Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.
One example: Paragraph: "Although the story didn't cite the cost of appendectomy emergency or urgent surgery and we wish it had, we nonetheless will give it a satisfactory score because it at least cited what the editorial writer wrote, ""A secondary benefit is the savings to the hospital generated by minimizing staff and anesthesiologist presence late in the evening and during the wee hours of the morning."" As with our harms score above, although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Despite running less than 300 words, this story did an adequate job in explaining the quality of the evidence, including pointing out limitations. No disease-mongering here. The story meets the bare minimum requirement for this criterion in that it at least cited what an editorial stated. The focus of the story was on a study comparing emergency appendectomy with surgery done up to 12 hours later or beyond. This is the whole focus of the story and one we applaud when it begins: ""Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be."" There were no claims made about the novelty of this research, and we may have wished for a bit more context on this. Nonetheless, the potential for guiding future care decisions was made clear. Not applicable. Given that the story only pulled excerpts from the journal article and the accompanying editorial, and didn't include any fresh quotes from interviews, we can't be sure of the extent to which it may have been influenced by a news release.". Claim: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Solution is here: We really don't understand why only a handful of mainstream news organizations reported this story. (At least in what we found.) The most common emergency surgery in the world. Rushing to emergency surgery may not carry any benefit. Waiting a few hours may be safer and less expensive. Why is that not a story? We applaud USA Today for finding time and space and clearly it didn't need to free up much space to do a good job telling the story. The story explains that as many as 300,0 appendectomies are done each year in the US. That figure alone explains why this is an important study to report.
Explanation: The output is an analysis of the claim while considering the paragraph as a reference. The output highlights the key features presented in the paragraph and explains the claim accordingly.

Now, solve this: Paragraph: "Mayor Jim Kenney's administration recently releaseda reportstuffed with the good news that happened during his first year in office. It notes how the DNC was better for local businesses than the pope and contains plenty about the soda tax and the upcoming education initiatives it will fund. But the report first discusses crime, consistently one of the biggest concerns for Philadelphians who flirt with leaving the city. ""While many urban areas across the country saw a sharp increase in crime over the last year,"" the report reads, ""the Philadelphia Police Department successfully lowered part one crimes and increased drug seizures."" So what's part one crime, and did Philly's part one crime rate drop? And did other cities have difficulty keeping their overall crimes rates low? We decided to check. And for fun we'll look into how this year's change in the crime rate compares to the years of former Mayor Michael Nutter. First, Philly's crime rate. Part one crimes are defined by the Uniform Crime Reporting Act as forcible rape, homicide, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft and arson. The mayor's report states that of part one crimes as of Dec. 11, homicide is down 1 percent, burglaries are down 14 percent, reports of rape down 10 percent and robberies down 8 percent. The administration said it obtained its data from the Uniform Crime Reporting Act. If you look at year-to-date statistics directly from the police department on Dec. 11, they're slightly different. Homicide, for instance, was up 2 percent. But either way, part one crime was down 1 percent on Dec. 11 and violent part one crime was down about 5 percent,according to statistics from the police. The decrease follows a years-long trend for Philadelphia. Under the Nutter administration,violent crime decreased about 20 percentfrom when he took office in 2008 to the end of 2015. Most of the decrease took place in his last four years, but Philly experienced a slight decrease in violent crime in his first year before slight increases the next three years. Not every city can tell the same story as Philadelphia about a reduction in crime and violent crime this year. Throughout 2016,national publications have hypeda rise in violent crime, particularly murder rates, for reasons unclear to experts. Among big cities that have experienced a surge in violent crime are Dallas, Chicago and Los Angeles. As of last week, Dallas' part one crime rate had increased .1 percent and Los Angeles' 5.4 percent. Nearby big cities like New York and Baltimore have seen a decrease in part one crime, like Philadelphia, according to statistics from their police departments. A recent studyby the Brennan Center looked at 21 of the 30 largest U.S. cities and compared projections of crime rates from 2016 to 2015, based on numbers it collected in September. It found the projected crime rate up 1.3 percent overall, a projection the Brennan Center described as ""nearly unchanged,"" the violent crime rate up 5.5 percent and the murder rate up 13.1 percent. The Brennan Center notes most of the fluctuations in the crime rate fall within expected ranges and there has been no national wave of crime. The main reasons for stories about an unclear increase in murder and violent crime nationally are outliers like Chicago and San Antonio, which have seen their murder rates go up about 47 percent and 50 percent, respectively, this year. For overall crime rate, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Antonio, Charlotte and Oklahoma City were the only cities with increases in crime above 4 percent. Philadelphia is one of 13 of the 21 cities to experience a reduction in total crime and one of eight to see a reduction in violent crime." Claim: While many urban areas across the country saw a sharp increase in crime over the last year, the Philadelphia Police Department successfully lowered part one crimes.
Solution:
Did major crimes drop in Philly compared to other cities in 2016?