Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 12:52 am
Time: 12:52 am
Results for public housing
15 results foundAuthor: Bjerk, David Title: Thieves, Thugs, and Neighborhood Poverty Summary: This paper develops a model of crime analyzing how such behavior is associated with individual and neighborhood poverty. The model shows that even under relatively minimal assumptions, a connection between individual poverty and both property and violent crimes will arise, and moreover, "neighborhood" effects can develop, but will differ substantially in nature across crime types. A key implication is that greater economic segregation in a city should have no effect or a negative effect on property crime, but a positive effect on violent crime. Details: Bonn, Germany: IZA (Study of Labor), 2009. 44p. Source: Discussion Paper No. 4470; Claremont McKenna College" https://d-nb.info/997468106/34 Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: https://d-nb.info/997468106/34 Shelf Number: 116675 Keywords: Neighborhoods and CrimePovertyPublic HousingSocioeconomic Conditions and Crime |
Author: Roman, Caterina G. Title: The Examination of the Social and Physical Environment of Public Housing Residents in Two Chicago Developments in Transition Summary: This report was designed to shine a spotlight on the immediate physical and social environment of residents who were living in two distressed public housing developments in 2007. While past research has similarly described the high incidence of depression and the high levels of disorder and violence within older, urban public housing developments, this report was intended to bring those factors together to uncover the pathways that influence mental health. We find evidence that suggests that physical and social disorder create cues that take a toll on residents through negative feelings about neighborhood cohesion and the neighborhood's ability to come together in a time of need. In addition, we find that economic stressors, which include threats of eviction, not being able to pay bills, or buy food for oneself, is associated with depression. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2010. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2010 at: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412134-chicago-public-housing.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412134-chicago-public-housing.pdf Shelf Number: 119633 Keywords: Neighborhoods and CrimePublic Housing |
Author: Popkin, Susan J. Title: Escaping the Hidden War: Safety Is the Biggest Gain for CHA Families Summary: "A main goal of the HOPE VI program was to improve public housing by replacing failed developments with healthy and safe communities that offer a better quality of life for residents. In 1999, when the Chicago Housing Authority's (CHA) Plan for Transformation began, the agency's large family developments were notorious for being among the most dangerous places in the nation. This brief explores whether the safety gains for early relocates have been sustained and whether those who moved later have benefited equally— because these residents tended to be among the most vulnerable, there was good reason to think that they would not fare as well. We find that almost all former residents are now living in safer conditions and that improved safety and quality of life has been the greatest benefit of the Plan for Transformation for CHA residents." Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2010. 7p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 20, 2010 at: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412187-CHA-escaping-the-hidden.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412187-CHA-escaping-the-hidden.pdf Shelf Number: 119645 Keywords: Neighborhoods and CrimePublic Housing |
Author: Hartley, Daniel A. Title: Blowing it Up and Knocking it Down: The Effect of Demolishing High Concentration Public Housing on Crime Summary: Despite popular accounts that link public housing demolitions to spatial redistribution of crime, and possible increases in crime, little systematic research has analyzed the neighborhood or city-wide impact of demolitions on crime. In Chicago, which has conducted the largest public housing demolition program in the United States, I find that public housing demolitions are associated with a 10 percent to 20 percent reduction in murder, assault, and robbery in neighborhoods where the demolitions occurred. Furthermore, violent crime rates fell by about the same amount in neighborhoods that received the most displaced public housing households relative to neighborhoods that received fewer displaced public housing households, during the period when these developments were being demolished. This suggests violent crime was not simply displaced from the neighborhoods where demolitions occurred to neighborhoods that received the former public housing residents. However, it is impossible to know what would have happened to violent crime in the receiving neighborhoods had the demolitions not occurred. Finally, using a panel of cities that demolished public housing, I find that the mean public housing demolition is associated with a drop of about 3 percent in a city’s murder rate and about 2 percent in a city’s assault rate. I interpret these findings as evidence that while public housing demolitions may push crime into other parts of a city, crime reductions in neighborhoods where public housing is demolished are larger than crime increases in other neighborhoods. A caveat is that while the city-wide reduction in assault rate appears to be permanent, the city-wide reduction in murder rate seems to last for only a few years. Details: Cleveland, OH: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, 2010. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper 10/22: Accessed December 8, 2010 at: http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/workpaper/2010/wp1022.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/workpaper/2010/wp1022.pdf Shelf Number: 120415 Keywords: Crime DisplacementNieghborhoods and CrimePublic Housing |
Author: Jacobs, Keith Title: Developing Effective Housing Management Policies to Address Problems of Anti-Social Behaviour Summary: This report presents research undertaken by the AHURI Southern Research Centre to develop effective housing management policies to address problems of anti-social behaviour (ASB). In recent years, public housing has increasingly become the tenure for individuals with limited incomes and a high level of social need. Furthermore, deinstitutionalisation policies in mental health provision have meant that individuals who in the past would have been provided with institutional care are now often residing in public housing. The intensive needs of many tenants result in a new set of challenges for housing managers in terms of supporting sustainable tenancies. The term anti-social behaviour is used to denote a range of activities from the very minor (such as the dropping of litter) to more extreme forms of criminal behaviour (such as burglary and harassment). Though residents who engage in ASB may be few in number, their activities have a significant negative impact on the quality of life for their neighbours. There is a wide-ranging debate about the causal factors associated with ASB. The dominant view within the Australian housing profession and academia is that ASB is a symptom of wider structural factors such as unemployment and poverty. Therefore, the most desirable policies are those that are community focused and seek to address the causal factors associated with ASB. However, there is a strand of literature based on the ‘underclass’ theory that draws upon the work of Charles Murray (1994) claiming that individual fecklessness is the root causal factor for ASB. Such underclass theories have been especially influential in informing the contemporary practices undertaken by housing authorities in the USA and, to a lesser extent, the UK. In Australia, State Housing Authorities deploy a range of strategies to address incidences of ASB. These include provisions within Residential Tenancy Acts to enforce conditions of tenancy, ‘good neighbour policies’, tenant complaint procedures, court orders, referrals to independent mediation services and, in extreme cases, eviction. However, while official policy frameworks for addressing ASB are in the public realm, very little is known about the extent of ASB, the ways in which housing managers actually respond to incidents and how tenants view the problem. In order to address these gaps in knowledge two case study investigations were undertaken in Bridgewater, Hobart and Christie Downs, Adelaide. The findings from the case study investigations confirm that ASB is a serious concern to tenants and housing managers and that considerable time and resources are taken up in responding to ASB. On average, it was estimated that front-line housing managers spend at least an hour a day on ASB issues. This figure can be even higher for senior managers when complex ASB cases are referred to them. Area offices very often deal with at least 10 incidents a week. However, the real extent of ASB is probably far greater than this with tenants noting that many incidents are not reported because of concerns about retribution. Young people under the age 16 are often cited as the most frequent perpetrators of ASB, although some incidents are viewed by staff as a direct consequence of the deinsitutionalisation policies in health care that have meant more individuals with mental health problems are residing in public housing. Housing managers perform an important role in preventing incidents of ASB and in responding to complaints from tenants. Evidence from the case study investigations show that staff adopt a range of proactive measures to reduce the risk of incidents taking place. The most effective interventions involve: • Housing staff working directly with tenants on an informal basis and utilising their knowledge of the area to inform their decision-making and harness a sense of communal well-being. • Flexible allocation policies • Communication and publicity strategies, especially when these are undertaken with the local community. • The establishment of neighbourhood renewal initiatives (i.e. Bridgewater Urban Renewal Project), which can play a vital part in tackling social stigma and restoring civic pride, both of which, in turn, can result in reduced incidents of ASB activities such as vandalism and damage to communal areas. Housing managers, when the need arises, utilise other measures to deal with ASB, for example, probationary tenancies, which can be effective in making sure tenants are aware of their responsibilities and transfers for exceptional cases (although it was acknowledged that this might result in simply moving the problem on). The establishment of good working relationships with the police and other professionals (such as educational and welfare professionals) were viewed as being very valuable. The best modes of collaboration were judged to be informal arrangements at the local level alongside innovative practices such as ‘officer next door programmes’ whereby special arrangements were made for police to reside in public housing to increase their presence on an estate. Mediation services were also valued for resolving disputes, but only when both parties were willing to participate. Finally, there was a view that policies need to be in place to deal with persistent ASB offenders who do not respond appropriately to complaints about their behaviour. In theory, eviction was deemed to be undesirable because the problem was not resolved but merely moved on to another locality or housing tenure. However, in certain circumstances housing managers and tenants felt that legal procedures and the threat of eviction could be useful as a deterrent. The report concludes that a mix of preventive and responsive strategies is required to tackle ASB and that the institutional barriers that can undermine implementation need to be addressed. For example, issues relating to confidentiality were seen as an impediment to information exchange with the police and staff working in community corrections. Holistic policies informed by social justice perspectives are generally seen as the best forms of intervention in preference to the imposition of stricter sanctions and punitive measures such as those adopted in the USA and to a lesser extent in UK policy settings. However, the active engagement by housing managers in holistic approaches to ASB requires considerable time and expertise. It is therefore important that the necessary training and resources are made available if such policies are to succeed. Details: Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, 2003. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2011 at: http://eprints.utas.edu.au/2130/1/40163_final.pdf Year: 2003 Country: Australia URL: http://eprints.utas.edu.au/2130/1/40163_final.pdf Shelf Number: 120843 Keywords: Antisocial Behavior (Australia)Nuisance Behaviors and DisorderPublic Housing |
Author: Jacobs, Keith Title: Making Sense of Partnerships: A Study of Police and Housing Department Collaboration for Tackling Drug and Related Problems on Public Housing Estates Summary: In recent years, interdepartmental partnerships within the public sector have been heralded as effective instruments for addressing complex social problems. For example, it is claimed that they can motivate staff and facilitate innovative practices that lead to improvements in service delivery. However, though partnerships are widely promoted as a panacea within the sector, there is a paucity of research that has looked at them from a critical perspective or examined how they operate in practice. The aim of this project is to explore the realities of partnership working by focusing on collaboration between the police and housing departments to tackle problems associated with illicit drug activity and anti-social behaviour (ASB) on three Australian public housing estates. The rationale for the project is that, though only a small minority of tenants are perpetrators, their actions can seriously blight the lives of their neighbours. Usually it is the housing department that responds to complaints relating to ASB but, in the more serious cases that are deemed criminal, the police also perform a role. Three locations were chosen as case studies. East Devonport in Tasmania and Girrawheen in Western Australia are areas with a large public housing stock. In East Devonport ASB and illicit drug activities are seen as nascent problems while in Girrawheen these problems are viewed as more pervasive, but to date there has been only limited collaboration between the police and housing departments. Collingwood in Victoria includes a large system-built housing estate that has become a location for the buying and selling of drugs. In Collingwood, police and housing departments have, for many years, worked on a series of partnership projects to address the problem and to enhance community wellbeing. The empirical component of the project entailed two stages. The first stage initiated meetings between the police and housing departments in order for them to agree to a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on partnership protocols. The second stage reported on existing and new activities undertaken by both departments over a twelve month period. The research methods entailed participant observation, secondary data collection and qualitative interviews with key personnel. The findings from the case studies are structured around three thematic areas: setting up partnerships, the benefits of partnerships, and the obstacles that can impact on partnership working. Details: Hobart, Tasmania: National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund, 2007. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Monograph Series No. 26: Accessed April 11, 2011 at: http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Monograph_26.pdf Year: 2007 Country: Australia URL: http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Monograph_26.pdf Shelf Number: 121312 Keywords: Antisocial BehaviorDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug EnforcementDrug MarketsPolice PartnershipsPublic Housing |
Author: Cahill, Meagan Title: Movin’ Out: Crime Displacement and HUD’s HOPE VI Initiative Summary: The purpose of this project was to conduct an evaluation of the impact on crime of the closing, renovation, and subsequent reopening of selected public housing developments under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s HOPE VI initiative. No studies have specifically considered the effects of redevelopment of public housing under the HOPE VI initiative on the spatial distribution of crime. The current research aimed to remedy that deficiency through an examination of crime displacement and potential diffusion of benefits in and around three public housing developments. The developments were selected from a candidate set of six HOPE VI sites in Milwaukee, Wis., and Washington, D.C., all of which were in the process of being redeveloped with HOPE VI funds during the study period. Displacement refers to changes in crime patterns that occur because offenders adapt their behavior to changes in opportunities for offending. In the context of the proposed work, opportunity changes are the result of large-scale public housing redevelopment. Anecdotal evidence suggests that, when HOPE VI developments are demolished and construction begins on new housing, residents are typically moved to other public housing sites in the same city. Our assumption was that crime would move with those residents to the new public housing locations, or to other nearby areas offering similar criminal opportunities. Three central research questions thus guide this report: 1. Does the closing of a large high-poverty public housing development under HOPE VI influence patterns of crime in and around that development, and if so, how? 2. Does crime displacement or di usion of benefits result during the time that the development is closed for rebuilding, and does crime return to previous levels when the development reopens? 3. Do different methodologies for examining crime displacement and diffusion of benefits from public housing developments yield similar results, and which is most appropriate for studying displacement in this context? The work entailed a statistical analysis of potential displacement or diffusion of crime from three selected sites, after the redevelopment timeline of each site was established. Three methods were employed: a point pattern analysis, a Weighted Displacement Quotient (WDQ), and time series analysis. The methods were compared following their application in each site. The results indicate that displacement of crime did not appear to be a significant problem during or following redevelopment under the HOPE VI program in these three sites. Instead, a diffusion of benefits was observed to some extent in each site. We found a clear indication in all three sites that crime dropped at some point during redevelopment and that redevelopment affected crime in surrounding areas in some way — usually by decreasing it. The effects in the buffers (the areas searched for displacement or diffusion of benefits) varied, but for the most part, we observed a diffusion of benefits from the target sites outward. Additional investigation into subtypes of crime would help to bring more specificity to the results (e.g., whether any crime prevention methods implemented during redevelopment should target specific types of crimes that are more vulnerable to displacement). In addition, in no site did we find any return to pre-intervention crime levels following the intervention period in either the target site itself or in the buffer areas. This indicates that the positive effects — the drops in crime — lasted at least as long as the study period, which was generally one to two years beyond the end of the intervention period. The project also aimed to compare different methods for studying displacement. The point pattern analysis had limited use in the present context, but we concluded that it would have more utility if a specific crime such as homicide, robbery, or burglary, were studied as opposed to studying a class of crimes such as personal or property crimes. The method is also quite involved, but efficiencies are gained once analyses are set up for one context, making it easier to apply the method in additional contexts (e.g., for additional time period comparisons, different areas/site boundaries, or types of crime). While it cannot replace more rigorous statistical analyses and testing, the typical constraints felt by most practitioners on time and resources make the WDQ best suited for their context. The WDQ is intuitive, easy to calculate, and does not require a long series of data. It is appropriate for use in exploring the possible effects of an intervention to determine whether more sophisticated analyses are worthwhile. While there are drawbacks to the use of the WDQ — it is only descriptive, it can only indicate relative (not absolute) effect sizes, and it is dependent on the parameters selected (time periods and displacement areas selected) — it is nonetheless a useful intermediate tool in the study of displacement. Where skilled statisticians are available and a quantification of the changes in crime levels is desired, the time series analyses methods presented here produce more rigorous results. Our results also demonstrated the desirability of the structural Vector Autoregression (VAR) over the traditional time series method typically used in displacement research — single series Autoregressive Integrated MovingAverage (ARIMA) modeling. The VAR was preferable based on the simultaneous modeling of the three study areas, as opposed to modeling each area individually. Finally, to the extent that the three HOPE VI sites in two cities are representative of other actual and possible HOPE VI sites, the results are applicable to other public housing sites undergoing this type of large-scale redevelopment, especially given the comparability of results we found across sites and methods. The consistency with which we found evidence of diffusion from the sites is an indication that redevelopment under HOPE VI does indeed lead to diffusion of crime reduction, whether via changes directly attributable to HOPE VI in the target area or indirectly by encouraging additional investment in the larger neighborhood of the HOPE VI site, leading to additional redevelopment efforts in areas surrounding the HOPE VI site itself. Based on our findings, we expect that housing authorities that undertake such largescale public housing redevelopment efforts as are common under HOPE VI will likely see a diffusion of benefits to nearby areas, and those nearby areas may experience reductions in crime levels similar to that experienced in the redevelopment site itself. Localities considering large-scale redevelopment, either under the HOPE VI program or following a similar process, might look at specific crimes that may be displaced, such as personal crimes (as was the case in Milwaukee) and enact policies that serve to prevent displacement specifically of those crimes from occurring. Studying displacement from public housing is an important undertaking, and the possibility of displacement should be considered by housing authorities either already undertaking such e orts or considering whether to start large-scale redevelopment. While this research showed that diffusion of benefits is likely from redeveloped public housing, more work of this type — exploring different options for target area boundaries, intervention periods, and displacement areas — can provide more evidence of the best approaches to this type of effort and inform housing authorities of the most effcient ways to include studies of displacement and diffusion in their redevelopment efforts. Additional research in this vein that confirms the results here would add to the case presented by this research for the positive effects of HOPE VI on target sites and on surrounding neighborhoods. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center, 2011. 95p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 10, 2011 at: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412385-movin-out.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412385-movin-out.pdf Shelf Number: 122687 Keywords: Crime and RedevelopmentCrime DisplacementCrime PreventionDiffusion of BenefitsNeighborhoods and CrimePublic HousingUrban Areas |
Author: Hartley, Daniel A. Title: Blowing it Up and Knocking it Down: The Effect of Demolishing High Concentration Public Housing on Crime Summary: Despite popular accounts that link public housing demolitions to spatial redistribution of crime, and possible increases in crime, little systematic research has analyzed the neighborhood or city-wide impact of demolitions on crime. In Chicago, which has conducted the largest public housing demolition program in the United States, I find that public housing demolitions are associated with a 10 percent to 20 percent reduction in murder, assault, and robbery in neighborhoods where the demolitions occurred. Furthermore, violent crime rates fell by about the same amount in neighborhoods that received the most displaced public housing households relative to neighborhoods that received fewer displaced public housing households, during the period when these developments were being demolished. This suggests violent crime was not simply displaced from the neighborhoods where demolitions occurred to neighborhoods that received the former public housing residents. However, it is impossible to know what would have happened to violent crime in the receiving neighborhoods had the demolitions not occurred. Finally, using a panel of cities that demolished public housing, I find that the mean public housing demolition is associated with a drop of about 3 percent in a city’s murder rate and about 2 percent in a city’s assault rate. I interpret these findings as evidence that while public housing demolitions may push crime into other parts of a city, crime reductions in neighborhoods where public housing is demolished are larger than crime increases in other neighborhoods. A caveat is that while the city-wide reduction in assault rate appears to be permanent, the city-wide reduction in murder rate seems to last for only a few years. Details: Cleveland, OH: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, 2010. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper 10/22: Accessed September 12, 2011 at: http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/workpaper/2010/wp1022.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/workpaper/2010/wp1022.pdf Shelf Number: 122724 Keywords: Neighborhoods and CrimePublic HousingUrban AreasUrban Renewal |
Author: Popkin, Susan J. Title: Safety Is the Most Important Thing: How HOPE VI Helped Families Summary: Fear of crime has profound implications for residents, causing stress and social isolation; relocation has brought about a dramatic positive impact on residents’ life circumstances. Those residents who left traditional public housing—voucher holders and unassisted renters and homeowners—are now living in neighborhoods that are dramatically safer than their original public housing developments. These improvements in safety have had a profound impact on their quality of life; they can let their children play outside, they are sleeping better, and are feeling less worried and anxious overall. However, those who remain in traditional public housing developments are still living in extremely dangerous circumstances, little better than where they started. Details: Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 2007. 12p. Source: Metropolitan Housing and Communities Center Brief No. 2: Internet Resource: Accessed February 12, 2012 at Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 124106 Keywords: Fear of CrimePublic Housing |
Author: Fagan, Jeffrey Title: Race and Selective Enforcement in Public Housing Summary: Drugs, crime and public housing are closely linked in policy and politics, and their nexus has animated several intensive drug enforcement programs targeted at public housing residents. In New York City, police systematically conduct “vertical patrols” in public housing buildings, making tens of thousands of Terry stops each year. During these patrols, both uniformed and undercover officers systematically move through the buildings, temporarily detaining and questioning residents and visitors, often at a low threshold of suspicion, and usually alleging trespass to justify the stop. We use a case-control design to identify the effects of living in one of New York City’s 330 public housing developments on the probability of stop, frisk and arrest from 2004-11. We find that the incidence rate ratio for trespass stops and arrests is more than two times greater in public housing than in the immediate surrounding neighborhoods. We decompose these effects using first differences models and find that the difference in percent Black and Hispanic populations in public housing compared to the surrounding area predicts the disparity in trespass enforcement and enforcement of other criminal law violations. The pattern of racially selective enforcement suggests the potential for systemic violations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s prohibition on racial discrimination. Details: New York: Columbia Law School, 2012. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Columbia Public Law Research Paper No. 12-314: Accessed September 11, 2012 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2133384 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2133384 Shelf Number: 126298 Keywords: Drugs and CrimePublic HousingRacial DiscriminationRacial DisparitiesRacial Profiling in Law Enforcement |
Author: New York City Department of Investigation Title: NYPD and NYCHA's Roles in Controlling Violent and Narcotics Crime By Removing Criminal Offenders from Public Housing Summary: Since 1996, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) have operated under a joint public safety agreement requiring NYPD to inform NYCHA of arrests of NYCHA residents, or on NYCHA property, so that NYCHA can then take steps to keep dangerous criminals out of public housing. NYPD has failed to comply with this agreement in that it does not routinely inform NYCHA of arrests, eve n where they involve sexual assault, gun possession, or n arcotics trafficking. In turn , even when informed of such arrests, NYCHA often fails to take steps to remove such criminals from public housing and thus protect the overwhelming majority of law abid ing residents. These systemic failures documented by a Department of Investigation review of thousands of files have contributed to disproportionately high violent crime rates at NYCHA, including a shooting incidence rate that is four times higher tha n in the City as a whole. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 1996, N YPD and NYCHA entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) , through which NYPD agreed to provide NYCHA with all arrest and complaint reports concerning criminal activity taking place at NYCHA dev elopments, or committed by NYCHA residents. The purpose of the MOU is to enable NYCHA, the largest landlord in New York City, to undertake its critical obligation to maintain safety and security at public housing developments by monitoring criminal activ ity at public housing developments , evict ing criminal offenders where needed to protect public safety, and address ing physical security vulnerabilities highlighted in these reports. After several incidents in which crimes were committed on NYCHA property by known felons, the New York City Department of Investigation (DOI) conducted a proactive investigation to determine NYPD's compliance with the 1996 MOU. This led to a further investigation of NYCHA's efforts to evict or exclude individuals and families whose criminal activities pose a threat to their neighbors. DOI's investigation revealed several key failures by both NYPD and NYCHA: 1) NYPD is out of compliance with the MOU because it does not provide NYCHA with NYPD complaint reports concerning NYCHA properties. 2) NYPD is also violating the MOU by failing to share with NYCHA reports of arrests of non - residents on NYCHA property. 3) Pursuant to Patrol Guide procedure known as "Cases For Legal Action" (CFLA) , NYPD is required to report to NYCHA all arrests of NYCHA residents on NYCHA property for certain enumerated serious violent and drug crimes . However, NYPD's actual compliance with this internal procedure in a sample one - month period was only 67% . As a res ult, NYCHA loses opportunities to address dangerous conditions by evicting or excluding residents who have committed violent crimes. 4) NYCHA , in turn, fails to take sufficient action to ensure that criminal offenders who pose a danger to their neighbors are removed from public housing. Specifically, NYCHA has a weak enforcement record of terminating tenancies based on criminal activity by public housing leaseholders or unauthorized occupants (dubbed "non - desirability" cases). 5) Longstanding NYCHA procedure known as "Permanent Exclusion" allows NYCHA to exercise discretion concerning NYPD Cases For Legal Action referrals. Specifically, although NYCHA has legal authority to evict the entire household of a criminal offender who presents a danger to neighbors' safety or peac eful tenancy, instead NYCHA may and frequently does opt for the less severe sanction of Permanent Exclusion of only the individual offender from the apartment, thus allowing possibly innocent household members to remain in public housing. DOI's investigation revealed that NYCHA's enforcement of Permanent Exclusion is essentially toothless, such that criminal offenders are allowed to return to NYCHA housing without consequences . 6) DOI further identified numerous critical flaws in NYCHA's systems and resources for enforcing Permanent Exclusion, including severe understaffing, inadequate safety equipment and protocols, an ineffective bureau cratic case management approach, and lack of coordination with law enforcement entities that could assist with meaningful enforcement of Permanent Exclusion, including by arresting excluded occupants subject to open warrants or Trespass Notices that prohibit their presence on NYCHA premises. Details: New York: NYC Department of Investigation, 2015. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 3, 2016 at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/doi/downloads/pdf/2015/Dec15/pr41nycha_nypd_mou_120815.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.nyc.gov/html/doi/downloads/pdf/2015/Dec15/pr41nycha_nypd_mou_120815.pdf Shelf Number: 140148 Keywords: Drug TraffickingDrugs and CrimeEvictionHousing and CrimePublic HousingViolent Offenders |
Author: Weine, Stevan Title: No-Trespass Policies in Public Housing Summary: Increasingly, public housing authorities (PHAs) are implementing "no-trespass" policies designed to combat crime by non-residents in their developments. These policies allow PHAs to develop "ban lists" of unwanted non-residents who may be cited for criminal trespass if found on PHA property. Implementation of such policies may conflict with resident's rights to have visitors, and invitees' rights to visit. The effects of these policies on crime, perceptions of safety, and associational rights are unknown. Through legal analysis and case studies of three PHAs-Yonkers, NY; Chester, PA; and Annapolis, MD-I investigate the impact of these policies on residents, PHA officials, project managers, police, and people who are banned. My findings suggest that a no-trespass policy, narrowly targeted and as part of a larger security strategy, can promote perceptions of safety among public housing residents. Strong, stable PHA management and a collaborative relationship with residents are key to successful implementation. With due process protections and clear procedures for assuring that tenants' rights to have visitors are not violated, it can pass constitutional muster. Whether it is an effective, or cost-effective, form of crime control is very much in debate. Implemented in isolation, however, a no-trespass policy is not likely to be effective in reducing crime and promoting perceptions of safety, and runs the risk of being used to police residents, rather than to protect them. If the policy is not narrowly tailored, it can divide families unnecessarily and discourage familial ties that create stability in a community. No-trespass policies can be blunt weapons against crime that cast very wide nets over a community, restrict movement, and interfere with family relationships. Applied arbitrarily and targeted indiscriminately, these policies are not likely to be constitutional. PHAs should consider whether no-trespass policies are worth the considerable resources needed to implement and maintain them, and reassess how these policies fit the larger objective of fostering safe places in which to live and raise a family. Longer-term safety may be better served by developing residents' human and social capital, and by providing social supports and services, rather than on banning criminals from PHA property. Details: Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2016. 203p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed May 17, 2017 at: http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3876&context=edissertations Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3876&context=edissertations Shelf Number: 145561 Keywords: Crime PreventionPublic HousingTrespassingZoning Ordinances |
Author: Bae, John Title: Coming Home: An Evaluation of the New York City Housing Authority's Family Reentry Pilot Program Summary: Public housing authorities across the nation historically have barred many with criminal records from public housing residency. However, given evidence of the critical role stable housing and family reunification plays for people coming back to their communities from incarceration, some housing authorities are rethinking their practices. This report evaluates the Family Reentry Pilot Program (FRPP), launched in November 2013 by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) in partnership with city and state corrections agencies, the New York City Department of Homeless Services, and intermediaries including Vera and the Corporation for Supportive Housing. FRPP reunites formerly incarcerated men and women with their families in public housing and partners with community organizations to offer participants reentry services. Vera interviewed participants, family members, and staff from partner organizations to explore the program's effects on participants' and family members' lives and understand the strengths and weaknesses of the program's components. The research also produced first-ever estimates of people returning from incarceration who are affected by NYCHA's admission policies. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2016. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 23, 2017 at: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/coming-home-nycha-family-reentry-pilot-program-evaluation/legacy_downloads/NYCHA_report-032917.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/coming-home-nycha-family-reentry-pilot-program-evaluation/legacy_downloads/NYCHA_report-032917.pdf Shelf Number: 146812 Keywords: Housing Prisoner Reentry Public Housing |
Author: New York City Department of Investigation Title: NYCHA Is Still Failing to Remove Dangerous Criminals from Public Housing Summary: The New York City Housing Authority ("NYCHA") continues to allow criminals - including gang members, drug traffickers, and violent offenders - to reside in public housing. Despite a mandate to protect its 400,000 lawful tenants, NYCHA has failed to take meaningful steps, or to exercise the legal remedies already available, to remove dangerous offenders from public housing apartments. In December 2015, the New York City Department of Investigation ("DOI") issued a Report that highlighted the failure of the New York City Police Department ("NYPD") to comply with an internal NYPD Patrol Guide procedure known as "Cases For Legal Action," and a similar 1996 Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with NYCHA, both of which require NYPD to report to NYCHA arrests of NYCHA residents for certain violent or other serious crimes. The purpose of these policies is to enable NYCHA, the largest landlord in New York City, to undertake its critical obligation to maintain safety and security at public housing developments by staying apprised of criminal activity, removing criminal offenders when needed to protect public safety, and addressing physical security vulnerabilities. Additionally, the Report demonstrated that even when made aware of resident arrests, NYCHA often failed to take steps to remove criminal offenders from public housing and protect the overwhelming majority of law-abiding residents. The 2015 Report highlighted failures in the following areas: - NYPD had not fully upheld its commitment to share information with NYCHA about resident arrests on NYCHA grounds, in violation of both the MOU, and NYPD's Cases For Legal Action policy promulgated as Patrol Guide #214-07. - NYCHA was failing to use available tools, including a procedure known as "Permanent Exclusion," to ensure that criminal offenders who threatened their neighbors' safety or peaceful tenancy were removed from public housing. Through Permanent Exclusion, NYCHA may exercise its discretion to remove an individual criminal offender from public housing, and thus avoid eviction of the entire household. DOI found that NYCHA's enforcement of Permanent Exclusion was essentially toothless, thus frequently allowing criminal offenders to remain in or return to NYCHA housing without consequences. - DOI identified key flaws in NYCHA's systems to monitor and enforce Permanent Exclusion, including severe understaffing of investigative and legal staff, and inadequate safety equipment and protocols for field investigators. In the 2015 Report, DOI made nine Policy and Procedure Recommendations for improvement, which both NYPD and NYCHA accepted and agreed to implement. DOI has now conducted a follow-up investigation to check whether meaningful progress has been made to address the vulnerabilities highlighted in the 2015 Report and to make additional recommendations to ensure the safety of NYCHA tenants. Details: New York: New York City Department of Investigation, 2017. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 26, 2018 at: http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doi/reports/pdf/2017/2017-03-28-NYCHAMOUreport.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doi/reports/pdf/2017/2017-03-28-NYCHAMOUreport.pdf Shelf Number: 149899 Keywords: Drug TraffickersGangsPublic HousingPublic SafetyViolent Offenders |
Author: Morgan, Anthony Title: Reducing crime in public housing areas through community development: An evaluation of the High Density Housing Program in the ACT Summary: The High Density Housing Program (HDHP) is a collaborative program involving Reclink Australia, the Australian Capital Territory Justice and Community Safety Directorate (JACS), ACT Housing, ACT Health and ACT Policing. It involves the application of community development approaches to prevent crime and antisocial behaviour at Ainslie Avenue, a large public housing area in the ACT comprising six (previously seven) blocks. An on-the-ground manager (OTGM), employed by Reclink Australia, maintains a continuing presence across the site, coordinating existing services to residents and introducing new events, activities and programs that provide opportunities for resident interaction and relationship building and that address the needs of residents. The HDHP draws on Australian research evidence that showed social approaches to crime prevention, including community development, can improve neighbourhood cohesion and are associated with reduced crime (Samuels et al. 2004). The HDHP has four primary objectives. I t aims to promote community safety and security, prevent and reduce opportunities for crime in public housing sites and surrounding areas, develop pro-social and law abiding community engagement among residents and facilitate and support residents' access to health, mental health, education and employment services. The evaluation of the HDHP employed a rigorous quasi-experimental design which enabled changes in recorded assaults and property crime, disturbance incidents and ambulance attendances at Ainslie Avenue to be compared with those of another public housing area that shared similar characteristics. This component of the evaluation also examined whether there had been any displacement or diffusion of benefit to surrounding areas. A cost-benefit analysis (CBA) compared the cost of the program with monetised benefits associated with changes in recorded crime rates. This was supported by analysis of data collected by the OTGM on program delivery and in-depth interviews with 15 residents about their experiences of the program and living at Ainslie Avenue. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2018. Source: Internet Resoruce: Research Report 06: Accessed May 7, 2018 at: https://aic.gov.au/publications/rr/rr6 Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://aic.gov.au/publications/rr/rr6 Shelf Number: 150070 Keywords: Communities and CrimeCrime DisplacementCrime PreventionHousing DevelopmentsNeighborhoods and CrimePublic HousingPublic Safety |