By Charlotte Howell, Martin Gill and Janice Goldstraw-White

The aim of the research was to explore the forms of joint working that take place between the security sector and the police, and the barriers that can prevent this work from progressing. The research is based on the views of security professionals from in-house security, security suppliers, other security experts and some individuals working for, or recently retired from the police.

The research sets out different forms of police and private security engagement:

• Crime reduction

• CCTV surveillance/co-operation

• Crime investigation and reporting

• Education and awareness raising

• Facilitating access to a site for police training exercises

• Joint patrolling

• Private security adopting specific policing powers

• Funding police time

• Emergency response

• Public events

• Assisting vulnerable individuals/victims of crime

• Critical infrastructure

Further, the research identifies 6 key opportunities for improving engagement and overcoming barriers:

Understand what the private security sector does now

There is a need to change the flawed assumption that public protection is possible without the private security sector. The spaces protected by private security are places where the public work, live and spend leisure time, largely with minimal police input. Private security also assumes responsibility for protecting critical national infrastructure. There was a view that a better understanding of what private security does, would facilitate greater collaboration.

Stress the similarities

While the police and private security may have different philosophies, the similarities are striking and need to be brought to the fore. Both are committed to reducing crime, gathering intelligence and being visible. Protecting people and places is complex, it is a skilled task which both mostly do well. Both have come under fire at times for poor performance.

Be clear how private security benefits

Our survey of security professionals showed that the vast majority believe collaboration has huge potential and results in better protection of the public and of organisations, and in an increased capacity to respond to crime. Other benefits include that clients view police engagement positively, it increases the knowledge and skills of private security and improves morale; and a good rapport with the police can lead to more activity on site (such as training, presentations, patrols) which is seen as a positive in some contexts.

Be clear how the police (and public) benefits

The private security sector offers resources, expertise, and data/intelligence; it protects people, places, and infrastructure; and it mostly operates in domains the police cannot realistically cover without extensive additional support. All private security work helps policing. There is an opportunity to better tap into this work to enhance efforts to protect the public. All parties benefit from effective collaborative working.

Joint working does not have to be onerous

There are different ways of working together. More formal collaborations can be important but are not always necessary; there is enormous opportunity at the informal levels. Private security acts not only as the ‘eyes and ears’ of the police but as a voice too in sharing key messages about safety and security. Often joint working is not about the police transferring responsibility or granting police powers for security staff.

There is a need for strong leadership (on both sides)

Our survey of security professionals showed that three quarters thought there is a need for strong leadership on joint working, on both sides. Each is difficult to deal with; private security has no identifiable single voice while each police force acts autonomously. The statutory regulation of the security sector does not include police input, and police argue that it is difficult to know who we are dealing with. Concerns can only be solved or ameliorated with good leadership, which is also needed to solve a variety of other very solvable barriers such as: identifying appropriate partners operating at the right level; understanding mutual risks and rewards; providing continuity and consistency; avoiding unnecessary data sharing complications and leading on new ideas and ways of working.

Professor Martin Gill who led the research noted:

‘Our research indicates that security professionals saw significant value in collaborative working with the police, particularly to better protect the public as well as organisations. There were many examples of joint initiatives which were considered beneficial. However, it was also apparent that much potential was untapped; that there is a general lack of joint working and that partnerships often do not achieve their full potential because of common barriers. Further, security professionals consider themselves to be more enthusiastic about collaborative working than they perceive the police to be. The Policing Vision 2030 sets an objective to collaborate more to prevent crime, and this includes with businesses. What is needed now is strong leadership with a strategy to move collaboration forward.’

Tunbridge Wells, UK: Perpetuity Research, 2024. 91p.

By: Clifford Karchmer

Traditional police response to crime has been reactive, yet nationwide trends toward problem-oriented and community-oriented policing have changed this approach in many departments. Over the past decade, police executives have shifted to more proactive policing and have instituted collaborative programs with a wide range of community groups and other organizations to prevent crime. These programs likely have contributed to decreasing rime, with most success demonstrated by the vast reduction in the nation’s homicide rate.

This report reviews current trends in homicide rates, the changing police perspective on homicide prevention, and summarizes innovative police department programs as captured in a Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) exploratory project that examined the homicide prevention practices of over 70 police departments. The goal of this report is to highlight successful policing strategies and programs offered by departments in cities that have reduced homicide. Descriptions of homicide prevention strategies and key program elements common to successful police departments around the country may serve as a guide to other police executives seeking to reduce homicide in their communities.

Homicide Prevention, October 2002

By: John E. Eck and Tamara D. Madensen

Problem-oriented Policing is a theory of policing, but does not contain a theory of problems. Situational crime prevention is a theory of problems, but does not contain a theory of an implementing institution. The paper shows why without Situational Crime Prevention, problem-oriented policing would have difficulty working. An analogy is drawn to lichens and it is asserted that any useful theory of policing must be like a lichen.

January 2012, DOI: 10.4324/9780203154403

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: Gloria Laycock and Graham Farrell

This paper discusses some of the difficulties encountered in attempting to introduce ideas derived from research on repeat victimization to the police services of the United Kingdom. Repeat victimization is the phenomenon in which particular individuals or other targets are repeatedly attacked or subjected to other forms of victimization, including the loss of property. It is argued that repeat victimization is a good example of the kind of problem solving envisaged by Goldstein and discussed in his original conception of problem-oriented policing.

Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 15 (2003), pp. 213-237.

By Philipp M. Dau, Christophe Vandeviver, Maite Dewinter, Frank Witlox, Tom Vander Beken

We systematically review the effectiveness of police presence. In doing so, we investigate concepts of police presence and differences between reported effects. Using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and protocols, we systematically identify and review eligible studies on police presence. Further, quality assessment and findings synthesis are used to map limitations of current research as well as grounds for future avenues. The systematic search strategies yielded 49 studies focusing on testing the effects of police presence or evaluating its measurement. We find evidence that police presence has mostly crime reduction effects on crimes related to motor theft, property, violence, and guns. Police presence also reduces calls for service and improves traffic behaviour. Police presence focused on specific areas, times, and types of crime achieves maximum effectiveness. The reviewed studies show a high degree of heterogeneity in reporting, however, which limits comparability of findings across studies. Research on police presence presents evidence for significant crime preventative effects of focused police actions. Police presence shows the strongest effects when focused on certain areas, times, or types of crimes. We encourage future research to focus on police presence en route and its effects, including crime prevention, traffic regulation, and fear of crime.

Unpublished paper, 2021.

By: Graham Farrell

What follows proposes a means by which to improve and accelerate police work so that it has an emphasis upon the rights and needs of victims. Using a term such as victim-oriented policing sounds like a proposal to compete with community policing or problem-oriented policing, but it is not. As proposed here, it would be entirely the fact that the concerns of victims should underpin a great deal of police work - more so than they do at present. it would be a complement to, rather than a substitute for, such approaches to policing.

The main proposal of this paper is that a simple means to promote victim-oriented policing (the term is broadly defined later) may be via an emphasis upon the policing and prevention of repeat victimization. For present purposes, repeat victimization is defined as the repeated criminal victimization of a person or place, or a target however defined. it is now well known that a small proportion of victims experience a significant proportion of all crime because they experience repeat victimization (see e.g. Skogan 1999; Friedman and Tucker 1997; Davis, Taylor, and Titus 1997; Pease 1998). Hence, to cut a long story short, preventing repeat victimization holds the potential to prevent crime. it helps victims in a practical and fundamental manner: Ezzat Fattah suggests that “Healing, recovery, redress, and prevention of future victimization are the primary objectives of most crime victims” (Fattah 1997: 270)

The focus here is upon the implications for police work with victims. While the phenomenon of repeat victimization presents a potentially wide range of implications for research and practice, for different areas of the criminal justice system, the work of community agencies and individuals, these areas are not the focus here.

International Symposium on Victimology, pp. 196-212

By: Michael S. Scott

Police agencies have, for the most part, not yet integrated the principles and methods of problem-oriented policing into their routine operations. This is so for several reasons. First, many police officials lack a complete understanding of the basic elements of problem-oriented policing and how problem-solving fits in the context of the whole police function. Second, the police have not yet adequately developed the skill sets and knowledge bases to support problem-oriented policing. And third, the police have insufficient incentives to take problem-oriented policing seriously. This paper begins by articulating what full integration of problem-oriented policing into routine police operations might look like. It then presents one framework for integrating the principles and methods of problem-oriented policing into the whole police function. The paper then explores the particular skill sets and knowledge bases that will be essential to the practice of problem-oriented policing within police agencies and across the police profession. Finally, it explores the perspectives of those who critically evaluate police performance, and considers ways to modify those perspectives and expectations consistent with problem-oriented policing.

Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 15 (2003), pp. 49-77

By: Michael S. Scott

Problem-oriented policing initiatives are one important form of crime prevention, and they offer opportunities for learning about implementation success and failure. Problem-oriented policing initiatives can succeed or fail for a variety of reasons, among them: inaccurate identification of the probk?n, inaccurate analysis of the problem, inadequate implementation, or application of an incorrect theory. This paper draws upon both the research literature and reports on problem-oriented policing initiatives to identify those factors that best explain why action plans do or do not get implemented. It identifies and provides examples of five clusters of factors that help explain implementation success or failure: (I) characteristics, skills, and actions of project managers; (2) resources (3) support and cooperation external to the police agency; (4) evidence; and (5) complexity of implementation.

Crime Prevention Studies, volume 20 (2006), pp. 9-35

By: John E. Eck

Increasing attention is being paid to the systematic review and synthesis of evaluations of large-scale, generic, crime prevention programs. The utility of these syntheses rests on the assumption that the programs are designed to work across a wide variety of contexts. But many police problem-solving efforts and situational prevention interventions are small-scale efforts specifically tailored to individual contexts. Do evaluation designs and methods applicable to generic programs apply to problem specific programs? Answering this questions requires examining the differences between propensity-based and opportunity-blocking interventions; between internal and external validity; and between the needs of practitioner evaluators and academic researchers. This paper demonstrates that in some common circumstances, weak evaluation designs may have greater utility and produce more generalizable results than very strong evaluation designs. This conclusion has important implications for evaluations of place-based opportunity blocking, and for how we draw general conclusions about what works when, and what seldom ever works.

Crime Prevention Studies, volume 14, pp 93-117

By: Graham Farrell and Ken Pease

The attempt to reduce

• the number of crime events and/or

• the loss and harm resulting from crime events

is the core work of both the security industry and the police, with their local authority partners. The difference is that the former does its work for its employers (where the security is in-house) or for paying clients. The police act as the National Health Service to the security industry’s BUPA, with many of the same tensions that arise at the points of connection.

This chapter seeks to outline key aspects of criminology that, in the view of the authors, make a significant and continuing contribution to the security industry. Its main aim therefore, is to present an introduction to crime prevention and crime science for a readership working in the security industry. Enough case studies of successful crime reduction efforts have now been published to provide a source of information and possible emulation for anyone in the public or private sector seriously interested in crime and loss reduction.

August 2005 Chapter forthcoming in M. Gill (Ed.) The Handbook of Security. Perpetuity Press.

By: John E. Eck & Emily B. Eck

On May 16, 2010, in the Club Ritz nightclub, Jerry Scott shot Dexter Burroughs dead. This was the second killing in the bar since 1998. Five years earlier, four people were shot near the club, one by the police and three in a separate incident. Four years earlier, a fight at the club resulted in a car chase that killed Philiant Johnson and wounded three others. On Valentine’s Day 2010, three people were shot in the club’s parking lot (Baker, 2010; Horst, 2010). After the killing of Burroughs, the club closed for several months but then reopened. Police state that since reopening, “14 arrests for disorderly conduct or drug possession have been made at the club, plus 10 assaults, four domestic violence incidents, a robbery and carjacking” (Whitaker, 2011). The owner of the club stated: “It’s not our fault. Nightclubs do not kill people. People kill people” (Nightclub and Bar, 2010). Just as the owner of the Club Ritz implies they should, current crime policies focus exclusively on offenders. We suggest he is wrong—crime reduction policies also should focus on places. Research has established that crime is concentrated at places; yet to date, policy makers and criminologists have focused most of their attention on two policy prescriptions: use coercion to deter or remove offenders, use forms of social assistance to divert potential offenders from crime, or convince active offenders to pursue legitimate activities (Weisburd, Telep, and Braga, 2010).

Criminology & Public Policy Volume 11 Issue 2

By: KENT R. KERLEY & MICHAEL L. BENSON

Advocates of community-oriented policing contend that it has great potential to reduce crime and fear because it strengthens community social organization and cohesion. Previous studies of community policing, however, fail to include community process variables as outcome measures and instead focus on outcome measures such as crime rates and fear of crime. Despite the recent focus by criminologists on community context in general studies of crime and delinquency, no direct attempt has been made to investigate the potential relationship between community policing and broader community processes such as community organization, cohesion, and cooperative security. Using data from a comprehensive community policing study conducted in Oakland, California, and Birmingham, Alabama, from 1987 to 1989, this article investigates whether community policing strategies have effects on community processes. Findings indicate that community policing tactics do not have strong effects on community processes. These results may help explain why community policing has so far had little measurable impact on crime and fear of crime, and may be instructive for the design and evaluation of future community policing studies.

POLICE QUARTERLY Vol. 3 No. 1, March 2000 46–69

By: Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris and John E. Eck

The epidemic of obesity in American cities has alarmed public health professionals. Attention has been cast on the importance of leading an active life for good health, so questions have been raised about barriers to active living. One potential barrier is the concern many people have about crime. Is crime a barrier to active living, and if it is, what can be done about it? This paper draws from two fields— environmental criminology and urban planning—to provide evidence of how crime may reduce active living and what can be done to make the physical environment safer.

Environmental criminologists and urban planners start from complementary but different perspectives. Environmental criminologists focus on the development and prevention of crime patterns, particularly the interactions of offenders, potential victims, and others. Their interventions focus on the immediate environments of crime concentrations and manipulate these environments to alter offenders’ perceptions of their prospects of success. Planners and urban designers are interested in the legitimate users of the city, who also may become crime victims. They examine how different social groups perceive the public spaces of everyday life, and how these spaces can be modified to encourage desirable activities.

This paper applies both perspectives to explore the relationships among crime, fear of crime, and active living. We begin by describing these relationships to establish a broad research framework. We then look at the factors that influence fear of crime and how they vary among groups and settings. Next we examine the literature on the relationship between physical characteristics of settings, opportunities to commit crimes, and fear of crime. Crime and fear are not evenly distributed, even over similar places, so this is discussed in the fourth section. In the fifth part we examine criminal justice, the central role of police, and the theoretical perspectives offered by environmental criminology and situational crime prevention. We then turn to the effectiveness of situational crime prevention. We conclude by outlining a research agenda for increasing active living through reducing crime and fear of crime.

Health Promotion hepr-21-00-05.3d 10/1/07 19:08:27 380 Cust # 06050358R1

By: Rob T. Guerette, Stephen F. Pires, and Auzeen Shariati

Despite common media reports of death among kidnapped victims, little is known about the extent and factors that determine whether victims will be killed during the ransom process. Using data on 9,469 kidnappings for ransom incidents, which occurred in Colombia, South America between the years 2002 and 2011, this exploratory study sought to determine whether predictable patterns existed among those incidents in which victims were killed. The analyses revealed significant differences in the odds of death across victims, offenders, and situational circumstances. Distinct time-to-death trajectories were also found. Recognizing and understanding these patterns offer to improve preventive efforts.

Homicide Studies, 1 –16

By: Charlotte Gill, David Weisburd, Cody W. Telep, Zoe Vitter & Trevor Bennett

Objectives Systematically review and synthesize the existing research on community-oriented policing to identify its effects on crime, disorder, fear, citizen satisfaction, and police legitimacy.

Methods We searched a broad range of databases, websites, and journals to identify eligible studies that measured pre-post changes in outcomes in treatment and comparison areas following the implementation of policing strategies that involved community collaboration or consultation. We identified 25 reports containing 65 independent tests of community-oriented policing, most of which were conducted in neighborhoods in the United States. Thirty-seven of these comparisons were included in a meta-analysis.

Results Our findings suggest that community-oriented policing strategies have positive effects on citizen satisfaction, perceptions of disorder, and police legitimacy, but limited effects on crime and fear of crime.

Conclusions Our review provides important evidence for the benefits of community policing for improving perceptions of the police, although our findings overall are ambiguous. The challenges we faced in conducting this review highlight a need for further research and theory development around community policing. In particular, there is a need to explicate and test a logic model that explains how short-term benefits of community policing, like improved citizen satisfaction, relate to longer-term crime prevention effects, and to identify the policing strategies that benefit most from community participation.

J Exp Criminol DOI 10.1007/s11292-014-9210-y

By: Joshua D. Freilich

This article compares Beccaria’s and Situational Crime Prevention’s (SCP) claims across six dimensions. Both perspectives question harsh penalties, embrace crime reduction as a goal, and view some individuals as possessing agency and rationality. The latter two points distinguish them from most other criminological theories that are not focused on crime reduction and downplay offenders’ rationality. Both approaches have also been criticized for ignoring the root causes of crime in society. Importantly though, the approaches also differ. The Classical School and SCP are usually differentiated from positivistic approaches in their assumption of offender agency. This article found, however, that SCP does not assume offender agency in all contexts. In fact, many SCP interventions could be explained in positivistic terms. The analysis indicates that it is sometimes unclear which causal mechanisms underlie each of SCP’s 25 techniques of crime prevention. Clarifying the precise causal mechanism of each technique could lead to more effective implementation. The article places these and other issues in context and outlines a series of suggestions for future research to address to strengthen the SCP approach.

Criminal Justice Review 1-20

By Rana Sampson, Problem-oriented Policing Consultant

In the early 1990s, American policing, applying a problem-oriented approach, displayed much creative energy in closing drug markets. This has not translated to a under range of quality efforts in tackling other common crimes, such as burglary, auto theft, and shop-lifting. While few of the factors that combined to fuel wide exploration of creative solutions in drug markets are present for other crime and safety problems, there may be some simple ways to engage the police to further study and target other crimes. Three strategies are offered: identifying, understanding, and responding to snowball crimes; using a situational crime prevention approach to graded responses for repeat victimization; and examining privately-owned properties for disproportionate demands on police service with an eye towards shifting responsibility for crime-place management to these owners.

Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 15 (2003), pp. 239-256.

By Hannah Cortés-Kaplan and Laura Dunbar

This research study sought to examine the unique implementation issues for crime prevention programs aiming to serve Indigenous populations. This was completed through the analysis of implementation data from 49 crime prevention projects with completed evaluations, funded under the National Crime Prevention Strategy. The purpose was to examine the information that currently exists related to the implementation process, to provide an in-depth understanding of the associated challenges and strategies, and to identify possible recommendations for moving forward. An exploratory research design was employed, whereby data obtained from evaluation reports and related documents, were analyzed using Microsoft® Excel and QSR International NVivo 10. Results demonstrated that projects experienced implementation challenges in the following areas: program accessibility; funding requirements; management and administrative issues; and time management and planning deficiencies. Although few strategies were identified overall, adding a cultural element or making cultural adaptations were acknowledged as important components in addressing challenges. Findings from this research study identified the importance of program readiness and planning, resource limitations, culturally relevant adaptations, and formative evaluation in the implementation process. Knowledge of the latter may in turn help to assist crime prevention practitioners and policy makers in their understanding of implementation issues and strategies for improving projects aimed at serving Indigenous populations moving forward. 

Research Report: 2021–R001  Ottawa: Public Safety Canada. 2021. 33p.

by Rafael A. Mangual

After a long period of continuous violent-crime declines throughout the U.S.—spanning from the mid-1990s through the early 2010s—many American cities are now seeing significant increases in violence. Nationally, in 2015 and 2016, murders rose nearly 11% and 8%, respectively.[1] The national homicide rate declined slightly in 2017 and 2018, before ticking upward in 2019.[2] In 2020, the nation saw its largest single-year spike in homicides in at least 100 years—which was followed by another increase in murders in 2021, according to CDC data and FBI estimates.[3] In the last few years, a number of cities have seen murders hit an all-time high.[4] In addition to homicides, the risk of other types of violent victimizations rose significantly, as well.[5] While various analyses estimated a slight decline in homicides for the country in 2022,[6] many American cities still find themselves dealing with levels of violence far higher than they were a decade ago. While violent crime—particularly murder—is the most serious due in large part to its social costs,[7] there have also been worrying increases in crimes such as retail theft,[8] carjacking,[9] and auto theft,[10] as well as in other visible signs of disorder in public spaces (from open-air drug use and public urination to illegal street racing and large-scale looting and riots).[11] Although several contributing factors are likely, this general deterioration in public safety and order was unquestionably preceded and accompanied by a virtually unidirectional shift toward leniency and away from accountability in the policing, prosecutorial, and criminal-justice policy spaces. That shift is evidenced by, among other things, three major trends in enforcement: A 25% decline in the number of those imprisoned during 2011–22[12], A 15% decline in the number of those held in jail during 2010–21[13], A 26% decline in the number of arrests effected by law-enforcement officers during 2009–19[14]. Notable contributing factors to the decline in enforcement include: A sharp uptick in public scrutiny and interventions—in the form of investigations and legal action taken by state attorneys general and the federal Department of Justice—against local law-enforcement agencies[15]. The worsening of an ongoing police recruitment and retention crisis, particularly in large urban departments[16]. The electoral success of the so-called progressive prosecutor movement, which, by 2022, had won seats in 75 jurisdictions, representing more than 72 million U.S. residents[17]. Perhaps most important, the adoption of a slew of criminal-justice and policing reform measures at all levels of government[18]. Those who are skeptical of the criminal-justice reform movement have devoted most of their efforts to arguing against the movement’s excesses and explaining why it would be unwise to enact certain measures.[19] Less effort has been devoted to the extremely important task of articulating a positive agenda for regaining what has been lost on the safety and order front.[20] This paper seeks to add to that positive agenda for safety by proposing three model policies that, if adopted, would help, directly and indirectly, stem the tide of rising crime and violence, primarily by maximizing the benefits that attend the incapacitation of serious criminals (especially repeat offenders) and by encouraging the collection and public reporting of data that can inform the public about the downside risks that are glossed over by decarceration and depolicing activists. The three policies proposed here, which draw on policies proposed and adopted throughout the country in recent history: Modified “Three Strikes”—Creating a points system for various offenses as well as a points threshold that will trigger a mandatory minimum sentencing enhancement, in order to improve deterrence for those beneath the threshold and to maximize incapacitation for those who step over it. “Truth in Sentencing”—Setting a floor for how much of a given sentence must be served before a convicted felon becomes eligible for initial release into community supervision, in order to maximize incapacitation for those who have been convicted of a serious offense and sentenced to a term of imprisonment. “Data Transparency”—Identifies several types of crime-related data that jurisdictions will be encouraged to collect and report in a standardized manner to address the problem of making and evaluating policing and criminal-justice policies without the benefit of reliable, relevant data. These model policies should be viewed flexibly; policymakers should see them as starting points, feeling free to make changes that reflect the various concerns and idiosyncrasies specific to their respective jurisdictions.

New York: Manhattan Institute, 2024. 19p.