U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Surveying

Communities

A Resource for

Community Justice

Planners
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

John Ashcroft

Attorney General

Deborah J. Daniels

Assistant Attorney General

Richard R. Nedelkoff

Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance

Office of Justice Programs

Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

NCJ 197109

This document was prepared by the Center for Court Innovation, under grant number

2001–PP–CX–0001, awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs,

U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations

expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent

the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also

includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile

Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime.
About the Author

As a planner for the Center for Court Innovation, Leslie

Paik was responsible for the administration of an annual

community survey in Red Hook, Brooklyn, New York. She

is pursuing a doctorate in sociology at the University of

California, Los Angeles, studying the rise of problemsolving courts—such as community courts, drug courts,

and mental health courts—in the United States.

Surveying

Communities

A Resource for

Community Justice

Planners
Cover photos © 1995 PhotoDisc, © 1998 PhotoDisc, and © 2003 Wonderfile Corporation.
Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Community Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Needs Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Community Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Evaluations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Survey Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Red Hook Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Appendix A: Sample Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Appendix B: Sample Survey Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Sources for Further Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

iii
There are many ways to identify a

community’s concerns. One approach

is to interview neighborhood leaders

such as clergy, the heads of business

groups, and school principals. Another

way is to hold focus groups that bring

together citizens—teenagers, single

mothers, members of various ethnic

groups—to discuss their neighborhood.

These methods, however, only reach a

small segment of the community. To

build on this information and develop

the most complete picture possible,

many community justice planners use

another tool: community surveys.

Conducting a survey requires time,

manpower, and the ability to design a

scientifically sound questionnaire and

analyze its results. Although this

monograph cannot provide community

justice planners with time and staff, it

can give planners a head start on how

to craft and conduct a survey. 1

Introduction

Over the past several years,

community justice initiatives

around the country have sought to

redefine the relationship between

criminal justice agencies and citizens.

Community justice advocates a

problem-solving approach to crime

and safety issues that calls on judges,

prosecutors, defenders, police, and

probation officers to do more than

churn cases through the criminal justice

mill. Community justice calls on

criminal justice agencies to pursue

new goals instead of simply responding

after a crime has occurred. Among

these goals are preventing crime,

increasing community involvement

and neighborhood safety, and handling

complex problems (e.g., drug abuse

and family dysfunction) that often fuel

criminal behavior.

For this approach to succeed, however,

community justice practitioners need

information. They need to know a

community’s strengths and weaknesses;

what local residents want from the

criminal justice system; and most

important, what neighborhoods identify

as their priorities. Are youth gangs

the most pressing problem for local

residents? Is drug dealing? Or are their

concerns more prosaic—teenagers

loitering, a noisy nightclub, or litter

in an empty lot? 

This monograph, Surveying Communities: A

Resource for Community Justice Planners, shares

the experiences of those who have conducted

successful surveys that helped to develop

the Red Hook Community Justice Center in

Brooklyn, New York. The lessons learned from

the preparation, administration, and analysis

of this community survey can assist other

jurisdictions in achieving a better understanding

of community needs and delivering more

responsive programs to meet those needs.

—Robert Victor Wolf, Director of

Communications, Center for Court Innovation
surveys offer the same benefits to

community justice planners as to

businesses researching a product’s

appeal: “We just did what businesses

do all the time. It’s called market

research. It’s what any successful

company in America does.”

A survey can enhance a planner’s work

in a number of key areas.

Needs Assessment

When a project is in the initial

planning phase, the most important

3

Community Surveys

Community surveys can give planners a

detailed picture of a community’s priorities,

expectations, and self-image. A survey—whether

conducted by phone, on the street, or from

door to door—gathers information from

hundreds and potentially thousands of

stakeholders. Surveys also sort data in a form

that is perfect for analysis. Rather than

gathering anecdotal impressions during a focus

group, a well-designed survey crystallizes

information into quantifiable data. For instance,

a statewide survey in Vermont found that

only 37 percent of residents had a favorable

impression of the state’s Department of

Corrections, but 93 percent would support the

creation of reparative boards (panels of citizens

who oversee probation terms for nonviolent

offenders). The results of this survey gave

planners valuable information that helped them

make the case to funders and elected officials

that reparative boards were worth trying.

—Robert Victor Wolf

When asked to coordinate a survey

of the Red Hook community

in Brooklyn, New York, the initial

reaction was, “Why?” The planning

team had already conducted focus

groups and one-on-one interviews

with community residents and leaders;

it seemed that little could be gained

by the labor-intensive task of

distributing and analyzing hundreds

of questionnaires. But now, after

organizing an annual survey in Red

Hook for the past 4 years, the value

(and the challenges) of a community

survey are apparent.

Although a survey does not replace

the knowledge gained through focus

groups and individual interviews, it

does deepen a planner’s understanding.

Adam Mansky, coordinator of the Red

Hook Community Justice Center

(Justice Center), explained, “Surveys

underscore certain ideas that planners

might have, letting them know what

the community does or doesn’t want.

It’s another way to ensure that your

project is responding to real

community needs.”

John Perry, the director of planning for

the Vermont Department of Corrections

(which conducted a statewide survey

about its department), finds that
4

function of a survey is to give a

program its fundamental shape.

Questions are addressed to set

parameters, such as:

■ What problems should a program

focus on? 

— Drugs? 

— Gangs? 

— Theft? 

■ What kinds of solutions are most

desirable?

— Targeted law enforcement? 

— Greater emphasis on offenders

paying the community back? 

— More services to help offenders

find legitimate work? 

■ What community resources are

available to support the program?

— Church groups? 

— Civic organizations? 

— Ad hoc volunteers? 

With answers to these questions,

planners can build a program that best

meets the community’s needs. Also

the survey elicits feedback from

everyone—not just a handful of the

neighborhood’s most vocal citizens.

According to Mansky, “There are about

15 or 20 leaders at every community

meeting, but how do you reach beyond

them to the average person on the

street? A survey is the perfect tool for

this. It offers some reassurance that

community leaders are accurately

representing the needs and interests

of their constituents.”

Community Support

A survey sends a clear message to

community stakeholders that their

opinions matter. This is especially

important in neighborhoods that are

wary of government intervention and

suspicious of outsiders. By conducting

a survey, planners show that their

project will be different: it will not be

an unwanted government program.

Rather, the project will be tailored to

the community’s needs and concerns.

The annual survey used by the Justice

Center is designed to last 20 minutes,

but it can take longer. This design

shows the community that you are

interested in their concerns by taking

time to listen. James Brodick, the

director of community programs at the

Justice Center, relates his experience:

“I think it shows that when you reach

out, people are willing to talk with you.

We might spend an hour chatting with

elderly residents. They can’t believe

that we are interested in hearing what

they have to say.”

Outreach

A survey offers an opportunity to

educate a community about a new

project. Every time a surveyor makes

a connection with a citizen, it creates
an opportunity for dialog and a chance

to shape public opinion about the

project. If surveyors are properly

equipped with information about the

initiative, they can and should answer

citizens’ questions. In Red Hook, for

example, surveyors tell the people

they are interviewing about the Justice

Center and invite them to visit. Kechea

Brown, a surveyor, recounted one such

experience: “A woman stopped to do

the survey but wasn’t mentally there. I

asked if she was okay and she started

talking about how she was losing her

apartment, having problems with

welfare, etc. I told her that I knew a

place where you can get help: the

Justice Center. I gave her the bus route,

telephone number, and names

of people to talk to. She got on the

bus straight to the Justice Center.”

Partnerships 

Partnerships are a key component of

any community justice project. Survey

results can help identify potential

partners and convince them that their

cooperation is needed. If the community

identifies a need such as job training,

affordable housing, or drug treatment,

planners can begin to forge relationships

with the appropriate agencies. To deal

with crime in a housing project, it

may make sense to partner with the

local housing agency or community

development organization. To respond

to drug abuse, a drug treatment

provider is a logical partner. In West

Palm Beach, Florida, for instance,

community court planners surveyed

residents approximately 6 months

before the court opened. Tom Becht,

coordinator of the court, said that the

survey showed that trash and litter

were by far the top concerns. Realizing

this was a community priority, the

court’s community service crews

focused on cleaning up the

neighborhood. Planners also used the

survey data to convince the city to get

involved. “The city now is adopting a

plan where they’re going to clean up

property and bill the landlords after

giving them a notice that they need to

clean up the property themselves,”

Becht said. 

Evaluations

Any project, especially one that is new

or experimental, needs to be evaluated.

Questions to consider include the

following:

■ Is the project achieving its goals? 

■ Are things working as intended, or

have unanticipated obstacles

required a change in strategy?

■ Is the public satisfied with the

results so far? 

■ How have the public’s attitudes

changed over time? 

A survey can help answer these

questions, especially if it is

readministered on a regular basis as

are the Red Hook and West Palm

Beach surveys. In addition, a survey

can reveal if the public is aware that

the community justice program exists

5
6

cultivate community support for a

project cannot vigorously measure

public opinion. In other words, a

surveyor cannot say, “This is a great

project,” and then ask community

members for their opinion of the

project without potentially biasing the

results. Even with this caveat, however,

it still makes sense to track community

attitudes. Survey results will help with

program design and help planners

gauge their progress. 

Funding

Funders like to support projects that

meet a community’s needs. A survey

can help persuade a potential funder

that the need for a new program is

genuine. Survey results can also help

show that the community supports a

project and that a project has had a

tangible effect on residents’ attitudes

about crime, safety, and the

neighborhood in general. 

and give a sense of what they think

about the program. For example, a

year after the community court in

Minneapolis opened, a telephone

survey was conducted to measure

community awareness and satisfaction

levels with the court. Court officials

learned that only 20 percent of

residents in the catchment area had

heard of the Hennepin County

Community Court, which suggested

that more could be done to educate

citizens about the court’s existence

and its role in the neighborhood.

However, officials were encouraged

to learn that a large majority of

residents supported the court’s key

features, such as having offenders

perform community service and

linking offenders with court-monitored

drug treatment.

Although a survey can offer a sense

of whether progress has been made

in public opinion, the results may not

stand up to scrutiny from academic

researchers. A survey designed to
■ Should be mailed out and filled in

by respondents on their own or

filled in by trained surveyors.

■ Should cover one topic or several

topics.

■ Should be conducted in-house, by

consultants, or by volunteers. 

Regardless of the method used, a

survey should be simple and short.

Remember that you are asking citizens

to volunteer time; do not keep them

any longer than absolutely necessary

or you may cause resentment. Some

surveyors conduct a survey test run

with a few community members and

then ask for their feedback. Sample

feedback questions include the

following:

■ Were there questions you did not

like or that did not make sense? 

■ Was the wording confusing? 

■ Were there questions missing that

you wish had been asked? 

Types of Questions

In general, community justice planners

rely on three types of questions:

7

The survey process can be broken

down into three major steps:

design, collection, and analysis. 

Design

The design phase involves the actual

writing of the survey. First and

foremost, a survey needs to be clear:

use plain language and simple

sentences to reduce the chance for

confusion. Experience also has taught

that multiple-choice questions with

preset answers (e.g., yes or no and

multipoint scales, such as big problem,

problem, and not a problem) are more

useful than questions that invite openended responses (such as in your own

words and describe what you think

about). Preset answers are easier to use

to code responses and analyze data,

and people seem to prefer multiplechoice questions to help organize their

thoughts.

Available Resources

The nature of a survey also depends on

available resources. Staff size, time,

money, and survey expertise determine

whether a survey:

■ Is best administered by phone or in

person. 

Survey Process
Collection

There are many different ways to

administer a survey. The Denver

district attorney’s community

prosecution program sponsored a

survey in which teenagers who

were members of a special youth

empowerment team asked 225 of their

peers about things they liked and

disliked in their neighborhood. In West

Palm Beach, Florida, community court

planners adapted the Red Hook survey

to meet their community’s needs—

sending staff to conduct 60 interviews

among targeted residences and

businesses in the catchment area and

repeating the survey every year to

track changes over time. Others partner

with local universities: Memphis’

Community Court contacted the

University of Memphis’ Department

of Criminology and Criminal Justice,

which used graduate assistants to

conduct both phone and in-person

surveys during the course of a

semester. Some hire outside

consultants: Vermont’s Department

of Corrections hired a private market

research firm to conduct a statewide

telephone survey about the department

and its proposed reparative probation

program. Similarly, the community

court project in Minneapolis hired a

local survey research firm to do a

targeted telephone survey within the

court’s catchment area. The survey

asked residents about their knowledge

and opinion of the project and its

various components (e.g., community

service, job training, and drug

treatment). 

1. Those that relate to specific

program components (e.g., Would

you support allowing low-level

offenders to perform community

service in the neighborhood? If so,

what kinds of projects would you

like to see them perform?).

2. Those that solicit opinions about

neighborhood strengths and

weaknesses (e.g., Do you think

local schools or churches or social

services agencies are doing an

excellent, good, fair, or poor job?). 

3. Those that obtain overall

impressions about the community

and provide a baseline for future

surveys (e.g., Do you feel safe in

your home, in the subway, or in the

park? What is the most pressing

issue facing the community—drug

abuse, juvenile delinquency, crime,

housing problems, or something

else?).

Planners can get ideas for questions

by looking at other surveys, including

the National Crime Victimization

Survey—a telephone survey conducted

by the Bureau of Justice Statistics

(for more information, visit

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict.htm)—

and the Red Hook survey (see

appendix A). In addition, the U.S.

Department of Justice’s Weed and

Seed national evaluation includes a

survey that measures community

perceptions of neighborhoods, public

safety, and the criminal justice system.

8
Training

Whether the survey relies on

volunteers or paid professionals,

everyone conducting the survey

should receive basic training that

covers how to ask the questions, fill

out the survey form, and make the

experience pleasant and productive.

The goal of training is to make

surveyors comfortable with the forms

and the target area. For example,

some volunteers may be nervous

about asking questions and bothering

people. More experienced surveyors

may be anxious about going into a

new neighborhood, especially if

certain areas seem dangerous. Training

can include role plays of different

situations, discussions about safety

precautions, and practice runs of the

survey to allay these concerns. 

Volunteers 

Community members make the best

survey volunteers. In Red Hook,

citizens were more willing to stop

and take time to answer questions if

the surveyor was also from the

neighborhood. In this way, Red Hook

volunteers were able to break down a

traditional barrier that stands between

surveyors and participants and foster

the trust needed to engage participants.

“The majority of the times, people

come to the door and know me. They

say, ‘Oh it’s you, Natasha, I’ll do your

survey,’” said Natasha Richie, a Red

Hook surveyor. “They feel better and

more secure in talking to me.”

Target Area

A successful survey also needs a clear

target area. This can be a geographic

boundary or a demographic group,

such as teenagers, the elderly, single

parents, or other groups. In Red Hook,

the target area is clearly defined by an

elevated highway that physically

divides the neighborhood from the

rest of Brooklyn. This target area is

subdivided into different geographic

zones, and surveyors are assigned to

each zone and work together to ensure

adequate coverage of their area.

Similarly, West Palm Beach divided its

catchment area into six subareas and

completed 10 surveys from each area

to ensure a representative sample.

Analysis

The extent to which planners can use

survey results depends in large part on

their ability to analyze the data. Some

projects have turned to experts—a

graduate student familiar with

statistical research or a local college

professor. This document does not

detail how to analyze data. Instead,

here are a few pointers.

■ When selecting a software package,

keep in mind the complexity of

the survey and the number of

questionnaires. To analyze small

surveys, like the 60 questionnaires

collected in West Palm Beach, a

basic spreadsheet such as Lotus or

Excel should be sufficient. Larger

surveys in which hundreds of

9
questionnaires are completed every

year, such as Red Hook’s, probably

will require a more flexible program

such as Access or even SPSS. 

■ Establish protocols for data entry.

For example, those entering the data

need to know what to do if more

than one answer is circled. 

■ Another important point to remember

is that a survey can go beyond

simply tabulating responses to

questions. The survey data allow

for comparing responses between

subgroups or examining trends over

time. This kind of analysis can help

planners answer key questions such

as the following:

— How has the percentage of

residents who see public

drinking, drug use, litter,

loitering, or another specific

problem as a very serious

problem changed from year to

year? 

— Do older residents have a

different assessment of the

seriousness of local crime than

younger residents? 

— Do men and women want

different types of services? 

— Do African-American residents

approve of police performance

more or less than Latino

residents? 

10
11

Much of the information contained

in this monograph is drawn from

the experience of planners who worked

on the development of the Red Hook

Community Justice Center, a

multijurisdictional community court in

the heart of a low-income, high-crime

neighborhood in Brooklyn, New York. 

Planning for the Justice Center started

in 1994, and in 1995, the center

launched its first program. The Red

Hook Public Safety Corps (Corps) is

an AmeriCorps program with 50

participants from the community who

work on crime-prevention and victimassistance projects. For their work in

the Corps, participants receive a small

stipend, an education award, and

valuable work experience.

Design

The team quickly seized onto the

Corps members as a potential vehicle

for completing a comprehensive

community survey. Greg Berman, the

original planner of the Justice Center,

recalls, “We had obtained a pretty

good picture of community needs from

interviews and focus groups, but we

wanted more. We wanted to reach a

broader segment of the community.

The Corps allowed us to make sure

that what we were hearing was truly

representative of the entire

neighborhood’s concerns.”

Berman and the rest of the team

created an ambitious questionnaire—

9 pages with approximately 170

questions—that was designed to take

20 minutes to administer. Although

the survey is long, community

residents have been supportive. Shona

Bowers, a life-long resident of Red

Hook who now runs the Corps, says,

“Before becoming involved with the

Corps myself, I remember seeing

Corps members walking all over the

neighborhood with clipboards. I’d

think, ‘Look, they’re back for that

survey.’ It felt good to see them

coming back to ask us what we, as

residents, wanted for our community.”

Bowers is not the only resident who

knows about the survey: In the 2000

survey, 37 percent of the respondents

stated that they had participated in

previous surveys. 

Collection

This survey, which is now known as

“Operation Data,” serves two principal

purposes: to measure community

perceptions of neighborhood safety

and to spread the word about the

Red Hook Survey
program. To meet these goals,

surveyors speak to as many people as

possible in a 2-week period. With 50

full-time interviewers, the survey

reaches hundreds of people each year.

In 2000, for example, 960 people

were interviewed, which represents

9 percent of Red Hook’s 10,846

residents (or 18 percent of

households). With so many

questionnaires to enter and numbers

to process, the entire process takes

about 5 months from the first day of

surveying to the dissemination of a

final report. The bulk of this time is

devoted to entering data; each

questionnaire takes approximately

20–25 minutes to enter into the

database.

Training

Because most Corps members have

had no experience in administering a

survey, surveyors undergo a full day of

training. This training covers, among

other things, interviewing techniques

(including tone of voice and speaking

slowly and clearly), safety procedures

(interviewers are told always to travel

in groups and never go inside an

apartment), and role plays of difficult

scenarios (hostile, unresponsive, or

nervous participants). Members

perform a 2-hour test run that covers a

small target area. After the test run,

Justice Center staff give feedback on

interviewing techniques and the

volunteers have a chance to discuss

any issues or problems that come up. 

Corps members are divided into 10

groups of 5 members each. Each group

has two pairs: one person asks the

questions while the other records the

answers. The fifth member serves as

the group captain to oversee the day’s

work. The captain fills out a building

log to track which households have

been contacted and is responsible for

troubleshooting when problems arise.

By reviewing the daily building logs

submitted by each team captain,

program staff can ensure that the

surveyors are covering the targeted

area in a comprehensive and effective

manner. 

Obstacles

Over the years, the Red Hook survey

has faced two main obstacles:

language barriers and timing. 

A significant number of residents

speak only Spanish, making the survey

difficult to complete for surveyors who

speak only English. This problem is

addressed by making sure the survey

teams have both Spanish- and Englishspeaking members. 

The other major challenge is finding

people at home. People often are not

at home when surveyors come.

Therefore, the survey is done both

during the day and in the evening.

Surveyors also go to more than just

apartment buildings; they visit the

local health center, businesses,

banks, supermarkets, and housing

development offices during rent time.

12
Analysis 

The annual Red Hook survey is a

massive undertaking that requires the

time and attention of numerous staff—

managers, researchers, and others at

the Justice Center. While the effort is

significant, so are the benefits. The

survey has gone a long way toward

building local support for the Justice

Center and shaping Justice Center

programs. Mansky, the coordinator of

the Justice Center, says that “Operation

Data is like a map. It tells us where

we’ve been, where we are, and where

we’re going. Mayor [Edward I.] Koch

used to go around the city asking

people, ‘How’m I doing?’ Well, this

is our way of going around the

neighborhood and asking folks how

the Justice Center is doing.”

Over the years, the survey has yielded

a number of surprises. Despite Red

Hook’s “Wild West” reputation as a

place where drugs and gun violence

rule the streets, the residents who

participate in Operation Data are also

concerned about quality-of-life

conditions. Each year, more than 60

percent cite garbage, littering, poor

street lighting, and rundown parks as

major neighborhood problems.

Less surprising but equally distressing,

Operation Data revealed high levels of

fear in the neighborhood, especially

in the early years. Although residents

report feeling safe in their apartments,

the moment they step outside their

doors, their feelings change dramatically.

One out of three feels unsafe in the

elevator or the building lobby.

Survey participants respond to real

problems they face every day—urine

in their elevators, graffiti in their

stairwells, and lights broken by drug

dealers eager to work in darkness.

Many feel these conditions create an

atmosphere where more serious crime

can flourish.

New Programs

In response, the Justice Center has

dedicated a team of Corps members to

make physical improvements in and

around the Red Hook Houses. Working

with the New York City Housing

Authority, team members repair broken

locks and hallway lights, conduct safety

inspections, and organize graffiti

cleanups. “Our work makes a direct

impact on living conditions for people in

the Houses. Take our safety inspections:

by immediately reporting when an

elevator ceiling lock has broken, we

prevent kids from riding on top of

the elevators for fun, which can be

extremely dangerous,” remarks Roberto

Julbe, a former Corps member who is

now on staff at the Justice Center.

Safety inspections and repairs by

Corps members are examples of how

the survey results can affect Justice

Center programs. Another example is

the Red Hook Youth Court. Over a

period of 2 years, community residents

cited youth crime as a problem and

expressed concern about the lack of

services and jobs for youth in the

neighborhood. In response, the Justice

Center turned these concerns into a

program for local teenagers. Opened in

April 1998, the Red Hook Youth Court

13
Mansky explains, “The survey drove

home the point that there was a

community need for mediation.” This

demand, expressed through the survey,

made mediation a prominent

component of the Justice Center. The

mediation office is located centrally on

the main floor and across from the

courtroom. If needed, a judge can

easily send a case across the hall for

mediation.

As planners had hoped, the Red Hook

survey has also become a vehicle to

promote the Justice Center’s programs

among local residents. In addition to

soliciting answers to survey questions,

Corps members discuss the purpose of

the Justice Center. Throughout an

interview, Corps members take the

opportunity to describe the project

and its services, inviting participants

to the Justice Center to see what is

happening. The survey is valuable

when planners craft community

presentations, respond to press

requests for information, and complete

funding applications. The survey

results also are disseminated to the

Justice Center’s partners as part of its

collaboration-building efforts. In

addition, these results are used as part

of an independent evaluation of the

Justice Center that is being conducted

by Columbia University’s Center for

Violence Research and Prevention. 

14

addresses low-level juvenile offenses

by training teenagers to serve as

judges, jurors, and advocates for their

peers. This court determines sanctions

for offenders involved in infractions

such as truancy, graffiti, and disorderly

conduct. Because these sanctions are

designed in part to pay back the

community harmed by these qualityof-life offenses, the 1998 survey asked

citizens what sanctions they would

like the Youth Court to use. Based on

the residents’ opinions, Youth Court

sanctions now include community

service projects (e.g., community

gardening and park cleanups), essays,

and letters of apology. 

The next year’s survey (1999) allowed

the Justice Center to track whether the

Youth Court had made its presence

known in the community. That survey

showed that the majority of residents

(54 percent) had heard about the

program, and more than 75 percent

of that group was satisfied with it. 

Partnerships

The survey’s impact, however, goes

far beyond programming. It has

strengthened partnerships with other

agencies. For example, residents’

consistently high demand for

mediation convinced Safe Horizon,

the largest provider of mediation

services in New York City, to provide

a staff person at the Justice Center.
15

I

n many ways, the circumstances in

Red Hook were ideal for conducting

a large survey. A large cadre of

community members was ready to go

door to door. It is a relatively small,

well-defined community, making it

easier to reach every corner of the

neighborhood. Further, on-staff

researchers were available to help design

the survey and analyze the results.

However, it is possible to conduct a

survey with far fewer resources. There

are numerous ways to approach a

survey—from a professional project

conducted by consultants (as in

Vermont) to less formal initiatives

(like the youth survey carried out by

teenagers in Denver). In West Palm

Beach, Florida, a survey of 60

residents helped community court

planners develop a community service

program. Likewise, the youth survey in

Denver helped highlight teenagers’ top

community concerns: crime (including

graffiti, gangs, and shootings) and

quality-of-life problems (such as

cleaner alleys, better street lighting,

and improved traffic controls). In

response, members of the Denver

district attorney’s youth empowerment

team are trying to have more stop signs

installed in the neighborhood and are

organizing neighborhood cleanups. 

When it is well executed, a survey can

build planners’ knowledge about a

community, cultivate the goodwill of

stakeholders, nurture partnerships,

and measure a program’s effectiveness

over time. Combined with other

methods of community outreach—

such as convening focus groups,

attending meetings of neighborhood

organizations, and creating community

advisory boards—a survey can help

ensure that a community justice project

makes the neighborhood safer by

building stronger ties between criminal

justice agencies and the communities

they serve.

Conclusion
17

Appendix A: 

Sample Questionnaire

The following is a shortened version of the survey administered annually by the

Red Hook Community Justice Center in Brooklyn, New York. Questions address

quality of life, personal safety, community resources, and justice system issues.

Red Hook Public Safety Corps—Operation Data

COMMUNITY SURVEY

Opening Remarks: Hello, my name is _____________. I’m with the Red Hook Public

Safety Corps. We’re conducting a survey to learn about the strengths and problems

of your neighborhood. Participation in this survey is voluntary, and your responses

will be kept confidential. This information is for research purposes only. The survey

will take about 20 minutes.

1. First, I have a few basic questions. What is your relationship to this

neighborhood? 

1 Resident

2 Merchant

3 Worker

4 Other: _________________________ 

2. How many years have you lived or worked in this neighborhood? 

(If less than 1, put 0) __________________ 

3. In general, how do you feel about this neighborhood as a place to live or

work?

1 Very satisfied

2 Somewhat satisfied

3 Neutral

4 Somewhat unsatisfied 

5 Very unsatisfied

4. Over the past year, how would you rate the quality of life in the

neighborhood? Is the quality of life: 

1 Very poor

2 Poor 

3 Okay 

4 Good 

5 Very good 
5. In the past year, do you think the quality of life in the neighborhood has

improved, stayed the same, or declined?

1 Improved 

2 Same 

3 Declined 

6. Let’s talk about the problems that may exist here. After each issue that I

state, tell me whether it is a:

1 - Very big problem 2 - Big problem

3 - Minor problem 4 - Not a problem

1 2 3 4 Public drug sales 

1 2 3 4 Fighting in public 

1 2 3 4 Public drug use 

1 2 3 4 Public drinking 

1 2 3 4 Mugging 

1 2 3 4 Littering 

1 2 3 4 Prostitution 

1 2 3 4 Begging and panhandling 

1 2 3 4 Domestic violence 

1 2 3 4 Child neglect or abuse 

1 2 3 4 Residential burglary 

1 2 3 4 Vandalism 

1 2 3 4 Shoplifting 

1 2 3 4 Garbage on the streets 

1 2 3 4 Graffiti 

1 2 3 4 Rundown parks/green areas 

1 2 3 4 Poor street repair/poor street lighting

1 2 3 4 Abandoned property

7. When I say a location, tell me whether you feel very safe, safe, unsafe,

or very unsafe during the day: 

1 - Very safe 2 - Safe 

3 - Unsafe 4 - Very unsafe 

1 2 3 4 On the street 

1 2 3 4 In your home 

1 2 3 4 In your lobby 

1 2 3 4 In the elevator 

1 2 3 4 In the stairways 

1 2 3 4 On the way to and from the subway 

1 2 3 4 At the local subway 

1 2 3 4 In the stores 

1 2 3 4 In the parks

18
8. For the same locations, tell me whether you feel very safe, safe, unsafe,

or very unsafe at night: 

1 - Very safe 2 - Safe 

3 - Unsafe 4 - Very unsafe 

1 2 3 4 On the street

1 2 3 4 In your home

1 2 3 4 In your lobby 

1 2 3 4 In the elevator 

1 2 3 4 In the stairways 

1 2 3 4 On the way to and from the subway 

1 2 3 4 At the local subway 

1 2 3 4 In the stores 

1 2 3 4 In the parks 

9. In what other places do you feel unsafe? ____________________ 

10. A: I want to stress again that all of your responses will be kept

confidential and will be used for research purposes only. Have you been

a victim of any of the following crimes within the past 12 months? 

Yes No 

1 2 Mugging/robbery 

1 2 Rape/sexual assault 

1 2 Domestic abuse 

1 2 Child abuse 

1 2 Burglary of home 

1 2 Burglary of car 

1 2 Theft of money or personal belongings

1 2 Assault 

1 2 Shooting 

1 2 Stabbing 

1 2 Other: ____________________________ 

B: CORPS MEMBER: If participant answers yes to any of these questions,

ask, “Was the offender under 18 years old?” 

Yes No 

1 2 Mugging/robbery 

1 2 Rape/sexual assault 

1 2 Domestic abuse 

1 2 Child abuse 

1 2 Burglary of home 

1 2 Burglary of car 

1 2 Theft of money or personal belongings

1 2 Assault 

1 2 Shooting 

1 2 Stabbing 

1 2 Other: ____________________________ 

19
11. What other problems is the neighborhood facing?_____________________ 

12. Are the following items strengths or weaknesses of the neighborhood? 

Identify each as: 

1 - Very strong 2 - Somewhat strong 3 - Not strong or weak

4 - Somewhat weak 5 - Very weak

1 2 3 4 5 Tenant association or block association 

1 2 3 4 5 Churches 

1 2 3 4 5 Soup kitchens 

1 2 3 4 5 Health clinics/medical centers 

1 2 3 4 5 Afterschool programs 

1 2 3 4 5 Economic/business development programs 

1 2 3 4 5 Recreational centers 

1 2 3 4 5 Schools 

1 2 3 4 5 Parks/public spaces 

1 2 3 4 5 Stores 

1 2 3 4 5 Social services agencies 

1 2 3 4 5 Red Hook Public Safety Corps 

13. What other organizations/leaders/programs in the neighborhood do you

consider strengths or weaknesses of the community? 

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

14. In your experience, is police response excellent, good, satisfactory, or

unsatisfactory in your neighborhood? 

1 Excellent 

2 Good 

3 Satisfactory 

4 Unsatisfactory 

5 No opinion 

15. Would you characterize the relationship between the police and your

community as: 

1 Very positive 

2 Somewhat positive 

3 Neutral 

4 Somewhat negative 

5 Very negative 

16. Would you characterize the district attorney’s office’s response to

complaints and issues raised by the Red Hook community as:

1 Very positive 

2 Somewhat positive 

3 Neutral 

4 Somewhat negative 

5 Very negative 

20
17. Would you characterize the relationship between the court system and

your community as: 

1 Very positive 

2 Somewhat positive 

3 Neutral 

4 Somewhat negative 

5 Very negative 

18. Have you heard of the Red Hook Community Justice 

Center, the community court? (If no, skip to #74)

1 Yes

2 No

19. Where did you hear of the Red Hook Community Justice Center? From a: 

1 Friend 

2 Family 

3 Local organization (If yes, which one?________________________)

4 Newspaper/poster 

5 Red Hook Public Safety Corps 

6 Other: _______________________________

20. In general, how do you feel about having a community-based justice

center in your community or nearby? 

1 Positive 

2 Neutral 

3 Negative 

21. If they were available to you at the Red Hook Community Justice Center,

would you use the following services? 

Yes No 

1 2 Entitlements and housing advocacy assistance 

1 2 Medical care, including HIV, STD, and TB testing 

1 2 English as a second language classes 

1 2 Drug treatment 

1 2 GED classes 

1 2 Job training and job referral services 

1 2 Neighborhood legal services for defendants 

1 2 Childcare for court users 

1 2 Mediation/conflict resolution 

22. What other services would you want or use in the center?_______________ 

23. What gender are you? CORPS MEMBER: You can answer this from

observation.

1 Male

2 Female

21
24. What ethnic/racial group do you consider yourself a part of? [optional] 

1 Black 

2 White 

3 Native American 

4 Asian 

5 Latino 

6 Other: _______________________________________ 

25. How old are you? 

1 18 or under 

2 19 to 25 

3 26 to 40 

4 41 to 60 

5 61 or over 

26. How many people are there in your household? ________________ 

27. How many of them are children? ________________ 

Comments? __________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

Thank you for your time!

22
23

Appendix B: 

Sample Survey Report

To give a sense of the types of

reports that can result from this

data collection, the following are

excerpts from the Red Hook survey

report produced in 2000, using data

collected in 1999. This report includes

findings over time and has a format

that is readable and accessible. It

attempts to summarize the findings

and also present them in a way that

will allow readers to draw their own

conclusions about the data. This

flexibility adds to the credibility of

the report’s data.

A. Summary 

In October 1999, 50 members of the

Red Hook Public Safety Corps, an

AmeriCorps community service

program, administered a communitywide

household survey in Red Hook,

Brooklyn, for the fifth consecutive

year. Known as Operation Data, the

survey focused mainly on residents’

perceptions of neighborhood public

safety and quality of life, existing

community resources, and the criminal

justice system. The 50 members of the

Red Hook Public Safety Corps (the

majority of whom are Red Hook

residents) completed 968 interviews—

a sizeable sample of a community with

only 10,846 residents. The survey

reached 9 percent of the community or

18 percent of the households in Red

Hook (the respondents reported a

median household size of two people). 

In teams of five people, the Corps

covered all major geographical areas

in Red Hook—the Red Hook Houses,

businesses, and private residences.

Team members went door-to-door to

houses and, in some cases, to various

organizations (e.g., the Housing

Authority management office and the

local health clinic) to find residents

who were not at home. They

administered the survey in both

Spanish and English. 

The data suggest the following

conclusions:

Satisfaction with Red Hook is

leveling off. The percentage of people

who are satisfied with Red Hook (50

percent) has decreased slightly from

a peak of 57 percent in 1998. In

addition, after 4 years, this year marks

the first decrease in the percentage of

people who feel the quality of life in

Red Hook is improving. In the 2000

report, 51 percent said the quality of

life was better than last year, compared

to 62 percent in the 1999 report, 63

percent in the 1998 report, and 34

percent in the 1997 report. 
problems in Red Hook. While drugs

remain the most prevalent problem

(selling at 82 percent and using at 72

percent), littering, garbage, public

drinking, public fighting, and graffiti

were all identified as problems by

more than 60 percent of the

participants. Child abuse/neglect,

panhandling, burglary, prostitution,

shoplifting, and mugging were cited

less frequently.

Over the 4 years, it seems violence is

on the rise: 62 percent felt that public

fighting was a big problem, up from

42 percent in 1996. Concerns about

mugging and burglary increased by

more than 5 percent. In addition, more

than 35 percent reported carrying a

weapon, either sometimes or always,

as a safety precaution. In contrast,

fewer participants cited streets and

abandoned property as problems

compared to the last 2 years.

Victimization. Indications that violence

is on the rise are further evident in terms

of victimization. Looking over the past

5 years, the percentage who report

knowing someone who was a victim of

violent crime has increased. The greatest

increases were in domestic abuse (more

than 20 percent in 1999 compared to

10 percent in 1996), rape/sexual

assault (15 percent in 1999 compared

to 6 percent in 1995), and child abuse

(more than 16 percent in 1999

compared to 11 percent in 1996).

More than 18 percent said they knew

a victim of a shooting, assault, or

robbery. 

24

Violence in Red Hook is a big

problem. Violence seems to be on

the rise in Red Hook. The percentage

of people who report fighting and

mugging as a major problem has

increased steadily since 1996—from

42 percent to 62 percent for fighting

and from 40 percent to 51 percent for

mugging. In addition, more than 35

percent of the participants report

carrying a weapon as a safety

precaution. 

Fear in Red Hook is down. At the

same time, the level of fear seems to

be decreasing substantially. In 1998,

more than 65 percent reported feeling

unsafe at night in subways, lobbies,

and streets, and only 45 percent

reported feeling unsafe in similar

areas in 1999.

Improved perceptions of the

criminal justice system. For the

fourth straight year, the percentage

of respondents who rated the police,

courts, and district attorney as positive

increased. Between 1996 and 1999,

positive perceptions of criminal justice

agencies increased from 14 percent to

38 percent for the police, from 10

percent to 30 percent for the courts,

and from 9 percent to 28 percent for

the district attorney.

B. Neighborhood

Quality of Life

For the fourth straight year, qualityof-life issues still dominated the

participants’ responses as the biggest
percent of the survey participants had

heard of the Youth Court. When asked

about their satisfaction with the

program, 68 percent reported being

satisfied or very satisfied, a slight

decrease from 76 percent a year earlier.

Other community services. Although

the majority of respondents rated

several community agencies (e.g., the

Corps, schools, afterschool programs,

and churches) as strengths, this still

represents a lower percentage of

people than in 1998. The biggest

changes from the previous year were

the percentage of those who felt soup

kitchens were strengths (increased

from 31 percent to 44 percent); social

services agencies were strengths

(increased from 35 percent to 45

percent); and economic/business

development programs were strengths

(increased from 37 percent to 46

percent).

D. Criminal Justice

When participants were asked about

their opinion of various criminal

justice agencies, they were most

positive about the Red Hook

Community Justice Center, followed

by the police, judicial system, and

district attorney. Overall support for

the justice system has increased

substantially since 1996: the

percentage who feel positive increased

for the police (from 14 percent to 38

percent), for the judicial system (from

10 percent to 30 percent), and for the

district attorney’s office (from 9

percent to 28 percent). 

C. Community

Resources

This section is crucial to any

community justice survey in that it

shows that you care about what the

community thinks about your

programs that operate in the

neighborhood. 

Red Hook Public Safety Corps. The

Corps’ work in the community is

becoming better known. Knowledge

of the Corps increased 7 percent—

from 61 percent who had heard of the

Corps in 1998 to 68 percent in 1999.

Of those who had heard of the Corps,

most knew from friends (41 percent)

and family (24 percent). More than 60

percent said they were satisfied with

the Corps, down slightly from 67

percent the previous year. 

In terms of the services offered by the

Corps, the most well known are the

most visible or long-term projects,

such as the Red Hook Youth Baseball

League (85 percent), Coffey Park

clean-up activities (82 percent),

community gardens (80 percent), and

graffiti removal projects (79 percent).

Mediation remained the least known

project of all the Corps’ services

during the fourth year. 

Red Hook Youth Court. In only its

second year, the Youth Court—a

program that trains youth to serve as

judges, jurors, and attorneys to hear

cases of youth who commit low-level

offenses such as truancy and fare

evasion—has made its presence known

in the community. More than 58

25
Center, more than 80 percent said yes

to all of the listed services. The

service that was seen as most helpful

was job training, followed by daycare,

law-related education, and a landlord/

tenant resource center.

26

More people are hearing about the

Justice Center. Almost 60 percent of

the survey participants had heard about

the Justice Center—up 5 percent from

the previous year. When asked if they

would use services at the Justice
27

Sources for Further

Information 

Center for Court

Innovation 

The winner of an Innovations in

American Government Award from

the Ford Foundation and Harvard’s

John F. Kennedy School of

Government, the Center for Court

Innovation is a unique public-private

partnership that promotes new thinking

about how courts can solve difficult

problems like addiction, quality-oflife crime, domestic violence, and child

neglect. The center functions as the

New York State Unified Court System’s

independent research and development

arm, creating demonstration projects

that test new approaches to problems

that have resisted conventional

solutions. The center’s problemsolving courts include the nation’s

first community court (Midtown

Community Court in New York) as

well as drug courts, domestic violence

courts, youth courts, family treatment

courts, and others.

Nationally, the center disseminates the

lessons learned from its experiments

in New York, helping courts across

the country launch their own problemsolving innovations. The center

contributes to the national conversation

about justice by convening roundtable

conversations that bring together

leading academics and practitioners

and by contributing to policy and

professional journals. The center also

provides hands-on technical assistance,

advising court and criminal justice

planners throughout the country about

program and technology design. 

For more information, call

212–397–3050 or e-mail

info@courtinnovation.org. 

Bureau of Justice

Assistance

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

202–616–6500

Fax: 202–305–1367

Web site: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

Bureau of Justice

Assistance Clearinghouse

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

1–800–688–4252

Web site: www.ncjrs.org

Clearinghouse staff are available

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to

7 p.m. eastern time. Ask to be placed

on the BJA mailing list.
Bureau of Justice Assistance

Information

For more indepth information about BJA, its programs, and its funding

opportunities, requesters can call the BJA Clearinghouse. The BJA

Clearinghouse, a component of the National Criminal Justice Reference

Service (NCJRS), shares BJA program information with state and local

agencies and community groups across the country. Information

specialists are available to provide reference and referral services,

publication distribution, participation and support for conferences, and

other networking and outreach activities. The clearinghouse can be

reached by:

❒ Mail

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

❒ Visit

2277 Research Boulevard

Rockville, MD 20850

❒ Telephone

1–800–688–4252

Monday through Friday

8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.

eastern time

❒ Fax

301–519–5212

❒ BJA Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

❒ NCJRS Home Page

www.ncjrs.org

❒ E-mail

askncjrs@ncjrs.org

❒ JUSTINFO Newsletter

E-mail to listproc@ncjrs.org

Leave the subject line blank

In the body of the message,

type:

subscribe justinfo 

[your name]
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice ProgramsBureau of Justice AssistanceWashington, DC 20531

*NCJ~197109*