Evaluating the Lower Cape May (NJ) Regional 
School-Based Partnership:
School-Related Crime Prevention and Safety Initiative 
Theft Eradication Program

Prepared and Written by

Center for the Prevention of School Violence
Raleigh, North Carolina

Edited by Craig D. Uchida
21st Century Solutions, Inc.
December 2001

Evaluating the Lower Cape May Regional School-Based Partnership:
School-Related Crime Prevention and 
Safety Initiative Theft Eradication Program

Introduction

Lower Township (NJ) Police Department received a school-based partnership grant from the 
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice in 1998.  The grant 
partnered the police department with Lower Cape May Regional High School.   Specific partners 
included the School Resource Officer (SRO) assigned to Lower Cape May Regional High School, 
other officers of the Lower Township Police Department, and students and teachers at the school. 
 The Center for the Prevention of School Violence served as a project consultant and external 
evaluator.

The partners worked together on the School-Related Crime Prevention and Safety Initiative Theft 
Eradication Program.  The problem-solving approach of SARA (scanning, analyzing, responding, 
and assessing) was employed.  The problem of theft was identified during the scanning phase and 
then analyzed.  The police department, students and school staff, and the Center developed and 
implemented a response to the problem and then assessed the impact of the response.

The following report provides background information about the Lower Township Police 
Department and the school.  It offers a description of the problem-solving method that was 
employed and describes the impact of the project.  Finally, it furnishes recommendations and a 
conclusion about the project.  

Background
The Lower Township Police Department consists of 42 full-time sworn police officers.  The 
department has a patrol bureau, detective bureau, and community services unit.  The 
Community service unit is comprised of two community-policing officers and two SROs.  
Community policing is a very important characteristic of the services provided by the department, 
and the SRO program reflects this importance.  

The SRO program grew out of Lower Townships DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) 
program which dates back to 1991.  Because of the success of the DARE program in Lower Cape 
May, the SRO program was started in 1994 with the following intentions:
- to assist in the implementation of all aspects of drug abuse/awareness;
- to increase communication and act as liaisons between the Police Department, the 
schools, and community agencies;
-  to provide students with opportunities to get acquainted with police officers in 
informal, non-authoritarian settings; and
- to assist in the maintenance of positive, proactive school environments that focus 
on the prevention of undesirable behaviors, attitudes, and activities.

In school year 2000-2001 the SRO program will provide services to 3800 students plus school 
staff and, importantly, parents and others in the community.  Since its initial implementation in 
1994, the program, in the eyes of the police department, has become a necessary part of the 
policing operation in the Township. According to Sergeant Brian Marker of the police 
department:
On a daily basis, the SROs handle many calls that would normally require a patrol 
officer to handle, thus allowing our patrol officers to be more accessible and visible 
to the community at large.  The involvement of our SROs in school-based 
programs has changed the attitude of many young people who would have been 
constantly in contact with officers in a negative way.

According to Marker, the police department sees SROs as problem solvers who also serve as 
positive role models for many students who are not exposed to such role models in todays 
society

Sgt. Marker is the supervisor of the community services unit of the Lower Township Police 
Department.  Marker served as the SRO of Lower Cape May High School at the time the grant 
was awarded and managed the grant project implementation.  Patrolman Ted Nagel is the current 
SRO at the school and served in that capacity for a majority of the project.  Detective Tom 
Keywood, a juvenile officer, and patrolmen Ed Musick and Doug Whitten, community policing 
officers, were involved in the project from its inception.  The stability of these officers 
involvement in the project as well as their commitment its success and, more importantly, to the 
success of youth in their community, provided a solid foundation for the project.

Lower Cape May Regional High School
Lower Cape May Regional High School has approximately 1,150 students: 330 ninth graders; 300 
tenth graders; 285 eleventh graders; 247 twelfth graders. There are 124 staffers: three 
administrators; 99 teachers; nine teacher aides; and nine support staff.   The school shares a 
campus with its feeder middle school.  Students are drawn from throughout the community and 
are reflective of the communitys demographics.

Prior to the School-Based Partnership Grant project, the relationship between the school and the 
police had been a good one.  The placement of SROs in 1994 had personalized the relationship 
between the two and allowed for joint treatment of concerns.  Some of the concerns or issues of 
interest at the school and in the district include theft, smoking, parking problems, criminal 
mischief, and school violence.

Implementing Problem Solvin

The Lower Township Police Department and Lower Cape May Regional High School worked 
together on the School-Related Crime Prevention and Safety Initiative Theft Eradication 
Program.  The problem-solving approach of SARA (scanning, analyzing, responding, and 
assessing) was employed.   Scanning involves identifying a priority problem and verifying its 
existence.  During scanning, a potential priority problem is identified by the school community 
and other related stakeholders.  The next phase is analyzing which involves examining information 
and data gathered about the priority problem.  Determining characteristics of the problem and 
the reasons why the problem exists takes place in this phase.  Responding is the next phase.  It 
involves taking the information from the analysis phase and formulating a response or solution to 
the priority problem.  The last phase is assessing and involves determining if the solution 
implemented helped solve the problem.  The impact and effectiveness of the solution can be 
determined by a post-test survey of students as well as other means (e.g., site visits; interviews; 
data tracking) of assessment.

The School-Related Crime Prevention and Safety Initiative Theft Eradication Program project 
followed the SARA model.  Scanning was initially pursued by the Lower Township Police 
Department with the implementation of a priority problem survey of students and staff, 
discussion groups, and interviews.  Taken together, the information gathered revealed that theft 
was considered a priority problem by the school community.  This information was used to 
obtain the school-based partnership grant.  

With the award of the grant, the Center for the Prevention of School Violence began its service as 
a project consultant and external evaluator.  The Center worked with the police department and 
students to develop a pre-test survey which was designed to verify the existence of the priority 
problem and to offer a means to analyze the problem.  Students distributed the survey, and the 
Center processed the survey data.  Results from the survey confirmed theft as a priority 
problem.  For purposes of the project, theft was operationalized as the taking of someone 
elses belongings without permission. 

Analysis Phase
Survey results served as the focus for the analysis phase of the project.  The Center analyzed the 
data that were collected and shared the results with the police department, students, and staff.  All 
aspects of theft (who [victim and perpetrator]; what; where; when; how) were revealed during 
this process that took place during the spring of 1999.  To add an understanding of the possible 
influence of the physical setting of the school on the occurrence of theft, a physical site 
assessment was conducted by the police department, students, and staff to employ CPTED (crime 
prevention through environmental design) principles to the project.

Stimulating the interest and involvement of staff was the greatest challenge faced by the project 
during this phase as well as during the entire project.  Efforts to reach out to staff to gain support 
were pursued throughout the project.  The inherent nature of high school culture with its 
characteristically overburdened staff likely explains why this challenge continued despite the 
efforts of the Police Department and students to include staff.

Response Phas

The response phase essentially began when the Center shared the survey results with the police 
department, students, and staff.  The presentation of the results to the police department and staff 
initiated discussion about the response phase.  A student advisory board was selected to provide a 
voice for the entire student body and also provide leadership in the school efforts to eradicate 
theft.  The advisory board consisted of students from ninth to twelfth grades and were 
representative of other core organizations within the school (e.g., student government; key club; 
performing arts; athletics).  These students were able to provide insight into areas of concern and 
to work together to develop an appropriate response.  Strategies were developed, and the 
feasibility of certain strategies was weighed against the resources available from the school.  
Ultimately the students and School Resource Officer came to terms about a number of strategies 
that addressed the key issues highlighted in the analysis phase.

The initial steps that had to be taken were to inform students about how to avoid being a victim of 
theft. Survey results highlighted that students at Lower Cape May Regional High School were not 
taking responsibility for securing their valuables.  In hallways and locker rooms, students were 
being negligent and careless about locking up their possessions.  Lockers found unlocked within 
the school was a major issue due in part to students either pre-setting their combinations, not 
closing them completely, or sharing their locker numbers with other students.  To alleviate this 
problem, students came up with a plan to increase awareness of the possibility of their belongings 
being taken.  Blue cards that contained a message indicating that a students locker was found 
unlocked were produced by the student advisory board.  The School Resource Officer patrolled 
the hallways and locker rooms to randomly search for unlocked lockers and, when found, placed a 
card inside.  By doing so, students returned to their lockers with this warning of a possible theft.  
This type of approach made students more conscious of securing their lockers and of taking care 
of their belongings at all times.  

Beyond increasing awareness, how to handle the problem of theft when a victim became a focus.  
Reporting theft to the proper authority was a concern because the analysis revealed that many 
students did not know what to do when their property was taken.  To promote awareness on this 
subject, the police department and the Center provided an informative assembly to the entire 
school in Fall, 1999, about what to do if belongings were taken. The focus was primarily on how 
not to be a victim of theft and different theft prevention strategies.  An emphasis was again placed 
on taking responsibility that meant locking lockers, not giving out combinations, and avoiding 
bringing excessive amounts of money and valuables to school.  Presenters highlighted what to do 
if a student becomes a victim of theft.   Students were directed to report thefts to the vice 
principal and were informed that appropriate actions would be taken from that point.  Law 
enforcement officers reiterated that the problem could not be solved unless reported.  A tightening 
of the reporting process was instituted to ensure ease of reporting and responsiveness.

Additionally, the school advisory board produced a brochure that explained the schools theft 
eradication project and once again explained the importance of theft prevention.  This brochure 
was distributed to all students and staff to inform them of all the efforts being taken to address the 
problem of theft within the school.  The student advisory board employed this strategy with the 
intent of getting the message out and with the understanding that the message had to be repeated 
numerous times in order to see a difference in student behavior in regards to theft prevention.  A 
poster contest was also used to get the message across to the school community.  

One additional response was the installation of a security camera system.  Funded with state 
monies, this camera system allows for surveillance of both the interior and exterior of the school 
building. 

The response phase was conducted throughout the entire 1999-2000 school year.  Staff 
involvement, as stated previously, was the biggest challenge.  Maintaining student involvement 
was also difficult but was largely overcome because students who were involved had ownership of 
the response phase and communicated that ownership to their fellow students.

Assessment Phas

The assessment phase began with a site visit by Center staff in Spring 2000.  Observations and 
interviews were conducted during the visit.  The assessment phase was completed by 
implementation of a post-test survey.  Because of scheduling difficulties, the post-test survey was 
not conducted until Fall 2000.  This is an important fact because a new class of ninth graders as 
well as other new students who had not experienced the response phase were included in the 
survey that was conducted.  With their inclusion, only a slight improvement in the perception that 
theft was a major problem occurred between the pre-test and post-test surveys.  However, 
importantly, there was a decrease in the number of thefts from lockers and an increase in 
knowledge and motivation regarding reporting.  Both locker theft and reporting had been targeted 
in the response phase.  Additionally, through its data tracking, the police department reported an 
initial increase in reporting (correlating with the assembly and awareness efforts) and then an 
ultimate decrease in the number of thefts as well as in the dollar amount associated with the thefts 
that occurred.

The police department, students, and staff worked in concert to carry out this project.  The 
good relationship between the police department and the school became a true partnership as 
they worked together with a common purpose.  The student advisory board, in particular, set high 
expectations for the project with aims of eradicating theft and therefore reducing victimization 
and improving the reporting of thefts.  Despite the typical challenges of maintaining energy in 
such a project, the partners were able to generate some positive results.

Impact of the Projec

Interviews with police department officials and students revealed that the project impacted three 
areas: security; relationships; and communication.  Everyone is in agreement that the school is 
more secure.  Lockers are routinely locked now.  The improved reporting process is known and 
being used.  And the camera system is seen as both a deterrent and a mechanism that enhances the 
investigative capacity of law enforcement and school officials. 

The relationships between/among officers, students, and staff have improved.  There is a level of 
comfort that working together on a project brings, and there is a sense that police officers can be 
trusted.  

The communication of information is more easily accomplished.    The new reporting procedures 
are part of this, but there also is more direct contact between the police department and school 
community.  More conversations are taking place, and more information is being shared.

Recommendations
The School-Related Crime Prevention and Safety Initiative Theft Eradication Program project at 
Lower Cape May High School in Cape May, New Jersey, provides the opportunity to generate 
recommendations about the conduct of similar projects in the future.  Foremost among these 
recommendations is that such projects allow for as much student participation as possible.  
Student ownership of a priority problem in a school fosters an environment in which responses 
directed at solving the problem are more likely to be successful. 

Additionally, having an existing program on which to build the project, in this case, the SRO 
program, can be an asset.  The relationship between the police department and the school that 
already was in place allowed for quick project initiation. 

Being open to the notion that awareness and education are the most important approaches to 
crime prevention is also important.  Technological devices such as cameras may be determined 
appropriate to be part of the response but are not sufficient to generate the changes in behavior 
that are needed.

Recognizing how challenging project implementation is going to be is necessary.  Keeping 
students and staff interested and motivated likely will fall upon the shoulders of the officers who 
are involved.  Interest and motivation cannot be assumed or taken for granted and must be 
continuously sought and supported.

Finally, flexibility must be a watchword for such projects.  There must be flexibility with regard 
to expectations, communications, schedule, and outcome.  Project participants need to be willing 
to compromise and develop partnerships that truly work with a common purpose put forward as a 
solidifying mechanism.

Conclusion
Those involved with the Lower Township Police Department school-partnership grant project 
would contend that such a project is worth doing and worth doing well.  We witnessed changes in 
the school since the projects initiation and know that these changes are the result of the work of 
the partnership of the Lower Cape May Police Department and the students and staff of Lower 
Cape May Regional High School.  We conclude that ensuring that schools are safe and crime-free 
environments is the responsibility of all stakeholders and one that can be best accomplished 
through true partnership.