Transcript Slide 0

Delivering safer neighbourhoods: lessons from
the NDC programme
Reducing fear and crime in our neighbourhoods
Scott Dickinson, SQWC and Richard Meegan, EIUA
30 October 2007
1
Structure of this presentation






What we did
Nature of the problem
NDCs’ approaches
Interventions and activities
Neighbourhood-level change
Working with communities and
agencies
 Implications and conclusions
2
What we did
 Six case studies






Bradford
Knowsley
Lambeth
Newcastle
Newham
Walsall
 Using:
 Project reviews
 Data analysis
> Household survey data
> Police recorded crime data
 Interviews and focus groups
 July 2006 and March 2007
 Plus other research
3
Nature of the problem: issues and complexities
 Variation in levels of crime and
fear of crime
 Crime ‘hotspots’ linked to
particular geographies or
communities
 Crimes and the geography of
crime change over time
 Increasing profile of youth
nuisance and ASB issues
 Relative vulnerability of younger
and older people
 Issues relating to drugs and drug
dealing
 Problems associated with
changing populations
(particularly where increases in
the number of refugee and
migrant communities)
4
NDCs’ approaches
 Evidence
 Available data
 Visible issues
 Less on invisible and unreported
 Focus on tackling high levels of recorded crime
 early interventions
> vehicle crime
> property related crime
 Tackling the fear of crime
 resources for
> increased police presence
> neighbourhood wardens
> CCTV





preventative and diversionary work with young people
support to victims and, in some cases, perpetrators of crime
flexible use of resources to enable targeting of ‘hotspots’
agency collaboration with a focus on ‘problem solving’
…but emphasis on working within themes
5
Interventions and activities
Improvements to
local environments
and public space
Diversionary
activities for young
people
Reactive
interventions to
tackle immediate
issues, e.g. drug
dealing or
prostitution
Support,
information and
awareness raising
projects
Reassurance
measures, e.g.
wardens,
additional police
Crime prevention
activities, e.g.
improved street
lighting
6
Neighbourhood-level change
 Positive change since the start of the programme
 Across most reduction in crime and across all reduction in fear of
crime
 more positive for women than men
 BME communities saw more positive change for quality of life and
satisfaction with area indicators
 overall reductions in burglary and theft, but only marginal reductions in
criminal damage in three case studies and reductions in violent crime in
only the two London NDCs




Reductions in fear of crime lag behind actual reductions
Little evidence that crime has been displaced
Evidence benefits extended to surrounding neighbourhoods
Linking interventions to outcomes is problematic but local
evidence does suggest some plausible links between them
7
Working with communities and agencies
 Communities have had an impact
by
 influencing project development
and highlighting issues through
engagement in theme groups and
projects
 Agencies involvement has worked
with
 early engagement in strategic
and delivery work has been
beneficial
 foci for partnership working e.g.
neighbourhood policing, youth
diversion and neighbourhood
management
 multi-agency partnerships for the
development of holistic
approaches to crime and
community safety
 Problems have been encountered:
 difficult to engage young
people
 communities have not always
felt comfortable working with
agencies and the police on
sensitive issues
 need to ensure the safety/
confidentiality of community
representatives
 tensions between community and
agencies’ priorities sometimes
resulting in NDCs being 'out of
step' with wider strategies and
approaches
8
Implications and conclusions

NDC resources have 'enhanced'
mainstream services



Safer Neighbourhoods work has focused
on prevention, detection and
enforcement



less emphasis on restorative justice
little evidence of interventions to support the
rehabilitation of offenders
Neighbourhoods (c. 10,000 pop.) are an
appropriate spatial scale at which to coordinate interventions and address some
community safety issues:




additional services or flexibility in delivery
which could be replicated in other
neighbourhood programmes
BUT police forces are unlikely in all cases to
be able to maintain current levels of service
beyond NDC
crimes against property
anti-social behaviour
youth nuisance
BUT some issues require interventions
beyond NDC and spatial scales

E.g. drug-related crimes which cut across a
range of deprived communities
9
Implications and conclusions

Community involvement has been
critical
 Communities are a key source of
information
 BUT they can focus on the visible and
enforcement to the exclusion of the
invisible and preventative

Multi-agency partnerships that reach
beyond the main criminal justice
agencies can provide
 Valuable intelligence
 Mechanisms for crime prevention and
project implementation
 BUT scant evidence the engagement
with the Probation Service or prisons
(only Bradford)
 AND limited evidence of systematic
links with LSPs/LAAs

Demolition and redevelopment
might, in the short to medium term,
result in increases in crime rates in
particular ‘hotspots’
10
Implications and conclusions
They also serve to raise the profile of interventions and provide
safe conduits for residents to provide agencies with intelligence.
What we need is a strategic
approach based around core themes:
•policing and deterrence
•support to victims and perpetrators
• education and diversion
Based on a flexible “problem solving
approach”, complemented by the
coordinated delivery of projects.
Community based
partnerships have a key role
in working with local
communities and can broker
and strengthen relationships
between communities and
agencies, notably the police.
Communication to residents
through newsletters and
consultation through
community forums and
organisations is vital in
ensuring the vitality of crime
and community safety
programmes.
11
Implications and conclusions
An asset-based strategy may not
be sufficient to support social
infrastructure projects which are
unlikely to be adopted by mainstream
service providers
Projects on education,
family support,
youth activities,
community facilities
and employment play
a crucial role in
instigating the
cultural change
required to sustain
reductions in crime
levels
But these are
commonly
delivered by
third sector
agencies and
evidence to
date shows
these projects
are the least
likely to be
mainstreamed
or attract secure
funding
12
Contact
Scott Dickinson
Richard Meegan
Associate Director
EIUA
SQW Consulting
t. 020 7307 7152
t. 020 7307 7152
e. [email protected]
e. [email protected]
w. www.ljmu.ac.uk/eiua
w. www.sqw.co.uk