Integrating Research and Research Partnerships into Youth Violence Prevention: National Forum for Youth Violence Prevention

Edmund F. McGarrell

Director and Professor

School of Criminal Justice

1

Integrating Research into Prevention

Background on Action Research & the Role of the Research Partner in Violence Prevention

Connection to a Strategic Problem Solving Approach

Systematic Case Review as a Valuable Tool

Boston Ceasefire to SACSI to PSN

Mid-1990s, Boston Ceasefire emerges as a promising strategy for addressing youth violence (+60% reduction in youth homicides & shootings)

Late 1990s, SACSI developed the strategic problem solving model based on the Boston Ceasefire approach

Boston Ceasefire to SACSI to PSN

Two Aspects to Boston Ceasefire

Focused deterrence, “pulling levers” strategy

Systematic problem solving process

Multi-agency working group

Problem solving model

Police-researcher partnership

Boston Ceasefire: Focus Youth Violence

Problem Analysis

Small Proportion Youths, Involved Gangs & Street Crews

Strategies Focused on those at Highest Risk for Violence

Intelligence-led Problem Solving

6

Problem Analysis

Strategy

Implementation

Assessment & Feedback

Boston Ceasefire Model of Research Partner

Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative (SACSI)

CeaseFire Chicago

Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN)

Comprehensive Anti-Gang Initiative (CAGI)

Drug Market Intervention (DMI)

Smart Policing (SPI)

OJJDP Comprehensive Gang Model

Reducing Homicide Risk (Indianapolis)

Note: Each trend is population specific for each graph presented above

8

Homicide Risk by Group 

per 10,000 Residents

Boston & Indianapolis as Examples

It was research that identified the highest risk individuals, groups & contexts

It was the hard work of the task force partners (criminal justice officials, social services, community groups) that then focused strategies on highest risk

Why a Research Partner? The Role of the Research Partner?

Traditional Research Model

Researchers were outsiders in problem-solving process

Not involved in problem identification

Observers, not participants, in program development and implementation

Involved only as independent evaluators of impact

11

Action Research Model

Active, ongoing partnership between researchers and practitioner agencies

Use research process to help solve local problems

Data collection to identify and understand problems

Strategic analysis to develop targeted interventions

Program monitoring and feedback for refinement

Assessment of impact

12

Data-Driven Problem Analysis

Gather data on the selected crime problem, including its sources, victims, offenders, and settings

Analyze the data to identify  specific aspects and components of the problem

14

Focused Interventions & Linking to Evidence-Based Practice

Research can assist:

Develop focused interventions aimed at reducing the specific sources and components of the crime problem

Implement these focused intervention strategies utilizing the resources and expertise of the working group partners

Base interventions on “best” practices & “promising” strategies 

15

Monitor the implementation of the interventions

Provide constant assessment  and feedback on the conduct and effects of the interventions 

Modify and refine the interventions based on feedback assessments

Evaluate the impacts of the interventions on the service delivery system and on the targeted crime problem 

Monitoring, Feedback, and Evaluation

16

Project Safe Neighborhoods

Nation-wide DOJ program intended to reduce gun crime in America

94 separate programs, one for each US Attorney Office in the 50 states and territories

Based on the Action Research/Strategic Problem-Solving Model

Funding provided for a local research partner to work with each PSN task force

17

9:30am - 9:34am

Describe Project Safe Neighborhoods

A nationwide commitment to reduce gun crime in America

A network of new and existing programs that target gun crime

An opportunity to provide tools and resources at the local and national level to support the network’s efforts

PSN focuses on:Violent organizations and offenders, especially armed career criminals; Illegal gun traffickers; and Brady denials/false statement cases

2.   Give the history of Project Safe Neighborhoods

On May 14, 2001, President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft unveiled “Project Safe Neighborhoods”, a new, comprehensive, strategic approach to gun law enforcement – an approach that targets gun crime and violent offenders in an effort to make our streets and communities safer. The Administration’s plan calls upon each US Attorney to implement this national initiative, working in partnership with communities and state and local law enforcement agencies. The plan envisions an invigorated enforcement effort that either builds on the successful programs already in place or, through new resources and tools, creates effective gun violence reduction programs.

PSN Implementation Measures

Partnerships

Research 

Integration into 

Strategic 

Planning

Enhance

d

Federal 

Prosecution

Implementation

Zimmermann, 2006

18

To begin to talk about that construction, let us turn to the dependent variables.

Five elements of policy adoption are mandates, however, two elements – outreach and training – were documented by all districts and hence became a constant in the model.  

Therefore, we will focus on the areas of

Collaborative implementation of programs

 research integration into a strategic planning process and

Enhanced federal prosecution

Key Findings

Integration of research was positively associated with other implementation components

More effective implementation led to reduced violent crime

PSN Impact on Violent Crime
| Level of PSN Dosage | PSN Target Cities | Non-target Cities |
|---------------------|-------------------|-------------------|
| Low                 | -5.3%             | +7.8%             |
| Medium              | -3.1%             | <-1.0%         |
| High                | -13.1%            | -4.9%             |
|                     | -8.89%            | -0.25%            |

20

Evaluating Impact

Pulling levers studies

SACSI

PSN

CAGI

DMI

CeaseFire Chicago

Common finding, when implemented with fidelity & intensity appears to have a violence reduction impact

Implementation is Key

PSN findings suggest that an effective police-research partnership supports effective implementation

The Systematic Incident Review

Boston, SACSI, PSN (many), DMI sites have utilized to understand the problem

Borrowed from public health mortality reviews

May focus exclusively on homicides

May focus on homicides & shootings

May focus on other “problems” (e.g., gangs, street robberies)

Tap into rich street intelligence

Incident Review: Unpacking the Problem

	3 things to unpack

The Facts

(Who? What? When? Where?)

The Context

(Surrounding circumstances)

The Explanation

(Why?)

Crime Incident Reviews 

Multi-agency team brought together to review individual incidents

Gather street level knowledge to combine with formal records

Who is involved?

What do we know about where it occurred?

What was the motive?

Are there group connections?

Crime 

Triangle

Offender

Victim

Location

Unpacking the Patterns

Crime Triangle

Outside of triangle:

Offender (Left)

Victim (right)

Location (bottom)

    Rochester, NY Incident Review

16th and 17th Homicides

Presented by Investigators Dominick & Galetta

From Rochester’s Incident Reviews, Courtesy of Dr. John Klofas, Rochester Institute of Technology, with permission Rochester Police Department

27

4:02pm – 4:14pm

The following 29 slides describe two homicides that were discussed in Rochester’s  incident review sessions. Go over the slides at a pace that is appropriate for the interest of the participants. Use the 12 minute time period to go through all the homicide slides.

1. Describe the structure and logistics of Rochester’s homicide review session.

In Rochester, as in several other locations, they conducted incident reviews- detailed reviews of the homicide cases.  

They began with a grand review of all homicide cases in a year.  Over one long day, they reviewed closed and open cases to identify patterns and important issues across the cases.

Almost 100 people participated from across the criminal justice system: police and prosecutors, probation and parole, ATF, FBI, Sheriff’s department.

About 50 people participate in the ongoing monthly reviews of major cases, including homicides.

Here are some examples of the case presentations done in Rochester

      April 28, 2000

113 Columbia Ave.

12:01 P.M.

Friday

28

This was the date, time and location of the two homicides in 2000. 

Friday April 28, 2000 

12:01 PM

113 Columbia Ave.

Residents of location called 911

113 Columbia Ave.

(Genesee Section)

113 Columbia Ave.

29

The presentations include GIS information and scene photos as well as data on everyone involved.

In this case, two young men were killed while sitting on this car eating pizza from the box on the trunk.

It occurred on a corner known for drug sales.  And it illustrate a problem that has been particularly severe in Rochester- drug selling related homicide.

VICTIM

Eric J.

62 Magnolia Ave.

M-B-18

Prior auto theft related arrests

Drug involvement- prior CPSP arrest

Selling drugs at location killed

Died from multiple gunshot wounds

30

This is the profile of one victim.

VICTIM

Will B.

400 Seward St.

M-B-18

No prior arrests

Selling drugs at location killed

Died from multiple gunshot wounds

31

This is the profile of the other victim. 

Eric J.

62 Magnolia Ave.

M-B-18

Prior auto theft related arrests

Drug involvement- prior CPSP arrest

Selling drugs at location killed

Died from multiple gunshot wounds

VICTIMS

Will B.

400 Seward St.

M-B-18

No prior arrests

Selling drugs at location killed

Died from multiple gunshot wounds

Eric J.

62 Magnolia Ave.

M-B-18

Prior auto theft related arrests

Drug involvement- prior CPSP arrest

Selling drugs at location killed

Died from multiple gunshot wounds

32

SUSPECT

Benjamin S.

M-B-18

Arrests: CSCS, CPCS,

	assault, GL, robbery,     unlaw. imprisonment 

Drug involvement- FIF’s for drugs

MOTIVE- Robbery

33

This is the profile of one suspect.

SUSPECT

Rommel “Swift” L.

M-B-18

Arrests: assault, GL, PL, CPSP, crim. poss. Weapon

Suspected of several shootings

Responsible for shooting Tim W. (a possible suspect in Whitney St. homicides)

MOTIVE- Robbery

34

This is the profile of the other suspect.

Lewis did the shooting in the case.  It occurred as part of a series of violent crimes he committed around the same time.  

Homicide Review Questions

Do you know anything about this case?

What do you know about the victim?

What do you know about any associates of the victim?

Was the victim part of a group of active offenders?

What do you know about the suspect(s)/offender(s)?

What do you know about any associates of the suspect(s)/offender(s)?

Is/was the suspect(s)/offender(s) part of a group of active offenders?

What do you know about the relationship between the victim and suspect(s)/offender(s)?

What do you know about the location of the event?

What do you know about the motive of the case?

Was the incident drug related?  How?

What do you think was behind the event? (final summary)?

Information to Intelligence

Incident reviews led to an understanding of two main categories of homicides and gun assaults (Rochester):

Drug house robberies

Disputes, often among individuals with prior experience in the CJ system

Crack House: Busted, Closed or Robbed

Weed House

Weight House

Time

Activity

Hot Crack House

What they said: Life History of a Drug House

37

4:25pm – 4:26pm

1. Describe the chart and how this inmate focus group information can be plotted and useful in strategic interventions.

When the inmates talked about drug house robberies, they indicated that many drug houses get so “hot” that dealers loose control of them.  They start selling to friends and friends-of-friends and then more and more strangers come (if the drugs are good).  That is when houses are subject to robbery- especially crack houses which is where the money is.

Where drug robbery/murders occur

38

4:26pm – 4:27pm

1. Describe the next steps to use this data.

So the next research task is to try to find ways to prioritize drug enforcement activity according to potential for violence- especially robbery and murder.

So in the universe of all drug houses some are known to the police.  Some of those will be “hot” houses and some of those will be robbed and some of the robberies will result in murder.  From an intervention perspective it makes sense to look for the hot drug houses as places to intervene.

So to start we needed to come up with an operational definition of what a drug house is and a way to count them and measure their temperature. 

Drug House Robberies

Suggests need identify “hot houses” as well as groups involved in drug house robberies

Houses = knock & talks, park police cruiser out front, undercover

Groups = pulling levers, notification, gun carrying directed patrols

Disputes

Many occur over a long period of time (two weeks to a month)

Known throughout neighborhood

Most risky are those involving felons in possession firearm

= Need gather street level intelligence on active disputes in hot zones & craft interventions (e.g., CeaseFire Chicago; knock & talks; gun carrying directed patrols)

Variation on Incident Review

Case Processing Review

Joint Case Review (PSN = Gun Case Reviews involving AUSA, Local Prosecutor, law enforcement)

What happens post-arrest? (adapt to youth violence prevention)

Are high risk youths diverted to services?

Do they receive services? 

Are they effective?

What happens to cases deemed necessary for prosecution? 

Case Processing Review

Shared understanding, system fixes, accountability

Summary – Incident Reviews

Another tool for understanding specific violence problems

Further Information:

Milwaukee Homicide Review Commission training program (COPS-Sponsored)

http://city.milwaukee.gov/hrc/COPS-National-TrainingTechnica

PSN Case Study on Incident Reviews

http://www.psn.gov/pubs/pdf/PSN_CaseStudy3.pdf

Thank you!

# image1.png

# image2.jpeg

# image3.png

# image4.jpeg

# image5.wmf

# image6.wmf

# image7.wmf

# image8.wmf

# image9.jpeg

# image10.jpeg

# image11.jpeg

# image12.jpeg

# image13.jpeg

# image14.jpeg

# image15.jpeg

# image16.jpeg

# image17.jpeg

# image18.jpeg

# image19.jpeg

# image20.jpeg

# image21.emf

# oleObject3.bin

# image22.wmf