extraordinarily high levels - more than 11,000 individuals are murdered by firearms and 75,000 are treated for nonfatal gunshot wounds at hospitals annually, and these incidents are certainly undercounted in our statistics. Beyond the devastating toll measured in injuries and loss of life, gun violence also imposes a heavy burden on our standard of living, from increased fear and reduced quality of life to depressed property values. While the public tends to focus its attention on mass shootings, the most common forms of gun violence occur on a daily basis involving gang members, violent youth, and others involved in crime. As a result, local police departments are in a strategic position on the front lines poised to curb or even prevent gun crime, injuries, and deaths. In response, a number of departments are experimenting with new, evidence-based strategies and tactics aimed at addressing the chronic and pervasive gun violence problem. Yet, the question remains: Can the police effectively reduce and prevent gun crimes and associated violence? The Smart Policing Initiative (SPI) emerged on the law enforcement landscape in 2009. With SPI, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) sought to identify effective and efficient solutions to chronic local crime problems, including gun violence. This program provides a valuable opportunity for local police agencies to partner with academic researchers and rigorously assess whether gun violence reduction strategies have the intended effects on crime, violence, and communities. Indeed, nine of thirty-five SPI-funded police agencies nationwide have targeted gun violence as part of their Smart Policing Initiatives (Boston, MA; Los Angeles, CA; Baltimore, MD; Joliet, IL; Las Vegas, NV; Cambridge/Somerville/Everett, MA; Kansas City, MO; Rochester, NY; and East Palo Alto, CA). This Spotlight report reviews the common strategies that police have employed across those nine sites. These evidence-based strategies, which reflect core tenets of the SPI, are grounded in a risk-focused framework that recognizes the importance of targeting efforts on the places, people, and times at greatest threat of violence. The common strategies identified for implementation in the nine SPI sites include: - Targeting persistent gun violence hot spots - Targeting prolific offenders in persistent hot spots - Employing new technologies and advanced crime analysis - Engaging a wide range of collaborative partners - Conducting advanced problem analysis We prepared the Gun Violence Spotlight to further the national conversation on the gun violence problem and to provide a resource for local officials seeking to make informed, evidence-based decisions regarding their prevention, intervention, and suppression efforts. Though many of the SPI projects are ongoing, several sites have produced important findings, derived through rigorous research methodologies, which indicate that their interventions have effectively reduced gun violence: - Boston's problem-oriented strategy focusing on micro-level hot spots reduced aggravated assaults by more than 15 percent, violent crime by more than 17 percent, and robberies by more than 19 percent. - Baltimore's strategy of targeted enforcement within selected crime hot spots reduced homicides by 27 percent; and a related focused deterrence intervention reduced non-fatal shootings in one neighborhood by 40 percent. - Baltimore's Gun Offender Registry reduced gun-related re-offending risks among participants by 92 percent. - Los Angeles' LASER initiative, which combined place and offender strategies with the use of criminal intelligence data, reduced homicides by more than 22 percent per month in the target division (Newton), and gun crimes by 5 percent in each reporting district of the target division. The Boston, Baltimore, and Los Angeles findings are certainly encouraging, and they strongly suggest that the SPI has generated significant declines in gun crime and related violence. Results for other SPI sites will be forthcoming in the near future. This Spotlight identifies a number of next steps for addressing gun violence, most notably the development of supply-side approaches that disrupt illicit gun supply lines and combat illegal gun sales. Details: Washington, DC: CNA Analysis & Solutions, 2014. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Smart Policing Initiative Spotlight Report: Accessed April 21, 2014 at: http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/research/SPIGunViolenceSpotlight.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/research/SPIGunViolenceSpotlight.pdf Shelf Number: 132098 Keywords: CollaborationCrime Prevention ProgramsGun ControlGun ViolenceHot SpotsIllegal MarketsPartnershipsViolent Crime |
Author: Webster, Julianne Title: Innovative Police Responses to Drug Problems: Exploring a Third-Party Policing Partnership Between Police and Community Pharmacy Summary: Third-party policing partnerships are a policing innovation increasingly discussed in the crime prevention literature, but what we actually know about third-party policing partnerships is extremely limited. In the main, studies examine voluntary community-oriented partnerships, 'hot-spots' approaches and strategies utilising legal-levers to mobilise third-parties to perform a crime prevention or crime control response. Typically, the results of such studies are observed through changes to crime and disorder concerning the particular intervention at the designated place. However rarely do studies seek to understand the processes underpinning the development and implementation of third-party policing partnerships which are mandated by regulation; the role of third-parties; the role of regulation in the mobilisation of the partnership; the impact of the intervention for the third-party; or the effectiveness of the strategy from the perspective of the regulated third-parties. This dissertation seeks to further understand how such third-party policing partnerships are developed; how they are implemented; the nature of their impact; and how they perform against their crime control objectives. This study of third-party policing partnerships draws upon a case study of a policing partnership implemented to control access to pseudoephedrine products from community pharmacies. Products containing pseudoephedrine are utilised as a key precursor chemical in the domestic manufacture of illicit synthetic drugs such as methylamphetamine in clandestine laboratories. Hence the diversion of these products for non-therapeutic purposes represents a serious crime problem. Details: Mt. Gravatt, QLD: Griffith University, Key Centre for Ethics, Law, Justice and Governance, 2012. 350p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed April 22, 2014 at: https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/file/de2de64f-4945-5f94-96ea-b1615c5f831c/1/Webster_2012_02Thesis.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/file/de2de64f-4945-5f94-96ea-b1615c5f831c/1/Webster_2012_02Thesis.pdf Shelf Number: 132110 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug EnforcementPartnershipsThird-Party Policing |
Author: Bynum, Timothy Title: Evaluation of a Comprehensive Approach to Reducing Gun Violence in Detroit Summary: Increasingly criminal justice agencies are integrating "data based" approaches into their operational strategies. This "new" model of criminal justice suggests that analysis of data on recent crime and violence incidents can lead to a more focused and targeted effort than previous enforcement efforts. Through such efforts, individuals, groups, and locations that exhibit a high level of gun violence within a limited geographic area are identified and a variety of intervention are then implemented. These interventions typically include both enforcement as well as offender focused interventions. These efforts differ from prior enforcement strategies in that they emphasize the integration of a problem analysis component in which data analysis is used to identify the patterns of gun violence in a small target area and enforcement resources are concentrated in this area. However, this approach also differs from previous "crackdown" enforcement strategies in that there are also community and offender intervention components that are integral to this model. The community component seeks to identify ways in which the community can be involved in working with law enforcement to reduce gun violence in this area. This is often through increased community meetings, and establishing more frequent and effective means of communication between the community and local law enforcement. In addition, the enforcement strategies used in this model are data and intelligence driven. As such they are focused on identifying the most problematic locations, groups and individuals that are most responsible for gun violence in this community. This report documents the implementation and outcomes of the implementation of Project Safe Neighborhoods in one of the jurisdictions in which this model was first implemented. Details: Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2014. 69p. Source: Accessed May 5, 2014 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244866.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244866.pdf Shelf Number: 132234 Keywords: CollaborationCommunity Crime PreventionGun-Related ViolenceHomicideHot-SpotsIntelligence GatheringIntelligence-Led PolicingProject Safe NeighborhoodsViolent Crime |
Author: Griffiths, Curt Taylor Title: Economics of Policing: Baseline for Policing Research in Canada Summary: In contrast to other countries, Canadian police services, governments, research institutions and other policing stakeholders are not capitalizing on the many opportunities for better collaboration on policing research issues. In addition, with a few notable exceptions, Canadian police services have not invested in developing the capacity to conduct policing research that focuses on outcomes rather than outputs. As a result, police service operational and organizational strategies are not benefiting from evidence-based research and the intended impact may not be fully realized. To improve this situation, leading police scholars in Canada have called for the creation of a coordinating body to bring stakeholders together to conduct, disseminate and use policing research. The creation of a national, credible, broad-based and representative policing research centre is widely viewed as the cornerstone to any strategy to overcome many of the noted challenges. Growth in the cost of police service is a major concern for the Canadian policing community. In 2011 alone, the total operating expenditure for Canadian local policing was roughly $13 billion. As a result, police services across Canada are facing increased fiscal challenges while attempting to balance the need to combat crime. To respond to this challenge, Canadian police services will need to consider a new management paradigm focusing on the use of evidence-based research to help: 1) develop efficient and effective law enforcement strategies; 2) generate improved outcomes to make our communities safer; and 3) better control policing costs. This research paper examines the state of police research in Canada. More specifically, it assesses the extent to which policing research is carried out in Canada, by whom and how policing research is shared nationally. Structured interviews with police services, the private sector, not-for-profit organizations and universities across Canada were carried out. The views of several organizations abroad that conduct police research in the UK, Australia, the Netherlands and the US were also examined to determine how policing research is conducted and networked and to identify international best practices. Lastly, discussions were held with a number of participants at the National Summit on the Economics of Policing, held in Ottawa in January 2013, to solicit their views on police research in Canada. Public Safety Canada funded this study to understand the state of policing research in Canada and to benchmark the Canadian situation in comparison to other countries. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2014. 90p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 4, 2014 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/bsln-plcng-rsrch/bsln-plcng-rsrch-en.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Canada URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/bsln-plcng-rsrch/bsln-plcng-rsrch-en.pdf Shelf Number: 132876 Keywords: CollaborationCosts of Criminal Justice Evidence-Based Practices Police Research Policing (Canada) |
Author: Martin-Roethele, Chelsie Title: Police Innovation: Enhancing Research and Analysis Capacity through Smart Policing Summary: Much research has been done on innovations in policing over the past few decades. However, little research has been done on the Smart Policing Initiative, the latest innovation in economically and financially effective crime prevention and reduction strategies. One of the key aspects of the Smart Policing Initiative is the collaboration of police agencies and research partners to more effectively address specific crime issues. The current study uses mean score comparisons and qualitative responses to evaluate this partnership to determine the extent of its value and effect. It also seeks to determine the areas of police agency crime analysis and research units that are most in need of enhancement. Findings are that the research partners are actively involved in a range of aspects involved in problem solving under the Smart Policing Initiative, and that they have positively influenced police agencies' research and crime analysis functions, and to a lesser extent, have positively impacted police agencies' tactical operations. Additionally, personnel, technology, and training were found to be the main areas of the crime analysis and research units that still need to be enhanced. Details: Phoenix: Arizona State University, 2013. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed August 23, 2014 at: http://cvpcs.asu.edu/products/police-innovation-enhancing-research-and-analysis-capacity-through-smart-policing Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://cvpcs.asu.edu/products/police-innovation-enhancing-research-and-analysis-capacity-through-smart-policing Shelf Number: 133130 Keywords: CollaborationCrime AnalysisPartnershipsPolicingPolicing Innovation |
Author: United Nations Human Settlements Programme Title: Diagnosis of Insecurity Report in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea Summary: In 2002, the Government of Papua New Guinea with the support of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and technical assistance from the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) launched the Safer Port Moresby Initiative with the express aim of addressing the underlying causes of crime that have accompanied the unprecedented urban growth of Port Moresby. The Safer Port Moresby Initiative (SPMI) is a citywide crime prevention initiative that is built on partnerships with public, private and popular (sector) institutions that can contribute towards crime reduction in the city. The initiative is presently being run from the offices of the Department for Community Development, formally known as the Department of Social Welfare and Development and works closely with the City Government (National Capital District Commission - NCDC). Details: Nairobi, Kenya: UN-HABITAT, 2004. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Safer Cities Programme Series 4: Accessed September 12, 2014 at: http://unhabitat.org/publications/diagnosis-of-insecurity-report-in-port-moresby-papua-new-guinea/ Year: 2004 Country: Papua New Guinea URL: http://unhabitat.org/publications/diagnosis-of-insecurity-report-in-port-moresby-papua-new-guinea/ Shelf Number: 133301 Keywords: CollaborationCrime PreventionNeighborhoods and CrimePartnershipsUrban Areas (Papua New Guinea) |
Author: Adams, Sharyn Title: Collaborating to fight drug crime: Profile of the East Central Illinois Task Summary: Drug task forces were developed to more efficiently and effectively fight proliferation of illicit drugs. Local police have jurisdictional restraints making it difficult to combat drug markets extending through multiple cities, and counties (Smith, Novak, Frank, & Travis, 2000). Drug task forces work across jurisdictions and pool resources, knowledge, and personnel. MEGs and task forces are staffed by officers representing federal, state, county, and local police agencies. Drug task force officers work undercover, using confidential sources, to purchase drugs in order to gather the intelligence to make arrests (Reichert, 2012). There are two kinds of drug task forces that operate in Illinois-metropolitan enforcement groups (MEG) and multi-jurisdictional drug task forces. MEGs have been in existence in Illinois since the 1970's through the Intergovernmental Drug Enforcement Act [30 ILCS 715/1]. MEG policy boards engage in an active, formal role in the management of operations. MEG policy boards are required to include an elected official and the chief law enforcement officer, or their designees, from each participating unit of government. An elected official from one of the participating agencies must be designated to act as financial officer of the MEG to receive operational funds. MEG operations are limited to the enforcement of drug laws and delineated weapons offenses and the investigation of street gang-related crimes. Periodically, the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA) profiles Illinois MEGs and task forces to provide a general overview of the drug crime problems in the various jurisdictions and share responses to these problems. These profiles can provide information to MEG and task force directors and policy board members to guide decision-making and the allocation of resources. This profile focuses on the East Central Illinois Task Force (ECITF), which covers Coles, Douglas, and Moultrie counties with an estimated total population of 88,339 in 2010. In 2010, 10 local police agencies participated in ECITF. A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either personnel or financial resources to the task force. Ten officers were assigned to ECITF in 2010, eight of the officers were assigned by participating agencies and two from the Illinois State Police (ISP).These officers are dedicated full-time to the task force and work out of a central task force office. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 9, 2014 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/ECITF_122012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/megprofiles/ECITF_122012.pdf Shelf Number: 133904 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Abuse and Crime (Illinois)Drug EnforcementPartnerships |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary Title: Private Sector Partnering in the Police Services Summary: 1 Police forces in England and Wales have contracted with the private sector for several decades. However, this activity has increased over the last two years as the service responds to the budget reductions required by the 2010 spending review,1 with more forces agreeing high‑value, long-term contracts. 2 Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) has reported on this increase in police/private sector partnering in three publications: Adapting to Austerity (2011), Increasing Efficiency in the Police Service (2012); and Adapting to Austerity: One Year On (2012). These found that: OO private/public partnerships can help forces develop new and more efficient approaches to providing services, but the service was not yet fully exploiting the benefits, and there are also associated risks (Increasing Efficiency in the Police Service); and OO there is a lack of good quality, comparative information on the potential benefits from different private or public sector collaborations (Adapting to Austerity). 3 As a result, HMIC identified a pressing need to share good quality, comparative information on the potential benefits of different private/public sector initiatives. 4 The National Audit Office (NAO) has produced numerous reports examining arrangements between the public and private sector in providing public services. These range from in-depth examinations of specific private finance initiative (PFI) contracts to wider reviews looking at thematic issues such as financing and tendering. The NAO also has a role in scrutinising the value for money of the grants that central government makes to the police service - for example, the NAO published a report looking at police procurement in March 2013. This report described the various types of collaboration forces entered into, including with private sector providers, and made recommendations for how further savings could be achieved. Details: London: HMIC, 2013. 74p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 12, 2015 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/media/private-sector-partnering-in-the-police-service-20130705.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/media/private-sector-partnering-in-the-police-service-20130705.pdf Shelf Number: 134600 Keywords: CollaborationPartnershipsPolicing (U.K.)Private SectorPrivatization |
Author: Great Britain. Cabinet Office Title: Police and Crime Commissioners and Civil Society Summary: This report explores some of the ways that civil society organisations and police and crime commissioners (PCCs) work together. It provides examples to illustrate positive working relationships between PCCs and civil society. It has been compiled through a partnership of the Cabinet Office, Home Office and the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners (APCC). Details: London: Cabinet Office, 2015. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 30, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/416621/PCCs_and_Civil_Society_24_March_2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/416621/PCCs_and_Civil_Society_24_March_2015.pdf Shelf Number: 135076 Keywords: CollaborationPartnerships Policing (U.K.) |
Author: Flannery, Kate Title: Police for collaboration: An independent review of the Warwickshire/West Marcia Strategic Alliance Summary: The global financial crisis in 2007 ushered in the era of austerity that now dominates much of the debate around public services - where do priorities lie, and how much of their cost can the public purse bear? For police forces the impact has been dramatic. The need to adapt policing models to meet changing and growing demands, with little real growth in income, had tested chief officers and police authorities for a number of years. But the coalition government has, since 2010, ramped up these challenges. All forces must now reduce budgets in real terms by up to 20 per cent over the five-year comprehensive spending review period, while attempting to satisfy local communities' demands for traditional/visible policing and transform operational practices to cope with internet-enabled crime that recognises no conventional boundaries. How have forces and Police and Crime Commissioners reacted to this challenge? Unsurprisingly, no silver bullet has been discovered - rather, a menu of options has emerged that encompass internal restructuring, savings programmes, outsourcing, regionalisation (mostly of specialist operations) and collaboration. HM Inspectorate of Constabulary has subjected forces' efforts to independent scrutiny and, while praising the achievement of budget reductions, has been largely critical of the failure to maximise collaborative opportunities. Indeed, it has identified some examples of retrenchment, despite the Home Office's expectation that collaboration would help forces meet the twin pressures of financial constraint and new policing demands. Against this background, the success of the collaboration between Warwickshire and West Mercia is notable. Its origins lie in discussions held in 2010 and early 2011 about the nature and extent of collaboration between the four forces in the West Midlands region. The region had a strong track record of productive working together, especially on specialist operations and protective services, but the four could not agree on how to move the agenda on. Concerned about their future prospects outside a regional collaborative framework, Warwickshire and West Mercia chief officers and police authority chairs agreed to embark on what became known as a 'strategic alliance'. After the dissolution of police authorities the newly elected Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) determined to continue with the alliance. Three years on, the bulk of policing and support services across the two force areas are delivered under unified leadership and processes. As a model of integrated police provision it has much to commend it, offering local people greater protection from harm and value for money. But despite a confidence in the Strategic Alliance and its impact, chief officers and the PCCs did not want to rest on their laurels and invited the Police Foundation to conduct an independent review. This looked critically at both achievements and lessons to be learnt, and identified ways in which the Alliance could progress. The work is summarised in this report, focusing on: - clarifying leadership roles; - strengthening accountability and governance; - securing a cultural identity for the Alliance without losing what is valued about Warwickshire and West Mercia as individual entities; - improving the ability to manage organisational change and - resolving anomalies in structure and processes. Our conclusion is that the Strategic Alliance forged by Warwickshire and West Mercia is a beacon of collaboration that others can learn from, notably the integration of operational policing across force boundaries and the harmonisation of finance, HR and estate services. (A note of caution, however; its success is rooted in similarities of policing environment, culture and working practice that make its full replication elsewhere less than straight forward.) Details: London: Police Foundation, 2015. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 1, 2015 at: http://www.police-foundation.org.uk/uploads/holding/projects/police_force_collaboration.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.police-foundation.org.uk/uploads/holding/projects/police_force_collaboration.pdf Shelf Number: 135834 Keywords: CollaborationPartnershipsPolice AdministrationPolice LegitimacyPolice-Community Relations |
Author: Homel, Peter Title: Understanding the local government role in crime prevention Summary: In Australia, crime prevention is primarily the responsibility of state and territory governments. What is less well understood is the significant role of local government in developing and delivering crime prevention at the community level, although councils have long been involved in helping to create safer communities. This research offers one of the first detailed insights into the valuable contribution made by local government within the multi-layered crime prevention strategies and initiatives which keep Australian communities safe. The Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee of the Parliament of Victoria carried out this research as part of an investigation into locally-based approaches to community safety and crime prevention in 2011. The results of a comprehensive survey of the crime prevention activities of local government authorities across Victoria are examined. This study reveals the issues local government prioritises, the responses they deploy and the challenges that they face, such as gaps in capacity and the need to manage complex relationships between participants who work on local community safety. Findings reveal a system that, while highly variable in sophistication and reach, provides an important platform for improving local community safety. The study also identifies important gaps and opportunities to improve collaboration between government and the private and NGO sectors. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 505: Accessed August 8, 2015 at: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi505.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi505.pdf Shelf Number: 136364 Keywords: CollaborationCommunity ProgramsCommunity SafetyCrime PreventionPartnerships |
Author: Roth, Olivier Title: A Fair Cop? Elected Police Commissioners, Democracy and Local Accountability Summary: The Coalition's White Paper entitled "21st Century Policing" argues for structural changes within the police service, in order to improve local accountability and to foster citizen engagement. The current tripartite arrangement would be replaced by directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners, who would be supported in their duties by newly created Police and Crime Panels. This research paper will analyse some of the issues and tensions that this proposal creates, and will attempt to issue a set of recommendations and principles designed to maximise the benefits that can be derived from its implementation. As a complex and multi-layered issue, policing requires cross-sectoral cooperation and collaboration. Police and Crime Commissioners will therefore have to work in partnership with local authorities and other public bodies, with citizens and communities, and with the newly created National Crime Agency in order to deliver positive policing outcomes. Police and Crime Commissioners should not be able to circumvent these partnership workings, and should therefore be required to consult and work with these entities on a regular basis. This engagement should provide further opportunities for neighbourhoods and citizens to participate in the improvement of crime outcomes. While directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners should improve police visibility and give citizens a channel through which they can address their concerns, there is a risk that electoral considerations could influence the actions and focus of Police and Crime Commissioners, and that these will become too politicised. As a repository of local democracy, Police and Crime Panels should play an important part in this process, and have their functions commensurately increased. A two-thirds majority in Police and Crime Panels should allow them to veto specific key decisions from Police and Crime Commissioners. Reducing bureaucracy is a key part of the Coalition's White Paper, which NLGN fully supports. The use of technology, and a standardisation in processes, could go a long way towards both reducing bureaucracy and collecting comparable data relating to policing outcomes. These should form the basis on which citizens would judge the work that has been done by their Police and Crime Commissioners, and allow them to focus their crime-reducing initiatives on specific problems in delimited areas. Finally, special attention will have to be paid to the costs involved in these reforms. Studies have shown that elections and new structures can be expensive to finance, and mechanisms designed to keep the costs as low as possible will be needed, for example by holding Police and Crime Commissioners elections at the same time as local ones. Details: London; New Local Government Network (NLGN), 2010. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2015 at: http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/nlgn_a_fair_cop.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/nlgn_a_fair_cop.pdf Shelf Number: 136487 Keywords: CollaborationPartnershipsPolice AccountabilityPolice AdministrationPolice LegitimacyPolice PerformancePolice Reform |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary Title: Reshaping policing for the public. A discussion paper from the advisory group on the national debate on policing in austerity Summary: 1.1. The police service and law enforcement agencies in England and Wales are committed to further change so that policing best meets the needs of the public within a climate of continuing budget pressures. 1.2. Further change should be in line with a set of principles which reflect the police's mission to prevent crime and protect the public. The following principles were developed during the course of the national debate: - We will seek to protect the public and keep people safe from harm, especially the most vulnerable members of our communities. This will mean focusing as much on early action to prevent and reduce crime as reacting to crime once it has happened. - We will provide a service that is valued and supported by the public, tailoring the service to individual needs and focusing on the victim. - We will seek to protect ease of access to frontline services by a range of means, including online access and a visible local policing presence that works directly with communities. - We will enhance capabilities and achieve value for money by scaling up specialist capabilities5 and standardising functions where appropriate. This will help to maintain capability and resilience across policing but without losing agility when fighting crime. - We will work in close co-operation with all other organisations involved in public protection to keep communities safe and work with communities so they play their part alongside the police in securing their neighbourhoods. This points towards greater integration between public services, for example through the development of shared public safety plans with single leadership and shared budgets. 1.3. This suggests a possible new framework for policing where: - Local, frontline services accessible to communities provide a 24/7 response; neighbourhood policing focused on problem solving that protects people and prevents bad things from happening and getting communities involved; and local crime investigations. - Frontline services (including the safeguarding6 of vulnerable people and the management of offenders) are provided collaboratively with other local public services involved in community safety, working to a common set of outcomes as part of partnership arrangements. These arrangements should include the ability to share and prioritise time, money and people to achieve effective local outcomes. - Specialist capabilities (such as those within the Strategic Policing Requirement) and areas of operational and criminal justice support are consolidated into cross-force functions7, strategically located and operating to national standards. The most highly specialised capabilities (such as counter-terrorism) should be provided nationally. This would minimise the number of locations required to support an effective police service; allow capabilities common to different policing activities to be deployed flexibly; and preserve access to capabilities for all forces without losing the ability to deploy rapidly on the basis of threat, risk and harm. - Different arrangements for cross-force working will be appropriate depending on the nature of the participating forces. For example, in some areas a larger force might provide the location for these capabilities on behalf of the participating forces, whereas in others, shared capabilities might be added to existing arrangements such as regional organised crime units (ROCUs). This will require further work based on local circumstances and should be an iterative process, focusing first on those areas of specialist capability which should only be provided on a cross-force basis.-Business support functions are provided through greater economies of scale that reflect local circumstances, recognising the opportunities to build scale through local partners, other forces and/or with the private sector. Details: London: HMIC, 2015. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 5, 2015 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/wp-content/uploads/reshaping-policing-for-the-public.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/wp-content/uploads/reshaping-policing-for-the-public.pdf Shelf Number: 136694 Keywords: CollaborationCosts of Criminal JusticePolice Reform |
Author: Guerin, Paul Title: City of Albuquerque, Albuquerque Collaborative on Police-Community Relations Phase One Report Summary: The Institute for Social Research (ISR) at the University of New Mexico was contracted by the City of Albuquerque to assess and evaluate the Albuquerque Collaborative on Police-Community Relations (Collaborative). This contract was finalized in the second half of November 2014. The assessment and evaluation includes a variety of research tasks including the development of a methodology to help collect relevant data to measure participation, the implementation, and results of the Collaborative. The Collaborative process includes three phases which are further described below. This report concludes our research associated with Phase I and a portion of Phase II. This study had two goals. First, to assess the implementation of the Collaborative following the process outlined in City Council Resolution R-2014-052 (Appendix A) and second to provide key themes distilled from the different sources of information described later. These key themes will be used during the Phase 2 Feedback Sessions to help in the drafting of community goals that will be prioritized. In Phase 3 the community goals will be implemented and a committee will be established to monitor and track progress to keep the process moving forward. The Collaborative was created by an Albuquerque City Council Resolution (R-2014-052) sponsored by two City Councilors, Ken Sanchez and Trudy E. Jones, and signed and enacted on June 27, 2014 by the City Council and Mayor. The City of Albuquerque Office of Diversity and Human Rights (ODHR) and the Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) were given the responsibility for implementing the Collaborative following the outlined process described later. This report contains several sections. Following this introduction, we generally describe the Albuquerque Collaborative with a focus on what is outlined in the Albuquerque City Council Resolution and a very limited comparison to the Cincinnati Collaborative after which it is partly patterned. Next, we describe our research methodology that included observations of all the facilitated meetings, a review of the reports completed by the facilitators for each meeting, and a review of other materials including participant evaluation/feedback forms, registrations for the meetings, and sign-in lists for each meeting. We then include an analysis section that reviews the information collected from the different sources of data noted above. Last, we provide our findings and a conclusion. Details: Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research, 2015. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 18, 2015 at: http://isr.unm.edu/reports/2015/city-of-albuquerque,-albuquerque-collaborative-on-police--community-relations-phase-one-report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://isr.unm.edu/reports/2015/city-of-albuquerque,-albuquerque-collaborative-on-police--community-relations-phase-one-report.pdf Shelf Number: 136817 Keywords: CollaborationPolice-Community Relations |
Author: Macvean, Michelle Title: The PATRICIA project: PAThways in research In collaborative inter-agency working Summary: This paper details a review conducted by the Parenting Research Centre (PRC) and the University of Melbourne at the request of Australia's National Research Organisation for Women's Safety (ANROWS). It forms part of a broader project - PAThways and Research In Collaborative Inter-Agency working, or the PATRICIA project - led by the University of Melbourne with partners from five universities, three government departments and eight community sector organisations which specialise in domestic and family violence (DFV). The PATRICIA project focuses on the relationship between statutory child protection, family law, and community-based services which seek to support women and children exposed to domestic violence. This review aims to address the following research question: What processes or practices do child protection services and specialist domestic violence services or family law engage in so that they can work better together to improve service responses for women and children living with and separating from family violence? Details: Melbourne: Australia's National Research Organisation for Women's Safety (ANROWS), 2015. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 28, 2015 at: http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/14_4.5_landscapes_patricia_f.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/14_4.5_landscapes_patricia_f.pdf Shelf Number: 137353 Keywords: Child Abuse and NeglectChild MaltreatmentChild ProtectionCollaborationCommunity-Based ServicesDomestic ViolenceFamily ViolenceGender-Related ViolencePartnerships |
Author: Carswell, Sue Title: Formative Evaluation of the Christchurch Metro Police Safety Order Project Summary: This report presents the findings of a formative evaluation of the Christchurch Metro Police Safety Order Project. The project is a joint collaboration between the New Zealand Police, Stopping Violence Services (SVS), Battered Women's Trust (BWT), Otautahi Maori Women's Refuge (OWR), West Christchurch Women's Refuge (WWR) and Aviva (formerly known as Christchurch Women's Refuge). The Metro PSO Project commenced as a pilot project on the 25th December 2012. The evaluation examines pilot implementation from January - December 2013. Police Safety Orders (PSO) were introduced nationally on the 1st July 2010 by the Domestic Violence Amendment Act 2009 (Domestic Violence Act insertion Part 6A, sections 124A - 124S). A PSO is issued by Police at family violence events to persons at risk of committing family violence (bound person) where there is no arrest; however an officer has reasonable grounds to believe that temporary separation is necessary to ensure the safety of persons at risk in the household. A PSO aims to deescalate a violent situation as the person bound by the order has to leave the household and cannot contact the persons at risk or the children who reside with them. The effect of the PSO can last up to five days. The Christchurch Metro Police Safety Order Project aims to improve safety within families by providing early intervention/prevention services to bound persons within the PSO timeframe where possible. The intervention services are provided by Stopping Violence Services, who contact bound persons to provide brief intervention including planning safety strategies to reduce the likelihood of family violence. SVS offers bound persons free access to further SVS services and information about other services they can access. The SVS approach is based on enabling people to take responsibility and be accountable for their behaviour. The Metro Project is based on a collaborative approach towards family safety and complements the crisis intervention already provided by Refuges to persons identified as being at risk on Police family violence reports (POL1310) where a PSO had been served. Similar to Refuge, SVS endeavour to contact bound persons as soon as possible services separately to avoid any inadvertent disclosure of information that may compromise safety. The pilot is integrated into the Family Violence Interagency Response System (FVIARS) and the FVIARS coordinator has oversight of referral processes. Bound persons are under no obligation to engage with SVS services and any engagement would be voluntary. The timing of offering intervention services was hypothesised as optimal for engagement as the bound person may be more receptive and motivated to engage shortly after receiving a PSO. The pilot has been managed by an interagency Project Management Team including NZ Police, SVS and Refuges, and is supported by an Advisory Group from the wider sector. A cross-agency professional supervision group supports operational staff after the incident. Details: Christchurch, NZ: Te Awatea Violence Research Centre, University of Canterbury, 2014. 81p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 5, 2016 at: http://www.vrc.canterbury.ac.nz/docs/Formative%20Evaluation%20of%20Christchurch%20Metro%20Police%20Safety%20Order%20Project%2028.3.14.pdf Year: 2014 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.vrc.canterbury.ac.nz/docs/Formative%20Evaluation%20of%20Christchurch%20Metro%20Police%20Safety%20Order%20Project%2028.3.14.pdf Shelf Number: 137775 Keywords: Battered WomenCollaborationFamily ViolenceFamily Violence PreventionPolicingProtection OrdersVictims of Family ViolenceViolence Prevention |
Author: Schweig, Sarah Title: Co-Producing Public Safety: Communities, Law Enforcement, and Public Health Researchers Work to Prevent Crime Together Summary: Even though crime has decreased across the country since the early 1990s, high rates of violence persist in many neighborhoods. In response, many jurisdictions are seeking ways to understand and prevent violence with a broader multidisciplinary approach, treating violence collaboratively as both a public health issue and a crime problem. A growing number of communities have been adopting this approach. One leading advocate of this method is The California Endowment, whose senior vice president, Anthony Iton, has said, "If you want to change an environment, you have to change many systems." To identify which systems need changing and the most effective ways to do it, The California Endowment, the Center for Court Innovation, and the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) met in Los Angeles on August 1, 2014. In their roundtable discussion titled "Spreading a Cure for Crime," law enforcement executives, public health professionals, funders, researchers, and government officials worked together to share information and craft collaborative strategies to prevent crime. This roundtable was the third in a series, following two other meetings hosted by The California Endowment, the Center for Court Innovation, and the COPS Office: Law Enforcement and Public Health: Sharing Resources and Strategies to Make Communities Safer, held in March of 20111 and Seeding Change: How Small Projects Can Improve Community Health and Safety, held in January 2012. This publication adds to the knowledge from the previous convenings and the reports on them while including a summary of the discussions, collaborative approaches, challenges, and recommendations for moving forward from the "Spreading a Cure for Crime" forum. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2016. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2016 at: http://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0800-pub.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0800-pub.pdf Shelf Number: 138942 Keywords: CollaborationCommunity PartnershipsCrime PreventionPublic Health IssueViolence Prevention |
Author: Geddes, Louise Title: The Prolific And Other Priority Offender Programme: in search of collaborative public management Summary: The purpose of the research was to assess the implementation and management of the Prolific and Priority Offender (PPO) programme, examining the barriers to and enabling factors for managing in partnership, whilst evaluating the settlement between three management models. The research provides evidence for a newer model of management, better suited to deliver on the shared outcomes government requires from its public programmes. Research has shown that although crime is multi-causal, a range of agencies separately intervene into service users' lives. Collaborative Public Management joins up these interventions to improve crime reduction. Details: Nottingham, UK: Nottingham Trent University, 2010. 351p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed October 14, 2016 at: http://irep.ntu.ac.uk/90/1/214873_Louise%20Geddes%20-Thesis.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://irep.ntu.ac.uk/90/1/214873_Louise%20Geddes%20-Thesis.pdf Shelf Number: 144807 Keywords: CollaborationCrime PartnershipsPartnershipsPriority Offender Programme |
Author: Cole, Christine M. Title: The Collaborative Reform Initiative Process: Experiences of Selected Sites Summary: Since the launch of the Collaborative Reform Initiative for Technical Assistance (CRI-TA) in 2011, interest in and support for this approach to improving trust between police agencies and the communities they serve has grown significantly. As of the writing of this report, 16 law enforcement agencies have been launched as CRI-TA sites. Given this increase in participation and investment, the COPS Office and others are interested in understanding how participating jurisdictions experience the Collaborative Reform process. This study compares and contrasts how the CRI-TA process unfolded across sites in order to shed light on elements that were similar, elements that differed, things that worked well, and areas in need of improvement. The sites reviewed in this report are the Las Vegas (Nevada) Metropolitan Police Department, Spokane (Washington) Police Department, Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) Police Department, Saint Louis County (Missouri) Police Department, Fayetteville (North Carolina) Police Department, Salinas (California) Police Department, and Calexico (California) Police Department. Oneon-one and group interviews were conducted across an array of stakeholders, including representatives from three key groups: (1) COPS Office staff (both current and former), (2) technical assistance (TA) providers and their subject matter expert (SME) partners, and (3) police agency personnel. In addition to speaking with key stakeholders, the team from the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) reviewed available documents that could shed some light on the CRI-TA process. The specific methodology and associated limitations are discussed in the text. What is working well Overall, sites typically found that the intense, time-limited assessment process and resultant findings and recommendations served as a catalyst for change and gave participating departments direction. Sites generally felt that the findings in their respective assessment reports were fair and accurate and that the recommendations were reasonable and feasible, although there were some exceptions. The flexibility of the CRI-TA program and its ability to be tailored for diverse local contexts were also identified as positive elements. Additionally, we heard repeatedly of the legitimizing effect of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)'s involvement. Sites reflected that in many instances they were aware of the work their department needed to do, but having the federal government as the source brought enhanced credibility. Several stakeholders mentioned that the voluntary nature of Collaborative Reform makes a participating police agency appear proactive about reforms and organizational transformation, unlike being forced to make reforms through a consent decree or settlement with the DOJ. Perceptions of collaboration There was no consensus on what collaboration means in the context of CRI-TA. We heard varying responses from stakeholders regarding which of the involved entities were actually the collaborators, including the participating police agency, the community, the local city or county government, the COPS Office, and the TA providers. We also heard varying responses on which points during the multiyear process should and should not be collaborative efforts. Furthermore, a number of people also noted that the meaning of collaboration has shifted since the Initiative’s formal launch in early 2012. The extent of collaboration between the TA team and the site representatives was generally deemed strong at the earlier sites, but some felt it has been decreasing at the later sites. Details: Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2017. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 15, 2017 at: https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0835-pub.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0835-pub.pdf Shelf Number: 150546 Keywords: CollaborationPartnershipsPolice AgenciesPolice Reform |
Author: Collins, Megan Title: Assessment of the Collaborative Reform Initiative in the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department: A Catalyst for Change Summary: The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) at the U.S. Department of Justice launched the Collaborative Reform Initiative for Technical Assistance for Technical Assistance (CRI-TA) in 2012 with the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) as the first site. Under CRI-TA, law enforcement agencies facing significant issues that may impact public trust undergo a comprehensive assessment, are provided with recommendations on how to address those issues, and receive technical assistance to implement such recommendations. Over two years have passed since LVMPD’s final CRITA report was published in May of 2014 and formal oversight was complete. The COPS Office granted the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) at Community Resources for Justice an award to assess the extent to which the reforms that were borne of CRI-TA have had an impact and have been sustained since the formal partnership ended. This report reflects the findings of a nine-month assessment of LVMPD which examined existing data from LVMPD and collected input from 74 individuals within the Department representing a range of ranks and perspectives. In sum, we found that the CRI-TA has been an important catalyst for meaningful and sustained change at the LVMPD. The message and priorities of Collaborative Reform have permeated the entire Department, as the over 70 members of the Department with whom we spoke were generally supportive of the reforms and the work that was done under CRI-TA. Use of force was a key component of the CRI-TA in Las Vegas and the overall sentiment was that the culture of LVMPD related to use of force has evolved positively since the beginning of the CRI-TA process. In addition, the Department has made positive progress in the level of transparency around officer involved shootings. It is also clear that LVMPD is continuing to make genuine and authentic efforts to engage, communicate, and develop personal relationships with a vast cross-section of the community. While some of the changes were underway prior to CRI-TA, CRI-TA provided additional support and motivation to build upon and strengthen such changes. The LVMPD is focused on being a learning organization. They learn from experience and strive continuously to improve. Once the formal monitoring phase of CRI-TA was completed, the Department not only remained committed to the changes, they continued to further advance the work that was started under CRI-TA. Based on our review of materials, content, and interviews, all provided by LVMPD, it is evident that the Department has been committed to proactively and continuously improving, while supporting officers' and community perspectives. We believe that CRI-TA has been a vehicle for organizational transformation, which does not happen overnight and any change in the culture of a police department takes time. Indeed, LVMPD had embarked on a path of reform in 2010 and the Department’s participation in Collaborative Reform starting in 2012 further advanced and strengthened their efforts. Specific key findings are: 1. The Department has made notable and sustained efforts to make progress toward verbal and tactical de-escalation 2. The Department has made impressive progress toward increased transparency and increased information sharing around officer involved shootings (OIS) and use of force (UOF). 3. The Department has continued to make efforts to engage with the community in authentic ways. 4. The number of OIS has declined notably since the start of CRI-TA (a 36 percent reduction from 25 OIS in 2010 to 16 in 2015). However, study of OIS data over the past two decades demonstrates little long term change in the annual average number of OIS, despite year-to-year variation. 5. There has been no discernable impact on the number of officer injuries. However, the share of injured officers seeking hospital treatment has increased in recent years. The reasons for this increase are unclear as it could be the result of more serious injuries or changes in how injuries and hospital treatment are documented. 6. Strong leadership on the part of the Sheriff, both Sheriff Lombardo and Sheriff Gillespie, has been a critical factor in making many of the positive changes possible. 7. Because Department leadership has worked to ensure that individuals at all levels of LVMPD feel commitment and a sense of ownership, there are high hopes for sustainability. 8. Because the Department has instituted sophisticated systems of review related to OIS that can trigger changes in policy, training, and operations, there are high hopes for sustainability Details: Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services , 2017. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 15, 2017 at: https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0834-pub.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0834-pub.pdf Shelf Number: 145321 Keywords: CollaborationPartnershipsPolice AgenciesPolice ReformPolice-Community Relations |
Author: Resource Development Associates Title: Oakland Unite: Overview of Evaluation Findings and Recommendations Summary: Resource Development Associates (RDA) has been the external evaluator for the City of Oakland's Measure Y initiative since 2008. In that role, RDA has worked with the City's Human Services Department (HSD) and contracted service providers to design and implement a mixed-methods evaluation to examine both the implementation and the impact of Oakland Unite Violence Prevention Programs. This memo is intended to provide an overview of evaluation findings to date, along with recommendations for improving Oakland Unite programs and the broader Oakland Unite service delivery infrastructure. Evaluation Overview Over the past 8 years, RDA has used a mixed methods approach to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the Oakland Unite initiative, as well as of specific Oakland Unite strategies, and of individual Oakland Unite programs. Our qualitative data collection activities have included interviews and focus groups with a range of Oakland Unite stakeholders, including both executive-level and line staff in community-based service providers, program participants, and leadership from partner agencies, such as the Oakland Police Department (OPD), Oakland Unified School District (OUSD), Alameda County Health Care Services Agency (ACHCSA), and more. In addition, the evaluation team has collected a range of quantitative data, including client-level service data from Oakland HSD's CitySpan data system; justic esystem data from Alameda County Probation Department's (ACPD) Juvenile Division, ACPD's Adult Division, and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR); OUSD data on youth attendance, suspensions, and expulsions; and client surveys on development assets, service quality, and more. Overview of Recommendations Drawing on our knowledge of the Oakland Unite programs, our experience in violence prevention, and conversations with experts in the field, the RDA team developed a set of recommendations intended to improve future programming by leveraging current programmatic strengths and addressing areas of need and challenge. These recommendations are grounded in best practices and the current needs of Oakland's crime prevention programs. Informed by discussions with Oakland Unite leadership, partners from other public agencies, and conversations with clients and providers, RDA conducted reviews of best practices in the areas of criminal justice, violence prevention, case management, social work, and mental health. We triangulated these best practices with our evaluation findings to develop a series of targeted recommendations. Below, we present an overview of our evaluation findings along with recommendations for addressing challenges identified in our evaluations. Details: Oakland, CA: Resource Development Associates, 2015. 87p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 20, 2017 at: http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/RDA-Eval-Recommendations-Memo_20150520_STC.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/RDA-Eval-Recommendations-Memo_20150520_STC.pdf Shelf Number: 146671 Keywords: CollaborationPartnershipsViolenceViolence PreventionViolent Crime |
Author: Resource Development Associates Title: Oakland Unite Violence Prevention Programs Retrospective Evaluation: 2005-2013 Summary: The City of Oakland's Measure Y ordinance provides approximately $6 million annually for the City to spend on violence prevention programs (VPP), with an emphasis on services for youth and children. The four service areas identified in the legislation and funded via Measure Y include: 1) youth outreach counselors; 2) after and in-school programs for youth and children; 3) domestic violence and child abuse counselors; and 4) offender/parolee employment training. The City's Human Services Department (HSD) is responsible for implementing the VPP component of the Measure Y legislation, which it does through the Oakland Unite programs. In consultation with the Measure Y Oversight Committee and the City Council's Public Safety Committee, HSD develops triennial funding strategies that align with the services delineated in the legislation and that meet the shifting needs of the City of Oakland. HSD then administers and monitors grants to community-based organizations and public agencies that provide these services across the City. Since 2008, the City of Oakland has contracted with Resource Development Associates (RDA) to evaluate various components of Measure Y, including the Oakland Unite Violence Prevention Programs. Over the past six years, these evaluations have taken a variety of approaches to assessing the implementation and effectiveness of Oakland Unite, collecting a range of qualitative and quantitative data to evaluate individual programs, funding strategies, and the initiative as a whole. This report integrates these approaches to provide a retrospective analysis of Oakland Unite, with a focus on the programs and strategies that directly address crime and violence, from the initiative's inception in 2005 through Fiscal Year 2012-2013. In particular, the evaluation examines: - How the Oakland Unite service model has changed over time, including target population, service array, and service dosage; - How participants' justice system involvement changes after participation in Oakland Unite programs; and - How participants' post-service justice system contact has changed over the course of the initiative. Details: Oakland, CA: Resource Development Associates, 2014. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 20, 2017 at: http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/OU-VPP_Retrospective_Report-FINAL.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/OU-VPP_Retrospective_Report-FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 146672 Keywords: CollaborationPartnerships Violence Violence Prevention Violent Crime |
Author: Connery, David Title: For the right reasons, in the right ways (Part 1): A four-nation survey of information sharing about organised crime Summary: This special report examines how government, business and the community in four nations share information about organised crime. Its key finding is that the Australian Government, businesses and community as a whole must be open to new kinds of information sharing partnerships. The report begins by defining information sharing as 'the trusted exchange of relevant knowledge or data between organisations to achieve their mutual objectives'. The types of information shared are then divided into two: case information that involves data about individuals who are usually suspected of involvement in criminal activity; and bulk data that includes people in a given set regardless of any possible connection with crime. The field work involved over 80 interviews, including visits to or discussions about a range of information sharing mechanisms in Israel, the UK, the Netherlands and the US. Those mechanisms were broadly differentiated by their location (within or outside government) and the nature of the sharing interaction (exchange or collaboration). The variety of mechanisms used in the four selected nations shows that information sharing is valued and strongly shaped by the particular national context. This means some countries rely heavily on informal systems, others have large numbers of specialised exchanges, and some are more risk accepting in their arrangements than others. The field work showed that a wide range of options for sharing information about crime exist, and Australian authorities and businesses might wish to consider a number of them in more detail. This research found both upsides and downsides to information sharing about crime. Some benefits are clear, including the opportunity to shape better interventions and build economy of effort in activities. While these upsides are undoubtedly attractive, it seems that the possible downsides of sharing - such as loss of control, the potential to compromise sensitive activities or an unwillingness to risk breaking laws, including those around privacy - were viewed as considerably strong downsides to sharing. Still, it's clear that sharing must occur. That's because the scale of the challenge posed by organised crime - and the speed, reach and depth of penetration that the internet enables - means information sharing is critical for all three groups. This report explains that information sharing is best promoted by building a strong sense of shared interest among the participants and then developing a strong system for information sharing that's governed by understood rules. This finding stands in contrast to those who emphasise interpersonal trust as the basis for sharing. Factors that work against information sharing about crime include legislative barriers and complexity, poor value propositions around sharing, the self-conceptions of the actors and what they value information for, and cultural barriers. Such barriers include a culture of secrecy in government, a lack of willingness to expose possible flaws, and the view that 'information is power'. These are perhaps the most powerful inhibitors to sharing. Efforts to enhance Australia's methods of sharing information about organised crime should be designed to cope with these inhibitors while making best use of the factors that promote this activity. Options for hosting information sharing organisations outside government, accepting a greater role for private funding for law enforcement activities, and encouragement of commercial efforts to gather and collate information, should all be considered by the Australian Government as it looks for new ways to undermine organised crime. Details: Barton ACT: Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2016. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 11, 2017 at: https://www.aspi.org.au/publications/for-the-right-reasons,-in-the-right-ways-part-1-a-four-nation-survey-of-information-sharing-about-organised-crime/SR96_info_sharing_crime.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.aspi.org.au/publications/for-the-right-reasons,-in-the-right-ways-part-1-a-four-nation-survey-of-information-sharing-about-organised-crime/SR96_info_sharing_crime.pdf Shelf Number: 144798 Keywords: CollaborationInformation SharingOrganized CrimePartnerships |
Author: Nolan, Bridget Rose Title: Information Sharing and Collaboration in the United States Intelligence Community: An ethnographic study of the National Counterterrorism Center Summary: The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) was established to serve as the primary organization in the U.S. Government for the integration, sharing, and analysis of all terrorism and counterterrorism intelligence. To date, no study has sought to illustrate whether and how NCTC overcomes the barriers to information sharing among agencies and the people that comprise them. The purpose of this dissertation is to explore the micro-level ways in which intelligence work is conducted in a post-9/11 world and to examine the circumstances that both facilitate and discourage collaboration. By presenting detailed ethnographic evidence and the in-depth interview perspectives of the people who actually do this work daily, this study provides a sociological analysis and discussion of best practices to help identify ways in which NCTC can move closer to fulfilling its mission. Details: Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2013. 206p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed May 9, 2017 at: http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3565195/ Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3565195/ Shelf Number: 131168 Keywords: CollaborationCounter-Terrorism Criminal Intelligence Homeland Security Information Sharing Terrorism |
Author: Golan, Guy D. Title: Countering Violent Extremism: A Whole Community Approach to Prevention and Intervention Summary: The United States national strategy for Countering Violent Extremism is broadly written and currently does not provide the framework necessary to combat homegrown violent extremism and the foreign fighter phenomenon. The threat of foreign terrorist organizations targeting the United States through a 9/11-style attack has become overshadowed by the threat of homegrown violent extremists and lone-wolf attacks. The purpose of this thesis is to gain a comprehensive insight into how intervention is used within the context of a counter-terrorism preventative strategy. How can intervention be used to disengage radicalizing individuals whose expression of extremist ideology involves committing violent acts? Furthermore, it is anticipated that the most appropriate methods for applying such an intervention program, in the pre-criminal space, can be most successful through interagency collaboration and a Whole Community approach. Such a system leverages partnerships between local, state, and federal government agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and community-driven initiatives. This paper analyzes specific case studies of socio-political landscapes, individuals who have radicalized to violent extremism, and intervention programs from Denmark, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The results of the analysis provide recommendations for implementing a nation-wide intervention program in the United States. Details: Long Beach, CA: California State University, Long Beach, 2016. 218p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed November 16, 2017 at: https://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/1777582076.html?FMT=ABS Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/1777582076.html?FMT=ABS Shelf Number: 148205 Keywords: CollaborationCounter-terrorism Extremism Homeland Security Radicalization Terrorism Violent Extremism |
Author: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority Title: Law Enforcement Information Sharing Task Force. EDiscovery Initiative Final Report Summary: The Law Enforcement Information Sharing Task Force (Task Force) reviewed the mission set forth in PA 99-0874 and determined that the imminent technological possibilities were a priority. Moreover, while PA 99-0874 highlights the importance of studying information sharing technologies and processes for the purpose of improving the criminal discovery process, the Task Force determined that the state's role in facilitating information sharing for public safety and criminal justice agencies must go beyond criminal discovery. Illinois must advance its efforts for using technology to improve multi-jurisdictional, crossboundary, information sharing between local and state public safety agencies and criminal justice agencies. The Task Force believes that the charge set forth by PA 99-0874 could serve as an effective use case for state and local governments to collaboratively initiate the development of a comprehensive statewide information sharing environment for the public safety and criminal justice domain. However, the Task Force also agreed that it did not have the resources and or capacities to fully examine this complex issue, which would include, at a minimum, a deeper analysis of the different information systems local jurisdictions use, how the state could promote more effective information sharing practices among local jurisdictions, and the real cost and benefits of implementation. As such, the Task Force offers this report as a preliminary analysis and set of recommendations to promote more effective and efficient state and local information sharing practices and systems. Details: Chicago: ICJIA, 2007. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 20, 2018 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/assets/pdf/ICJIA_ILEITF_HB5613_Report_%20120117.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/assets/pdf/ICJIA_ILEITF_HB5613_Report_%20120117.pdf Shelf Number: 148888 Keywords: CollaborationInformation SharingLaw EnforcementPolice Technology |
Author: Worwood, Erin B. Title: Evaluation of the Homeless Outreach Service Team (HOST) Program Summary: According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 610,042 people were homeless in the United States on a single night in January 2013 (HUD 2013). In Utah, state officials estimate that 15,093 individuals were homeless in January 2013, a 9.5 percent decrease from the previous year (Wrathall et al. 2013). When individuals experiencing homelessness lack the resources to gain adequate housing and key behavioral and support systems, they occupy public places that often create conflict with other community members. Communities may perceive homeless individuals to be a threat to community safety or a disruption to the functioning of businesses and public spaces. As a result, many communities have turned to their local law enforcement agencies and criminal justice systems to address these issues (NCH and NLCHP 2006). Law enforcement policies typically respond to such problems by restricting where homeless individuals can congregate and issuing citations for misdemeanor offenses and infractions that are specific to their status as homeless (e.g., public intoxication, urination in public, open container, trespassing, jaywalking) (American Bar Association 2006; U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness 2012; NCH and NLCHP 2006). The homeless gain entry into the criminal justice system when they are cited for misdemeanor offenses or infractions, fail to appear in court, or are booked into the jail on a court-ordered warrant (J. Baxter, pers. comm., September 10, 2012). Unfortunately, reliance on the criminal justice system as a means of managing homeless populations places an expensive burden on a system that is not equipped to address the underlying issues contributing to homelessness (Roman and Travis 2004). Salt Lake City's Homeless Outreach Service Team (HOST) program was developed in April 2011 as a collaborative effort between law enforcement and homeless service providers to disrupt this cycle and address the underlying issues of homelessness (M. Ross, pers. comm., October 2, 2012). The original purpose of the HOST program was to bring Salt Lake City police officers and community outreach workers together to identify homeless individuals who frequently panhandle or engage in other types of public nuisance activities in downtown Salt Lake City and to connect them to community resources. The main objectives of this program were to (1) encourage police to make referrals to services rather than issue citations to the homeless and (2) decrease the prevalence of panhandling by encouraging the public to give money to homeless service providers rather than directly to panhandlers. In 2012, the Salt Lake City (Utah) Police Department (SLCPD) received an award from the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) to expand the HOST program. The goals of the COPS Office HOST award were to fund a public awareness campaign, coordinate strategic planning efforts, and recruit and train formerly homeless individuals as volunteers to assist with outreach efforts. Salt Lake City has contracted with the Utah Criminal Justice Center (UCJC) to examine the impact of the award on services offered and the perceptions, roles, and responsibilities of personnel and key stakeholders involved with the HOST program. This report covers the three primary components of the HOST program: donations to homeless service providers, the homeless support group, and collaborative street outreach. Details: Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2016. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 27, 2018 at: https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0814-pub.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0814-pub.pdf Shelf Number: 149588 Keywords: Anti-Social behaviorCollaborationHomeless PersonsHomelessnessOutreach ServicesPanhandling |
Author: Milgram, Anne Title: Integrated Health Care and Criminal Justice Data - Viewing the Intersection of Public Safety, Public Health, and Public Policy Through a New Lens: Lessons from Camden, New Jersey Summary: At the intersection of public safety and public health lies the potential to view crime prevention through a new lens: the lens provided by analyzing integrated data from the many agencies that serve vulnerable populations. This study involved the integration of health care and criminal justice data for people who cycle in and out of hospitals and police precincts in Camden, New Jersey. Working pursuant to a grant from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, researchers from the Camden Coalition of Healthcare Providers (the Coalition) integrated existing data sets to break down traditional information silos, identifying and analyzing the experiences of people who showed an extreme number of contacts with both systems. By analyzing these cross-sector data, Coalition researchers found that a small number of Camden residents have an enormous and disproportionate impact on the health care and criminal justice sectors, neither of which is designed to address the underlying problems they face: housing instability, inconsistent or insufficient income, trauma, inadequate nutrition, lack of supportive social networks, But the study's potential impact goes well beyond the identification of a population that frequently cycles through the health care and criminal justice systems. Cross-sector data offer a more holistic view of the challenges these individuals face, telling a different story than the one we typically hear - a story with far-reaching public policy implications. When we overlay data to view the trajectories of lives through consecutive cross-sector contacts, we begin to see that crime most often happens after, and not before, contacts with hospitals and other government agencies. During these earlier encounters, we could find potential markers that would allow us to identify individuals at risk of future criminal justice involvement. In large part because agencies are not sharing data in the collaborative ways needed to gain a holistic understanding of individuals, opportunities to intervene earlier in their trajectories are lost. Most interventions to prevent recidivism currently occur during the community corrections and re-entry phases, well after a crime has happened and the individual's case has ended. The study suggests that we should shift from a mindset of reacting to immediate health and crime crises as distinct events to focusing on holistic approaches that result in better individual outcomes, increased public safety, and reduced system costs. The holistic view provided by integrated data will allow researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to design earlier interventions to prevent crime and the avoidable use of jails and emergency departments. The Coalition's researchers plan to design and test such interventions in the next phase of this study. This paper is organized in two parts. Part I sets out the Camden study's key findings from the analysis of integrated hospital and police data: - A small percentage of arrestees account for a disproportionate share of total arrests. - There is a relationship between high use of hospital emergency departments (EDs) and frequent arrests. - A small subset of 226 individuals had extreme numbers of contacts with both hospital EDs and police. Part II outlines the potential impact of integrated data analysis on public safety, public health, and public policy: - Cross-sector data that look beyond the criminal justice system, including data on health, housing, employment, and other socio-economic characteristics, provide a holistic view of individuals and their contacts with multiple systems over time. Details: Cambridge, MA: Harvard Kennedy School, Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management, 2018. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 4, 2018 at: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/wiener/programs/pcj/files/integrated_healthcare_criminaljustice_data.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/wiener/programs/pcj/files/integrated_healthcare_criminaljustice_data.pdf Shelf Number: 150062 Keywords: CollaborationHealth CarePartnershipsPublic HealthPublic Safety |
Author: U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy Title: High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program Report to Congress Summary: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 707 of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) Reauthorization Act of 1998, as amended by Section 301 of the ONDCP Reauthorization Act of 2006, P.L. 109-469, ONDCP is providing Congress with this report on the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTAs). In order to present a national overview and individual HIDTA focus, this report provides background information and addresses three Congressional reporting requirements in one cohesive and coordinated document. This document is divided into an Executive Summary, Strategic Objectives, and five primary sections: 1. HIDTA Program Background Information The HIDTA program provides assistance to Federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies operating in areas determined to be critical drug trafficking regions of the Nation. There are currently 28 regional HIDTAs which include approximately 16 percent of all counties in the United States and 60 percent of the population. HIDTA-designated counties are located in 45 states plus Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the District of Columbia. Through the HIDTA program, representatives of Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies in each HIDTA region coordinate and collaborate to address the specific drug threats of that region. 2. National HIDTA Program Evaluation This report provides Congress with an evaluation of HIDTA performance. ONDCP has established two goals for the HIDTA program which address program effectiveness, program efficiency, and program management. These goals also reflect the continued refinement of the process ONDCP has developed to manage and measure HIDTA performance. The first goal is to reduce drug availability by assisting Federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies participating in HIDTAs to dismantle and disrupt drug trafficking organizations. The second goal is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of HIDTA initiatives. In order to report on their achievement of these goals, each HIDTA is required to provide the following four documents pertaining to its geographical area, on which its performance evaluation is based: 1) Threat Assessment; 2) Strategy; 3) Initiative Budget Proposals; and 4) Annual Report. 3. Assessment of Law Enforcement Intelligence Sharing in the HIDTA Program This report outlines the formal processes of the HIDTA program to assess law enforcement intelligence and information sharing, and highlights the formal evaluation and review process of the HIDTA program, including policy and budget guidance; FY 2009 funding levels for intelligence; processes for sharing Federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement information; and the measures needed to achieve effective sharing of information. The HIDTA program has 57 operational intelligence and information sharing initiatives. Each HIDTA capitalizes on the combined resources of the Federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement communities. The HIDTAs prepare and review threat assessments and apply the appropriate law enforcement response to combat illegal drug activity in our Nation. 4. Assessment of Drug Enforcement Task Forces in HIDTAs Regardless of the method of funding task forces (e.g., HIDTA, Justice Action Grant (JAG)/Byrne-sponsored), the 28 HIDTAs provide a coordination umbrella for Federal, state, local, and tribal drug law enforcement efforts; foster a strategy-driven systemic approach to integrate and synchronize efforts; facilitate efficiency, effectiveness, and cooperation among and between various agencies; and focus on outcomes and impacts. Using both formal and informal methods of coordination among drug enforcement task forces, the HIDTAs act as neutral centers to manage, deconflict, analyze, and report on drug enforcement activities in their respective regions. 5. Individual HIDTA Reports To address the specific reporting requirements, an analysis of each HIDTA is included in this report. These reports are succinct descriptions of the individual HIDTAs and their responses to the Congressional report requirements. For more comprehensive information on an individual HIDTA's performance in addressing specific drug threats, ONDCP can provide, upon request, that HIDTA's Annual Report, Strategy, or Threat Assessment. Details: Washington, DC: ONDCP, 2010. 184p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 8, 2018 at: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/ondcp/policy-and-research/hidta_2011.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/ondcp/policy-and-research/hidta_2011.pdf Shelf Number: 150507 Keywords: CollaborationDrug Control PolicyDrug EnforcementDrug TraffickingIllegal DrugsInformation Sharing |
Author: International Association of Chiefs of Police Title: Establishing and Sustaining Law Enforcement-Researcher Partnerships: Guide for Law Enforcement Leaders Summary: Law enforcement leaders are increasingly recognizing the benefits of applying research findings in their work. As more researchers direct their efforts toward producing practical knowledge about effective police policies and practices, law enforcement agencies are better able to use that information to maximize their capacity to protect the public and bring lawbreakers to justice. In this era of shrinking budgets, research that points to what works best can help law enforcement leaders do more with less. Evidence-based policing (EBP) is an approach to testing and validating all facets of policing that encourages law enforcement agencies to develop their policy and program guidelines based on knowledge of best practices, and to carefully define and monitor outcomes that are achieved through their actions. Policymakers, funders and even community members have come to expect publicly-funded agencies to demonstrate that their policies and practices are proven to be costeffective. EBP is not an all-or-nothing approach that results in discarding "failed" programs, but rather a way for law enforcement agencies to continuously refine and update their policies and practices. By working with researchers, police departments can contribute to the continuing development of evidence-based policies, programs and practices. Since law enforcement personnel are trained in investigative techniques, they have a natural appreciation for well-done research, i.e., research efforts that ask meaningful questions, assemble relevant evidence, and make a convincing case for recommended actions. Police departments that have implemented community and problem-oriented policing are familiar with the problem-solving process that is the foundation of action research: problem identification and analysis, response development and implementation, ongoing monitoring and refinement, and impact assessment. Many police staff members find that they can become critical consumers of research, able to discern which studies or findings are valid and understand how best to apply them in their own agencies. This guide outlines ways that law enforcement leaders can move from being consumers of research to working with researchers to generate useful knowledge about what works in their own agencies and for policing in general. The guidelines in this document are grounded in the experience of a number of law enforcement agencies that have already partnered with researchers to continuously improve police performance. Many of these agencies have been able to use the results of research on the effectiveness of their policies and practices to successfully advocate for needed resources or policy changes. A few have contributed significantly to the general body of knowledge about what works best in policing. Details: Alexandria, VA: IACP, 2018? 32p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed August 23, 2018 at: http://www.theiacp.org/Portals/0/documents/pdfs/EstablishingSustaingLawEnforcement-ResearchPartnershipsGuideforLELeaders.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://www.theiacp.org/Portals/0/documents/pdfs/EstablishingSustaingLawEnforcement-ResearchPartnershipsGuideforLELeaders.pdf Shelf Number: 151242 Keywords: CollaborationCriminal Justice ResearchInteragency Cooperation Police Administration Police Research Research Partnerships |