PSN Workshop Poster · Title: PSN Workshop Poster Created Date: 11/3/2017 2:43:09 PM
Reducing Serious Violent Crime: Lessons from PSN in the U.S. Edmund F. McGarrell Director and...
-
Upload
nora-porter -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
6
Transcript of Reducing Serious Violent Crime: Lessons from PSN in the U.S. Edmund F. McGarrell Director and...
Reducing Serious Violent Crime: Lessons from PSN in
the U.S.
Edmund F. McGarrell
Director and Professor
School of Criminal Justice
Travel Rule #1 – Carry on the clothes you need
Why Share Lessons Between US & SA?
• Democratic governments
• Regional & global economic powers
• Committed to rule of law
But
• High levels of violent crime
• Historic patterns racial conflict & injustice that complicate policing & justice system processes
The Promise
• Within U.S., evidence has accumulated over the last 15 years that can significantly reduce the most serious gun violence
Reducing Homicide Risk (Indianapolis)
Note: Each trend is population specific for each graph presented above
All 15-
24 y
ear o
ld ho
mici
des
Young
whit
e fe
male
hom
icide
s
Young
whit
e m
ale h
omici
des
Young
blac
k fe
male
hom
icide
s
Young
blac
k m
ale h
omici
des
Young
blac
k m
ale h
omici
des
in fiv
e ho
tspo
ts
All oth
er h
omici
des
0.020.040.060.080.0
100.0120.0140.0160.0
26.15.1
14.9 18.2
112.9
152.1
3.514.8
2.2 4.5 11.5
66.445.6
2.6
Homicide Risk by Group per 10,000 Residents
Pre-IVRP Post-IVRP
Plan
• Briefly review this research evidence
• Present evidence from Project Safe Neighborhoods
• Discuss both the process (how) and the substance (why) of these violence reduction interventions
• Consider implementation issues - how to make it happen
Evidence-Based Strategies for Reducing Gun Crime Circa 1994
Promising Practices for Reducing Gun Crime, Circa 1999
Directed Police Patrol
Project Exile Strategic Problem Solving – Boston Ceasefire Model
Kansas City Richmond Boston
Indianapolis Indianapolis
Pittsburgh Los Angeles
Key Ingredients
• Use of analysis to understand & guide interventions
• Focused on specific problems (gun violence, high risk people, places, contexts)
• Focused deterrence
– Focus on high risk individuals, groups, contexts
– Risk communication strategy
• Steps to increase legitimacy, perceptions of fairness
Project Safe Neighborhoods
• National program to reduce gun crime (2001-2010)
• Built on these promising practices
• National program coordinated locally through U.S. Attorneys Offices (94 cover the U.S.)
PSN – Federal Program Adapted to Local Context
Federal government will provide resources to local initiatives with following conditions:
• Must be focused on violent crime & homicide
• Must include a research & analysis component
• Must include partnerships beyond police & prosecutors
PSN Evaluation Challenges
• National, “full coverage,” program• Uneven implementation• Larger cities offer treatment and comparison sites but
may have both citywide and targeted program components
• Smaller and medium cities – may be no logical comparison site
• Lack of consistent measures of gun crime across jurisdictions
• Variation in data availability (e.g., NIBRS vs. non-NIBRS)
PSN Impact – Stage One
Series of site specific case studies
• Ten tests of impact on gun crime
• Reductions in gun crime in all ten sites (impact in two of these studies was equivocal)
PSN Impact – Stage Two
• Assess impact of PSN in all U.S. cities with populations of 100,000+
• Trend in violent crime 2000-01 compared to 2002-06
• Compare PSN target cities with non-target cities
• Compare cities by level of PSN implementation dosage (range 3-9)
Measuring Implementation
• Implementation Dosage
– Research integration
– Extent & quality partnerships
– Federal prosecution for gun crime
Overall Finding
• PSN target cities in high implementation districts experienced significant declines in violent crime in comparison to cities in low implementation districts and non-target cities
Violent Crime Trends in PSN Target Cities by Level Federal Prosecution
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006850.00
900.00
950.00
1000.00
1050.00
1100.00
1150.00
High prosecution sites (n = 26)
Medium prosecution sites (n = 29)
Low prosecution sites (n = 27)
Vio
len
t C
rim
e R
ate
per
100
,000
Low Prosecution
Medium Prosecution
High Prosecution
PSN Impact
Level of PSN Dosage
PSN Target Cities
Non-target Cities
Low -5.3% +7.8%
Medium -3.1% <-1.0%
High -13.1% -4.9%
-8.89% -0.25%
PSN Impact
Level of PSN Dosage
PSN Target Cities
Non-target Cities
Low -5.3% +7.8%
Medium -3.1% <-1.0%
High -13.1% -4.9%
Total -8.89% -0.25%
HGLM Models
Being a target city and having a higher level of dosage was significantly related to a reduction in violent crime controlling for:
• Concentrated disadvantage
• Population density
• Police resources
• Correctional population Journal of Quantitative Criminology (2010) 26:165-190.
Promising Practices
• Some combination of focused deterrence, communication, data-driven problem solving, & linkage to opportunities, appears promising in reducing gun crime
15 Years of Suggestive Evidence on Reducing Gun Crime
Directed Police Patrol
Project Exile Strategic Problem Solving
Equivocal Evidence
Kansas City Richmond Boston St. Louis
Indianapolis Montgomery Indianapolis Durham
Pittsburgh Mobile Los Angeles
Stockton
Lowell
Omaha
Greensboro
Winston-Salem
Mixed Model Chicago
PSN National Assessment (all cities over 100,000 population)
Pre-PSN
Key Elements
• Process (how it works)
• Substance (why it works)
Process – Intelligence Led Problem Solving
• Strategic & tactical understanding of the gun crime problem in specific jurisdictions
• Highly focused
• Evidence-based
• Adaptive & self-correcting
Intelligence-led Problem Solving
Problem Analysis
Strategy
Implementation
Assessment & Feedback
Specific Strategies
Enforcement • Chronic violent offender
lists• Call-in meetings• Directed police patrol gun
hot spots• Smart prosecution• Probation/parole home
visits• Focused warrant service
Intervention/Prevention • Direct linkage to services
for at-risk populations• Mentoring• Street-level intervention• Moral voice of community• Community revitalization
Risk-Based StrategiesIncapacitation
Focused Deterrence
Limit Opportunity, General Deterrence
Compliance through Belief,
Stakes in Conformity
High Risk
Low Risk
Balanced Strategies
• Focused and Fair
Substance/Theory Process
Highly Focused Multi-agency, Multi-sector
Focused Deterrence backed up by incapacitation
Data-driven; intelligence-led; research partner
Risk Communication Offender notification meetings and public education campaign
Social Support/Procedural Justice/Restorative
Community collaboration
Caution - Although evidence shows it can work, it does not always do so
• Lack commitment and leadership
• Misdiagnosis
• Not focused
• Lack intensity or dosage
• Not sustained
– Declare victory
– Turnover
Lessons Learned – Cascading Implementation (vs. National Implementation)
Assessing Capacity for Implementation
• Leadership & Commitment
• Prior Experience with Key Components
• Assess & Learn from Early Adopters while Building Capacity in other Locations