By Jorja Leap, Jeffrey Brantingham, Todd Franke, Susana Bonis

The Community Safety Partnership emerged as a comprehensive violence reduction and community safety strategy first implemented in four public housing developments in 2011 by the Los Angeles Police Department, the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (HACLA), and the City of Los Angeles’ Office of Gang Reduction and Youth Development (GRYD). On the basis of its impact in these settings, CSP has been recognized as a state‐of‐ the‐art counter‐violence strategy and has received extensive coverage in the media. However, despite the commendation and media attention, there has been limited external assessment of the CSP.1 Beyond this, there have been no formal evaluations of the program to determine if it, in fact, works. Additionally, despite the promise and early successes CSP encountered, as time passed, challenges arose surrounding fidelity to the CSP model, leading to a need for the model to be documented and formalized.

This evaluation of the LAPD Community Safety Partnership (CSP) was designed to examine both the impacts and challenges that have emerged over eight years of experience with this non‐traditional, community safety initiative. Over the course of the last year, three teams of researchers from UCLA have rigorously evaluated this model, using both quantitative and qualitative research methods to examine crime data as well as draw upon the viewpoints of law enforcement, residents, institutional partners, and community‐based organizations.

Ultimately, the evaluation study set out to holistically assess the CSP and its impact, focusing on two of the four public housing developments where CSP was originally implemented: Nickerson Gardens in Watts and Ramona Gardens in Boyle Heights. The evaluation plan, detailed in the first chapter of the report (“Overview of the CSP Evaluation: Methodology and Origins”), was established prior to engaging in any research activities. Over the past year, the goal of the evaluation study was to assess whether the CSP model actually works and – if CSP is determined to be effective – how the key elements of this model of law enforcement can be implemented nationally. To accomplish this, it was critical to offer recommendations on what is required to retain CSP’s effectiveness as it expanded, improved its operations, and was institutionalized within the LAPD. The meta‐analysis of all data collection led to the following conclusions regarding the effectiveness of the CSP model and the challenges it faces.

KEY EVALUATION FINDINGS

It is clear from the data collection, analysis, and findings described in the research chapters in the report that the CSP Comprehensive Safety Model effectively works by building trust and relationships between CSP officers and community residents and stakeholders. These relationships and the actions they give rise to, in turn, ensure that the community feels protected and strengthened. As trust increases between residents and the LAPD, the evaluation research indicates that residents do reach out to officers when there are problems. This also contributes to a greater sense of safety, further reflected by the decreases in violent crime. The key evaluation findings consisted of the following: 

• CSP’s trust and relationship‐based partnership policing improves resident perceptions of safety. 

• Implementation of CSP helps reduce the dangerous conditions at CSP sites that historically fueled violent crime and enhanced gang control. 

• By disrupting gang intimidation and control of public spaces, CSP increases residents’ ability to gather and enjoy public spaces, facilities, and programs. 

• As CSP works to reduce dangerous and high‐risk conditions that fuel crime, residents’ and stakeholder trust grows. 

• Analysis of LAPD crime statistics demonstrates that crime reductions associated with CSP sites are even greater than overall crime declines across the City. 

• It is clear that the impact of CSP is not narrowly limited to reducing gang violence; instead, its efficacy for other epidemic crises, such as homelessness, is promising and should be implemented.

Los Angeles: UCLA, 2020. 212p.

By Farhang Heydari

This Article connects the administrative state and the criminal system—two dominant modes of governance that too often are discussed in isolation. It presents an original account of how the policies and the failures of federal administrative agencies drive criminal law enforcement at the local level. In doing so, this Article exposes a significant driver of criminal policy and possible interventions to correct some of its failures. The primary vehicle for this analysis is an in-depth case study of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)—the federal agency best known for crash test dummies and five-star ratings as part of its traffic-safety mission—and its support for pretextual traffic stops. This Article unearths a series of NHTSA programs that have, for decades, trained state and local police to use traffic stops to ferret out drug traffickers, violent criminals, and even terrorists. NHTSA’s embrace of a policing mindset has become an unexpected enabler of pretextual stops, one that has pulled agency resources away from systemic regulation of the auto industry. The impact of NHTSA’s quiet campaign has been significant, engraining its view of traffic stops within policing agencies across the country without public visibility or oversight. These revelations come at a critical moment for a nation struggling with twin crises of traffic safety and policing. Learning from NHTSA and moving to the broader administrative state, this Article draws on a diverse set of agencies to identify a pattern of non-law-enforcement agencies shirking their systemic regulatory duties in favor of individual criminal law enforcement. The result is that parts of the administrative state have become systemic drivers of overpolicing and criminalization in ways that have, until now, received virtually no attention.

76 STAN. L.REV. 1 (2024)

By Lonnie M. Schaible

The oversight of law enforcement agencies, particularly at the local level, is crucial for ensuring accountability, transparency, and adherence to community standards. Historically, law enforcement controlled administrative mechanisms for investigating misconduct, determining discipline, and identifying areas for improvement of policy and practice have been inadequate. Moreover, law enforcement misconduct and accountability shortcomings have increasingly been subject to public scrutiny and calls for reform. As independent entities, civilian oversight agencies play a vital role in improving accountability by examining complaints, conducting or reviewing investigations, analyzing policies and practices, and/or making recommendations for improvement of law enforcement. Most cities with civilian oversight either have multiple oversight entities or a single entity with multiple responsibilities. Hybrid oversight models combining these powers are prevalent. Across initiatives and models, oversight confronts a variety of challenges. Drawing on interviews with oversight practitioners, empirical analysis of local statutes governing oversight, and analysis of the broader political context in which oversight operates, this report explores the landscape of civilian oversight, focusing on its powers, responsibilities, and challenges, and legislative trends that affect civilian oversight. Oversight Practitioners’ Perspectives on Principles of Effective Oversight Between August of 2022 and April of 2023, thirty-six oversight practitioners and community members were interviewed, representing twenty-six states and the District of Columbia. Interviewees included individuals with diverse backgrounds in oversight, ranging from those implementing new programs to retired veterans of the field. Interviewees also represented the perspectives of practitioners working in each of the four dominant models of oversight: commissions, review boards, investigative agencies, and auditor/monitors, as well as hybrid combinations of these. The interviews revealed a shared understanding of the significance of oversight work for promoting accountability, transparency, and trust between law enforcement and the communities that law enforcement serves. Practitioners also shared the value of ensuring fair treatment of both officers and community members, and addressing broader systemic concerns about police policies and practices. However, practitioners also identified significant impediments to effective oversight, especially: legal constraints, limited resources, and resistance from law enforcement agencies. Despite these challenges, practitioners indicated a commitment to overcoming impediments and advancing the goals of civilian oversight. They especially emphasized the importance of building strong relationships with law enforcement agencies, community stakeholders, and policymakers to garner support for oversight initiatives. Practitioners viewed collaboration and dialogue as essential for overcoming resistance and effecting meaningful change within police departments. Additionally, practitioners advocated for increased funding and resources to bolster the capacity of oversight entities and enhance their effectiveness in addressing systemic issues. Practitioners also widely noted the importance of local charters and ordinances and advocated for careful consideration of local needs and improvement of these statutes consistent with the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement’s (NACOLE) thirteen principles for effective oversight. Powers and Responsibilities of Civilian Oversight Entities Considering the importance of local charters and ordinances guiding oversight, and their adherence to NACOLE’s thirteen principles, a thorough empirical review of these is presented in this report, with a particular focus on statutes in the top one hundred most populous cities. Findings suggest that more robust oversight authorities tend to be more prevalent in the one hundred most populated cities; however, powers and authorities of oversight widely vary across these cities. Powers held by oversight entities include: reviewing internal investigations, conducting independent investigations, analyzing policy and practice, mediating complaints, making recommendations about discipline, and rarely, directly adjudicating or administrating of discipline. The most common blend of responsibilities includes reviewing internal investigations, conducting independent investigations, and analyzing policies and practices. While many entities benefit from statutory authority to conduct investigations, findings suggest the scope of investigative authority remains very limited in some jurisdictions. Likewise, provisions in charters and ordinances statutorily requiring adequate access to key personnel and data remains a challenge. In part such challenges result from the broader political context which oversight entities are subject to, and especially efforts by state legislatures to preempt local oversight authorities. State-level Legislative Trends in Civilian Oversight With limited federal legislation focused on police and civilian oversight, states have become battlegrounds for reform efforts. Between 2020 and 2023, over 37 states have passed legislation impacting civilian oversight. While most of these reforms advance oversight authority in a manner consistent with NACOLE’s thirteen principles for effective oversight, several states have enacted legislation that significantly impedes oversight. These impediments are especially likely to arise due to variations in home rule authority, with some states preempting local control over oversight efforts through legislation. Such legislation poses significant obstacles to implementation, maintenance, or reform of civilian oversight, and more broadly, policing. Notably, Florida, Arizona, Utah, Tennessee, and Wisconsin have recently implemented laws targeting existing oversight entities and/or imposing stringent requirements on new ones. These laws often limit the authority of oversight boards, impose unreasonable training requirements, or restrict the ability of oversight entities to influence law enforcement policies and practices. Despite such legislative constraints, existing oversight entities have adapted to comply with state statutory limitations, albeit often with authorities limited to advisory roles and restricted powers. Nonetheless, the limitations imposed by state laws can significantly hinder the effectiveness and independence of civilian oversight efforts and generally present a broader ongoing threat to the advancement of fair and effective civilian oversight. Conclusion The landscape of civilian oversight reflects a complex interplay of powers, responsibilities, legislative trends, and challenges. While oversight agencies play a critical role in promoting accountability and transparency in law enforcement, they also face significant obstacles, including local political and resource constraints, and increasingly, state-level preemption and legislative restrictions. Despite these challenges, efforts to adapt and uphold principles of effective oversight continue, highlighting the ongoing importance of civilian oversight in ensuring law enforcement accountability and community trust. To address these challenges, those seeking to advance and promote effective civilian oversight of law enforcement should advocate for legislative reform, engage in community outreach and education, invest in capacity building and training, foster collaborative partnerships, and prioritize continuous evaluation and improvement. By taking proactive and collaborative action, stakeholders can work together to overcome obstacles and strengthen civilian oversight, thereby advancing the principles of accountability, transparency, and trust.

Indianapolis, IN: National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) , 2024. 46p

By: Federico del Castillo

In the broad context of Uruguay’s police reform, the Ministry of Interior is implementing a pilot Problem-Oriented Policing (POP) program in Montevideo since late 2012. This research examined the obstacles confronted by the program throughout its implementation. Using a grounded theory approach, qualitative data was collected through 20 semi-structured interviews with members of the Uruguay National Police (UNP) of different ranks. Findings were analyzed based on the following categories: a) contextual factors; b) theoretical and practical inaccuracies; c) characteristics, skills and actions of project managers; d) resistance and motivational issues; e) resources; f) external support and cooperation. Consistent with research conducted on POP in other settings, findings suggest the program confronted a diverse set of obstacles over its implementation corresponding to all but one of the proposed categories. The study concludes with a series of recommendations to inform future POP endeavors by the UNP.

November 2017

By: Mark Ungar and Enrique Desmond Arias

In every part of Latin America, unprecedented levels of violence have even led to questions about the underlying quality of democratic rule. In response to this crisis, governments have enacted an array of policies, ranging from repressive mano dura crackdowns and adoption of new technology to the reform of criminal justice systems. But one of the most popular approaches to reform efforts has been community-oriented policing (COP), a strategy popularised in the USA in the 1990s, which is based on close collaboration between the police and the neighbourhood residents. COP focuses on the causes of crime
rather than simply responsding to it by empowering citizens, building police
community partnerships, improving social services and using better crime statistics. Street patrols, policy councils and youth services are some of the many COP programmes being adopted in Latin America and other regions. As other authors emphasise, this reform also entails restructuring of police forces to make them more flexible and responsive. Skogan and Hartnett (1997), for example, stress decentralisation of authority and foot patrols to facilitate citizen-police communications and public participation in setting police priorities and developing tactics.

The results of these efforts, however, have been very uneven. Some programmes have shown considerable success while others have faced many difficulties and either been defunded or left to expire of their own accord. Why do some projects succeed where others fail? More importantly, what can Latin American policy-makers learn from past experiences in the region in order to develop more effective and successful policies for the future?

This edition of Policing and Society takes a step towards answering these questions by bringing together security officials, practitioners and scholars to offer detailed analyses of community reform efforts at the local, regional and national levels throughout Latin America. The articles cover programmes in Colombia, Chile, Venezuela, Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Argentina, Mexico and Brazil. By detailing the challenges facing reform and how to overcome them, these cases provide an important compendium about community policing in Latin America that will help practitioners and policy-makers build effective durable programmes. This introduction highlights critical issues that the individual articles develop further. Those challenges, as contributors discuss, fall along two main dimensions: support for community policing by key actors, from Presidents to neighbourhood residents, and a continuity of that support through the entire process of community policing creation, from initial proposals to programme evaluation.

Policing & Society, Vol. 22, No. 1, March 2012, 1
13

By: David Weisburd, Stephen D. Mastrofski, Ann Marie McNally, Rosann Greenspan, James J. Willis

This paper provides the first national description of CompStat programs, considered in the framework of strategic problem solving. Relying on a survey of American police departments conducted by the Police Foundation, we examine the diffusion of CompStat programs and the nature of CompStat models throughout the Untied States. We also assess the penetration of models of strategic problem solving more generally into American policing. Our findings document a process of “diffusion of innovation” of CompStat-like programs in larger police agencies that follows a rapid pace. At the same time, our data suggest that many elements of strategic problem solving had begun to be implemented more widely across American police agencies before the emergence of CompStat as a programmatic entity, and that such elements have neem adopted broadly even by departments that have not formally adopted a CompStat program.

CompStat holds out the promise of allowing police agenices to adopt innovative technologies and problem-solving techniques while empowering traditional polcie organizational structures. However, our analysis suggests that at this stage, what most characterizes CompStat department and distinguishes them from othrs is the development of the control element of this reform. This leads us to question whether the rapid rise of CompStat in American police agencies can be interpreted more as an effort to maintain and reinforce the “bureaucratic” or “paramilitary” model of police organization (that has been under attack by scholars for most of the last two decades) than as an attempt to truly reform models of American policing.

Volume 2, Number 3, 2003, PP 421-456

By: RHENA FE P. TONDO, LESSEL R. FRANCO, HASNA T. GUMANDOL, MARK E. PATALINGHUG

As the philosophy of policing shifts from a traditional to a community-based approach, its implementation needs to be assessed. The study determined the program implementation of community-oriented policing in the town of Dumingag Zamboanga del Sur and its effectiveness in crime reduction from 2014 to 2018. The study employed a descriptive-survey method with the questionnaire checklist as the main instrument used in gathering the data and information. The survey questionnaire underwent an evaluation process by field expert and tested using Cronbach’s alpha. Weighted Arithmetic Mean, Percentage and ANOVA were the statistical tools used in the data analyses. The participants were PNP, residents, and Barangay Officials of Dumingag, Zamboanga del Sur. The results showed that PNP and Barangay officials perceived that the extent of community-oriented policing in Dumingag was implemented without lapses. However, residents rated that the implementation has minimal lapses. The study also revealed that there was a reduction of crimes committed for the past five years of the implementation. The result shows a significant difference among the perceived extent of implementation of the three groups of respondents.

IOER INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOL. 2, NO. 4, DEC., 2020

By Barry Friedman et al.

Recent events have brought to the fore longstanding concerns about the nature of policing in the United States and how it undermines racial equity. As an institution, policing needs significant reconsideration. It is time to rethink the structure and governance of policing. It is also time to engage in a deeper conversation about the meaning of public safety. In the meantime, however, the following is a list of urgently-needed reforms, compiled by a small group of law school faculty, each of whom runs or is associated with an academic center devoted to policing and the criminal justice system. The reforms are not intended as an entire agenda for what ought to happen around policing, or what American policing should look like. Rather, they offer immediate, concrete steps federal, state, and local governments can take to address enduring problems in policing. The authors are scholars who are also deeply involved in the daily practice of policing, and included among them are the Reporters for the American Law Institute’s Principles of the Law: Policing, which works with advisers from across the ideological spectrum in drafting high-level principles to govern policing, though the recommendations here go beyond the scope of the ALI project.

New York: NYU School of Law Policing Project (June, 2020).18p.

By Derek A. Epp & Macey Erhardt

This article asks if investigative police stops (1) help officers find contraband, and (2) serve as a bulwark against violent crime. We focus on the experiences of Fayetteville, North Carolina, which in 2012 mandated that police officers obtain written permission from motorists before conducting searches absent any probable cause. The effect of these mandates was a dramatic reduction in the use of so-called “consent searches.” Using traffic stops data available from the North Carolina Department of Justice, we show that after these reforms went into effect officers made fewer overall searches, but contraband continued to be recovered at pre-reform levels, indicating a reduction in low-quality searches with minimal substantive impact. Moreover, we find that homicide rates are statistically indistinguishable between the pre- and postreform periods. Thus, Fayetteville local government was able to implement community pleasing police reforms without jeopardizing community safety.

POLITICS, GROUPS, AND IDENTITIES https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2020.1724160

By Ellen G. Cohn, Suman Kakar, Chloe Perkins, Rebecca Steinbach, Phil Edwards

Road traffic crashes are a major and increasing cause of injury and death around the world. In 2015, there were almost 6.3 million motor vehicle traffic crashes in the United States. Of these, approximately 1.7 million (27%) involved some form of injury and 32,166 (0.5%) resulted in one or more fatalities (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2016, Traffic Safety Facts 2013: A Compilation of Motor Vehicle Crash Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the General Estimates System). The most common cause of urban crashes appears to be drivers running red lights or ignoring other traffic controls and injuries occur in 39% of all of these types of crashes (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, IIHS, 2018, Red light running). While many drivers obey traffic signals, the possibility for violations exists due to issues such as driver distraction, aggressive driving behaviors, or a deliberate decision to ignore the traffic signal. One researcher suggests that eliminating traffic violations could reduce road injury crashes by up to 40% (Zaal, 1994, Traffic law enforcement: A review of the literature). Red light cameras (RLCs) are an enforcement mechanism that permit police to remotely enforce traffic signals; they may serve as a deterrent to drivers who intentionally engage in red light running (RLR). The one previous systematic review of RLCs found that they were effective in reducing total casualty crashes but also found that evidence on the effectiveness of cameras on red light violations, total crashes, or specific types of casualty crashes was inconclusive. However, this review searched only a small number of electronic databases and was limited to a handful of studies published in 2002 or earlier.

Objectives

This report updates and expands upon the previous Cochrane systematic review of RLCs. The aim of this review is to systematically review and synthesize the available evidence on the effectiveness of RLCs on the incidence of red light violations and the incidence and severity of various types of traffic crashes.

Search Methods

This study uses a four-part search strategy that involves: (a) searching 27 online electronic bibliographic databases for published and unpublished evaluations of RLCs; (b) searching the websites of 46 international institutes and research agencies focusing on transportation issues for reports and other gray literature; (c) searching the reference lists of published studies to identify additional published and unpublished works; and (d) conducting a keyword search using Google and Google Scholar to search for additional gray literature.

Selection Criteria

The criteria for inclusion were determined before the search process began. To be eligible, studies must have assessed the impact of RLCs on red light violations and/or traffic crashes. Studies must have employed a quantitative research design that involved randomized controlled trials, quasi-random controlled trials, a controlled before-after design, or a controlled interrupted time series. Research that incorporated additional interventions, such as speed cameras or enhanced police enforcement, were excluded, although normal routine traffic enforcement in the nonintervention control condition was not excluded. Both published and unpublished reports were included. Studies were eligible regardless of the country in which they were conducted or the date of publication. Qualitative, observational, or descriptive studies that did not include formal comparisons of treatment and control groups were excluded from this research.

Data Collection and Analysis

Initial searches produced a total of 5,708 references after duplicates were removed. After title and abstract screening, a total of 121 references remained. Full-text review of these works identified 28 primary studies meeting the inclusion criteria, in addition to the 10 studies identified in the prior Cochrane review. Because several of the primary studies reported on multiple independent study areas, this report evaluates 41 separate analyses. At least two review authors independently assessed all records for eligibility, assessed methodological risk of bias, and extracted data from the full-text reports; disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third review author. To facilitate comparisons between studies, a standardized summary measure based on relative effects, rather than differences in effects, was defined for each outcome. Summary measures were calculated for all studies when possible. When at least three studies reported the same outcome, the results were pooled in a meta-analysis. Pooled meta-analyses were carried out when at least three studies reported the same outcome; otherwise, the results of individual studies were described in a narrative. Heterogeneity among effect estimates was assessed using χ2 tests at a 5% level of significance and quantified using the I2 statistic. EMMIE framework data were coded using the EPPIE Reviewer database.

Results

The results of this systematic review suggest that RLCs are associated with a statistically significant reduction in crash outcomes, although this varies by type of crash, and suggest a reduction in red light violations. RLCs are associated with a a 20% decrease in total injury crashes, a 24% decrease in right angle crashes and a 29% decrease in right angle injury crashes. Conversely, however, RLCs are also associated with a statistically significant increase in rear end crashes of 19%. There was also some evidence that RLCs were associated with a large reduction in crashes due to red light violations. There is no evidence to suggest that study heterogeneity is consistently explained by either country or risk of bias, nor did the presence or absence of warning signs appear to impact the effectiveness of RLCs. Studies accounting for regression to the mean tend to report more moderate decreases for right angle crashes resulting in injury than studies not accounting for regression to the mean. Studies with better control for confounders reported a nonsignificant decrease in right angle crashes, compared with a significant decrease for all studies.

Authors' Conclusions

The evidence suggests that RLCs may be effective in reducing red light violations and are likely to be effective in reducing some types of traffic crashes, although they also appear linked to an increase in rear end crashes. Several implications for policymakers and practitioners have emerged from this research. The costs and benefits of RLCs must be considered when implementing RLC programs. The potential benefits of a reduction in traffic violations and in some types of injury crashes must be weighed against the increased risk of other crash types. The economic implications of operating an RLC program also must be considered, including the costs of installation and operation as well as the economic impact of RLC effects.

Campbell Systematic Reviews, Volume16, Issue2, June 2020

By The Little Hoover Commission

The state should prioritize data collection and collaboration with research institutions as it seeks to understand and combat retail theft in the long term, the Little Hoover Commission concluded in a new report, Retail Theft: A Data Driven Response for California.

The report was prompted by a request from 66 members of the legislature to study issues surrounding retail theft. The report notes that since the Legislature and the voters are now considering changes to the penal code sections addressing retail theft, the Commission’s recommendations focus on long-term improvements in the way the state reports and assesses retail theft and law enforcement’s response.

In recent years, alarming videos showing brazen thefts of commercial property have circulated on social media, increasing public concern. Some businesses have cited theft as a reason for closing stores. These crimes also burden the criminal justice system, using limited resources that could be redirected toward more severe crimes.

Looking at available data, the Commission found that, despite a recent uptick, reported retail theft remains at roughly the same level as during the 2010s and lower than it was in earlier decades. Like many crimes, retail theft is undoubtedly underreported, but the report notes that by its nature, the level of underreporting is difficult to measure.

The Commission concluded that more detailed crime data is needed for policymakers to craft an evidence-based response. The Commission commended the Department of Justice for its existing data initiatives, and recommend they be expanded in consultation with experts. At a minimum, data should include information on crime statistics, demographics, law enforcement response times, prosecution and adjudication data, and rehabilitation, reentry, and recidivism data. In addition to data collection, the Commission recommended that the state partner with California universities and other nonpartisan research institutions to study preventative measures, rates of underreporting, economic impact, and drivers of public perception.

“Never was the aphorism, ‘You can’t manage what you don’t measure,’ more true than when discussing retail theft. We can’t fully comprehend the effects of retail theft, or address its causes, without detailed data. As it now stands, necessary data is missing,” said Commission Chair Pedro Nava. “There are many potential partners who can collaborate to remedy the information gap. Working with stakeholders, California can fund coordinated studies and data collection efforts to better understand the complexities of these crimes.”

“California has the opportunity to join efforts with some of the best researchers in the nation as it navigates the issue of retail theft,” said Vice Chair Anthony Cannella. “With a more complete picture of how retail theft is impacting the state, the Governor and Legislature can make evidence-based decisions on how to respond effectively.”

Sacramento: Little Hoover Commission, 2023/ 35p.

By Louise Forde and Ursula Kilkelly

Under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, children in conflict with the law are entitled to dignity and respect for their rights within a youth justice system adapted to their age and circumstances. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child recognises the necessity of ensuring that children’s rights are protected during the criminal process, emphasising the importance of legal advice, information and support to enable their participation in the process. Police questioning can be a particularly difficult experience for children, given their vulnerability and immaturity and yet it can have very serious consequences for children. This article examines the rights of the child during police questioning, from the perspective of children themselves. Presenting the findings of a study of children’s experiences of their rights when being questioned by the police (An Garda Síochána) in Ireland, the article highlights the need to adapt police questioning processes to the needs and circumstances of the child, while emphasising the powerful case for greater involvement of children in research about criminal justice and policing so that their experiences of their rights can be better understood.

Criminology & Criminal Justice Volume 24, Issue 3, July 2024, Pages 648-669

By BRANDON DEL POZO, Jessica Reichert, Bruce Taylor

Police frequently encounter people with opioid use disorder (OUD), having a profound effect on their risk environment and health outcomes. Officers retain significant discretionary authority in their response to these encounters. To explore the factors that underlie these decisions, we surveyed a sample of Illinois police officers. We administered an online survey to Illinois police departments using a random sampling strategy, stratified by agency size and the rurality of their service areas. Our final sample was 248 police officers from 27 departments. We surveyed officers’ beliefs about 1) influences and control over their decision-making; 2) the approval of other actors in making referrals to treatment for addiction, and 3) the potential impacts of medication-assisted treatment (MAT). We analyzed the survey data using descriptive statistics and regression analyses. Most officers were highly influenced by the expectations of their supervisors when responding to subjects who appeared to have an OUD, and about half would take direction from addiction treatment providers. Police in urban departments perceived greater support for MAT and were more likely to believe MAT could reduce the need for future arrests. Our findings suggest ways police officers can be influenced to make discretionary decisions that improve the health outcomes of their encounters with people with OUD: 1) Supervisors should serve as champions to promote referrals to treatment for substance use disorders; 2) Collaboration between law enforcement and community addiction treatment providers should be strengthened, and 3) MAT should be supported and expanded in rural areas.

Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2024. 29p.

By: Kyle Hucke

The street-level violence prevention field includes a range of professionals fulfilling specific roles in various programs. This literature review focuses on violence interrupters as a specific type of outreach worker and the programs that utilize them. Violence interrupters embed themselves within specific areas of communities experiencing elevated levels of violence and mediate emerging conflicts between groups and/or individuals to interrupt the cycle of violence. This review describes the theoretical frameworks guiding the design of these programs, the role of violence interrupters, and program implementations. It also summarizes results from the research literature that evaluates these programs. The literature suggests that violence interrupters are successful at reaching the target population. The research on the effects of these programs on community violence shows that most experience initial success followed by challenges maintaining that success. Program instability from funding and employee turnover likely reduce the effectiveness of VI programs. The dangerous and stressful nature of the work and the relatively poor level of monetary compensation drives the high turnover of VIs. The high social and economic cost of violence suggests that VI programs “pay for themselves” by preventing violence. Overall, evidence suggests violence interrupters are a valuable part of the violence prevention field, but researchers, practitioners, and policymakers need to be aware of violence interrupters’ strengths, limitations, and the supports needed for them to work effectively.

Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority 2024. 42p.

By Illinois Crime Reduction Task Force

Background

To develop and propose policies and procedures aimed at reducing crime in Illinois, the Crime Reduction Task Force Act established the Crime Reduction Task Force (20 ILCS 3926/1-5). Task Force membership was statutorily mandated in the Crime Reduction Task Force Act. The Task Force was active from October 2022 through June 2024. Meetings were held virtually and were open to the public. Meeting content included:

• Testimony from subject matter experts.

• Input from community service providers.

• Reports and other documents submitted by Task Force members and other interested parties.

• Votes taken on submitted recommendations.

Recommendations

The approved recommendations are listed below.

• There should be a new legislation that mandates judges to order an abusive partner to complete a Partner Abuse Intervention Program (PAIP) when granting an Order of Protection for domestic violence in civil courts. This can help prevent domestic violence, and crime in general, because domestic violence offenders can pose a threat to a family as well as to the community. A PAIP focuses on power, control, and relationship dynamics. It helps people reflect on their relationship and take responsibility for one’s behavior.

• If the person fails to complete the PAIP, there should be a consequence, such as restrictions in child custody or supervised visitation of family members. Because taking a PAIP costs money and it lasts 26 weeks, there should be a financial support to complete a PAIP for low-income earners.

Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.. 2024. 52p.

By Nancy Sullivan, Sharyn Adams, Eva Ott Hill, Jessica Reichert

Introduction

A significant amount of police engagement involves persons with multiple service needs, such as substance use treatment or mental health services. A public safety and public health partnership encourages police to “deflect” individuals from the criminal justice system by referring them to treatment and other service providers (Charlier & Reichert, 2020; Lindquist-Grantz et al., 2021). Individuals may face several barriers to treatment and services, but deflection can reduce barriers such as social stigma, waiting lists, and limited ability to personally fund treatment (Charlier & Reichert, 2020).

We evaluated the action planning process for a deflection program in Southwestern Illinois, later named Choices. The program serves the following counties: Calhoun, Greene, Jersey, Macoupin, Madison, Monroe, Montgomery, and St. Clair. The development of the program began with guided action planning sessions during which community stakeholders agreed that the focus of this program will be substance use and mental health. The program was then developed based on results of the action planning sessions. The two facilitators of the sessions were from Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities’ Center for Health and Justice (TASC CHJ), and at least one researcher from the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA) attended each session.

Methodology

In conducting an evaluation of the action planning process, researchers attempted to answer the following research questions:

• Who participated in the action planning process?

• What transpired during the action planning process?

• What feedback about the action planning process did participants provide?

• What was the content of the final action plan?

• To what extent was there collaboration among the participants?

• What areas of collaboration can be enhanced to produce the most effective outcomes?

In order to evaluate the action planning process aimed at developing the deflection program, researchers examined multiple data sources, including field observations, supporting documents (e.g., sign in sheets, handouts), and participant surveys. We conducted field observations and took field notes during six action planning sessions in October and December 2022. At the end of each session day, we administered a survey to all participants to obtain their feedback on the program and action planning process. On the final day of action planning, we administered a survey to gauge the level of collaboration among participants. One study limitation was that not all participants completed every action planning session survey. The number of participants and surveys varied by session. In addition, as Chicago-based researchers, we may not understand the intricacies of the community area.

Key Findings

The action planning process for the Southwestern Illinois deflection program took place over six days. Fifteen representatives from 13 different organizations participated in at least one session.

During observations of action planning, participants appeared unsure about the deflection model as well as the overall action planning process. Facilitators did the bulk of the talking, and participation was consistent but low. When they joined in, participants were engaged and discussed community issues, needs, collaboration, and program design. The participants completed the action plan document detailing objectives and action steps for the program implementation. However, the participants struggled to produce measurable objectives when finalizing the Solutions Action Plan (SAP).

Based on the results of the surveys, participants felt that collaboration was strong and that those who should have been at the action planning sessions were already there. By the conclusion of the final session, the majority in attendance reported that they were confident this program would help their community and positively rated the action planning process.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the evaluation, we offer four recommendations for future action planning sessions. First, increased collaboration is necessary in order to have an effective action planning session and, down the line, a successful implementation of the program. Team building as well as community engagement are recommended to improve collaboration among both groups. Second, increased participation is essential to the success of the action planning sessions. Not only is the number of participants important, but their diversity, as well. Moreover, action planning participants should be representative of the local communities they are serving. Third, it is essential that all participants in action planning have a thorough understanding of both deflection and the action planning process. Ensuring that all participants fully understand both of these items at the start of action planning will reduce the time spent explaining them throughout the sessions, resulting in more engagement and participation in actual planning. Finally, it is essential that all objectives created by participants are reasonably measurable. The use of a logic model is recommended to keep participants on track and to make sure that each objective is measurable and attainable.

Conclusion

We conducted an evaluation of the action planning process to develop a deflection program, Choices, to help persons with substance use and/or mental health disorders in Southwestern Illinois. The action planning sessions for the program identified community issues and discussed community needs, collaboration, and resources in order to draft the program’s structure, design, and implementation. These discussions led to the final action plan document, which laid out objectives and action steps for the implementation phase of the program. The program employs a police-led deflection model, with the help of multijurisdictional drug task forces, to refer individuals to services in their community. We recommend increased engagement of diverse community members, more clarity on the purpose of the action planning process, and the creation of measurable objectives.

Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2024. 57p.

By Joanna Shapland, Jamie Buchan, Steve Kirkwood and Estelle Zinsstag

This report summarises key findings from our project which was funded by the Scottish Government, in support of the Scottish Government’s Restorative Justice Action Plan (Scottish Government 2019). In particular, we seek to support the expansion of restorative justice in Scotland to include its use in response to more serious offending and more difficult cases.

Our objectives were to develop a sense of what factors were perceived by facilitators as risky in any restorative justice process, how they assessed risks, and what measures have been used to prevent and mitigate these risks, with a view to informing the development of practice and policy in Scotland. By ‘risk’ we mean not (just) risks to safety but any factors that might jeopardise the success of the process, i.e. the participants being able to communicate safely. To this end, we interviewed 30 restorative justice facilitators in 11 European jurisdictions. The extent to which restorative justice was ‘established’, and how it was organised, varied considerably between these. Our questions roughly followed the timeline of a restorative justice process: we began by talking about the referral process and how facilitators decide to move forward (or not), before considering facilitators’ definitions of ‘risk’, approaches to assessment, and measures they used to mitigate specific risks in restorative justice. Finally, we asked them about their training and measures for capacity building, including co-facilitation, mentoring and reflective practice.

Key Findings

• The restorative justice risks described by our interviewees attach to individual people and cases. Some cases are risky, but this is because of individual factors, not because of the type of case or person. This is essentially different to the actuarial/statistical mode of risk assessment found in many criminal justice settings.

• It is impossible to predict the risks of a case before engaging with the individuals involved, because different people experience ‘risk’ factors in very different ways. Furthermore, the seriousness of the harm in a given case may not tally with the legal categories imposed on it by the criminal justice system.

• Aside from unwillingness to engage or attempts to coerce others on the part of either party, only two types of risk were seen as ruling out restorative justice entirely: where the person responsible is unable or unwilling to acknowledge the harm (which does not necessarily entail admitting criminal guilt), and where either party is unable to comprehend the proceedings, usually because of substance use or severe mental disorder. Even these may be amenable to change over time. 

• Most facilitators agreed that certain difficult cases, particularly those involving sexual offending and domestic/intimate partner abuse, presented particular challenges related to trauma and power imbalance. There was no sense however of them being qualitatively different to other cases in terms of how they were approached from a practice perspective - they just require additional care and preparation.

• Capacity to facilitate more challenging cases comes with experience. In Scotland, many facilitators are less experienced with these types of case, so are more concerned about risk and their capacity to facilitate these; facilitators in other jurisdictions with experience around facilitating in cases involving more severe harm are much more confident taking on more difficult cases. 

• Facilitators rarely used formal risk assessment processes, and none appeared to use, or have, validated risk assessment tools in relation to restorative justice, although some may use informal ‘checklists’ of factors. Professional judgment and a case-by-case approach, sometimes with advice and support from other professionals, was the key element in assessing and mitigating risks. Given this, and the individual nature of ‘risk’, it was usual to consider risks and mitigating measures simultaneously, not sequentially. In assessing risk, they focus on risks related to the restorative justice process itself, rather than more general risks, such as risk of re-offending. They would also adopt a restorative approach to assessing risk, such as through raising and discussing potential risks and their mitigation with participants. 

• Facilitators valued the advice of other professionals, such as prison officers, social workers and psychiatrists, and (in some cases) these professionals’ work supporting parties in restorative justice meetings. However, in making decisions about restorative justice, facilitators’ own judgment and the views and needs of the parties (principally the person harmed) were seen as more important. 

• Facilitators use a range of measures to mitigate potential risks. The single most important measure is simply preparation with the people involved, through a series of ‘pre-meetings’. All facilitators used these meetings to prepare each party for the restorative justice process, and identify and mitigate particular risks; more difficult cases were generally seen as requiring more pre-meetings. 

• Communication difficulties which could affect the process included language barriers as well as those related to mental illness or the youth of the parties. Facilitators used a range of methods to overcome these, including interpreters and supporters as well as non-verbal communication techniques. 

• While some types of case, such as those involving young people, communication difficulties or large groups, might require extra preparation, these cases (like more difficult cases) were not seen as fundamentally different to any others. 

• Many participants want supporters present at face-to-face meetings, and so facilitators invited these people into the restorative justice process as ‘supporters’. These could be friends and family of the participants or sometimes professionals (e.g. therapists or social workers). While this was seen as useful, care was needed in order to avoid power imbalances or inappropriate interventions from supporters. 

• There was varied evidence on the practice of using follow-up measures after the meeting, though this was seen as very desirable. While some facilitators iv check in with the participants afterwards, others are content simply to provide contact information and solicit feedback. 

• It was common for facilitators to work in pairs on a given case, particularly where the case is risky, complex or involves many people. This ‘co facilitation’ is particularly valuable for gaining complementary perspectives as well as for training newer or less experienced facilitators, who can ‘shadow’ a senior colleague. 

• The physical space in which a meeting occurs is very important. Preferably this would be an accessible and neutral space with no links to criminal justice or to either of the parties, and conducive to an atmosphere of safety and calm. It should have at least one ‘breakout room’ for parties to prepare and take breaks. 

• Facilitators generally felt that their training had prepared them adequately for facilitating restorative justice, but this training had not always been well evaluated. 

• Restorative justice is not suitable for all people or all cases. However, it is worth remembering that for some people harmed by offences, the risks of not engaging in restorative justice may outweigh the risks of doing so.

Suggestions 

• We do not advise the adoption of formal risk assessment processes in restorative justice. This would risk compromising the individual-focused ethos of restorative justice, and could have harmful consequences by imposing risk categories ‘top down’ on cases. Tools should particularly not be imported from other criminal justice processes, where the aims and purposes are likely to be different. There must be an acknowledgement that every case is different - the most serious offences may be relatively straightforward in restorative justice terms, while apparently minor crimes may hide unexpected risks. However, checklists, tailored to the specific restorative justice services, may function as a useful aide memoire for practitioners in considering the types of issues and factors that should be considered when assessing and mitigating risks. 

• ‘Pre-meetings’ are the key measure for identifying and mitigating risks. Without introducing undue delay, adequate time must be allowed for a preparatory meeting or meetings ahead of the restorative justice process. This is particularly true for more difficult cases. 

• Restorative justice services will need to be flexible in accepting referrals at different stages of the criminal justice process and afterwards, to allow for cases of serious offending where the person responsible is serving or has served a custodial sentence. 

• Where necessary, resources should be made available for communication support in restorative justice (interpreters and/or supporters). Non-verbal tools such as picture cards may also be helpful for supporting communication.

Edinburgh: Edinburgh University, 2022. 98p.

By Scottish Government, Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs

Although many countries have now introduced domestic homicide reviews, there remains little evidence on their effectiveness in creating system change and improving organisational practice. Taking the learning forward from reviews and ensuring recommendations are implemented is of crucial importance and at the very core of the purpose of the process, yet there is little evidence of how and whether this works in practice. A lack of evaluation of the effectiveness of domestic homicide reviews internationally makes it difficult to establish a consensus for best practice and develop a model with this in mind (Scottish Government, 2023). Still, where problems have been identified and mechanisms have been introduced to attempt to overcome these issues, we can consider these when developing a domestic homicide and suicide review (DHSR) model for Scotland. This will help to ensure that the process created does not repeat the same mistakes, and instead is constructed in a way that will enable lessons to be learned effectively from reviews. In doing so, Scotland’s model will facilitate the system changes and improvements that are the core purpose of conducting reviews, and will ensure that practitioners and victims’ families can have faith in the process and see value in their participation. This report builds on a working paper by Professor John Devaney, which introduces key points to consider for the implementation of learning from reviews to generate service improvement. This report outlines 15 aspects of good practice to be considered in the development of a domestic homicide and suicide review model for Scotland. The report then discusses the rationale behind these points in more detail, identifying existing challenges with implementing recommendations from reviews, exploring examples of good practice, and considering how to define and measure success and impact. This report was prepared by Justice Analytical Services for the DHSR Model Development Sub-Group. As the key points presented in this report have been generated at an early stage of development of the model, they are designed to be considered as general principles of good practice, and may require further refinement and deliberation as the details of the model are established. The information presented in this report is drawn from academic literature on domestic homicide reviews and other similar review processes, consideration of responses to the Scottish Government’s targeted engagement consultation, and consultation with British and international DHR experts (see Annex 1 for a description of the methodology).

Edinburgh: Scottish Government, Justice Directorate, 2024. 27p.

By SHEYLA A. DELGADO, GINA MORENO, FIDEL OSORIO, RICHARD ESPINOBARROS, JEFFREY A. BUTTS JOHN JAY COLLEGE RESEARCH AND EVALUATION CENTER

Researchers at the John Jay College Research and Evaluation Center (JohnJayREC) investigated transit fare evasion in subway stations and station complexes throughout New York City between 2018 and 2023. The study was conducted as part of the New York City Police Reform and Reinvention Collaborative Plan, overseen by the New York City Mayor's Office of Criminal Justice (MOCJ). The research team analyzed associations between fare evasion and arrests reported by the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and considered the social and economic characteristics of the neighborhoods surrounding each transit station. The study found no statistically significant associations between fare evasion enforcements and total arrests for felonies and misdemeanors. Fare evasion enforcement, however, was most prevalent in stations whose neighborhoods were characterized by high socioeconomic disadvantage. The statistical interaction of crime rates, fare evasion enforcement, and socioeconomic disadvantage underscores the role of social factors in public safety.

New York: JOHN JAY COLLEGE RESEARCH AND EVALUATION CENTER, 2024. 15p.

By Nick Sawhney

Fare Evasion and its enforcement is an ever-more relevant issue in New York City. In this paper, a data set of fare evasion arrests and weighted census data is created and analyzed using a difference-in-differences regression model in order to understand the impact of the Manhattan District Attorney’s 2018 policy to curtail the prosecution of those arrested for fare evasion in the New York City Subway. Results suggest that, despite an overall reduction in arrests, Black and Hispanic communities still saw an increase in fare evasion policing. Income inequality is suggested as an indicator of the number of arrests as well. Furthermore, the proportion of Black arrests was found to increase following the implementation of the policy, especially in areas which contain greater Black and Hispanic populations.

Published 2020.