--- title: "Neighbors Against Drugs" type: "pdf" year: "2005" canonical: "/projects/1161" --- # NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs" ![img-0.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/05-13%28F%29/img-0.jpeg) SUBMITTED TO CENTER FOR PROBLEM-ORIENTED POLICING JUNE $24^{\text {TH }}, 2005$ FOR THE # Table of Contents - [NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [CONTENT Letter of endorsement from Chief of](#content-letter-of-endorsement-from-chief-of) - [APPENDICES](#appendices) - [SHEBOYGAN POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY POLICING](#sheboygan-police-department-community-policing) - [The Sheboygan Press](#the-sheboygan-press) - [NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS NONCRIMINAL APPROACHES TO RIDDING NEIGHBORHOODS OF DRUGS](#neighbors-against-drugs-noncriminal-approaches-to-ridding-neighborhoods-of-drugs) - [NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [NONCRIMINAL APPROACHES TO RIDDING NEIGHBORHOODS OF DRUG DEALING BY EMPOWERING COMMUNITY RESIDENTS AND PLACE MANAGERS](#noncriminal-approaches-to-ridding-neighborhoods-of-drug-dealing-by-empowering-community-residents-and-place-managers) - [SCANNING](#scanning) - [ANALYSIS](#analysis) - [Setting Goals](#setting-goals) - [RESPONSE](#response) - [Putting up the NAD signs](#putting-up-the-nad-signs) - [Nuisance civil abatement (Increasing Place Guardianship)](#nuisance-civil-abatement-increasing-place-guardianship) - [Multiplying partnerships and Securing funds](#multiplying-partnerships-and-securing-funds) - [Problems and Limitations of the NAD Response](#problems-and-limitations-of-the-nad-response) - [ASSESSMENT](#assessment) - [How victories are proclaimed](#how-victories-are-proclaimed) - [Calls for Service data](#calls-for-service-data) - [Posttest Results](#posttest-results) - [Posttest Qualitative Highlights](#posttest-qualitative-highlights) - [Assessing if the original objectives were met](#assessing-if-the-original-objectives-were-met) - [Recognition from outside reviewers](#recognition-from-outside-reviewers) - [Future Challenges](#future-challenges) - [AGENCY AND OFFICER INFORMATION](#agency-and-officer-information) - [What Is Suspected Drug Activity and Daily Drug Diary](#what-is-suspected-drug-activity-and-daily-drug-diary) - [What Is Suspected Drug Activity](#what-is-suspected-drug-activity) - [1. Based on reasonable suspicion](#1-based-on-reasonable-suspicion) - [Entry \#10 Date:](#entry-10-date) - [Entry \#11 Date:](#entry-11-date) - [Instructions for completing Daily Drug Diary](#instructions-for-completing-daily-drug-diary) - [Entry \#6 Date:](#entry-6-date) - [Entry \#7 Date:](#entry-7-date) - [Entry \#1 Date:](#entry-1-date) - [Entry #2 Date:](#entry-2-date) - [Entry #3 Date:](#entry-3-date) - [Entry #4 Date:](#entry-4-date) - [Entry #5 Date:](#entry-5-date) - [Residential Survey Pre-test NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS SURVEY](#residential-survey-pre-test-neighbors-against-drugs-survey) - [Residential Survey Post-test](#residential-survey-post-test) - [NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS SURVEY](#neighbors-against-drugs-survey) - [N.A.D](#nad) - [Attention:](#attention) - [Be sure to follow the survey script!!!!](#be-sure-to-follow-the-survey-script) - [Drug Activity Notification Procedures](#drug-activity-notification-procedures) - [These are the steps that your neighborhood must take to ensure the elimination of suspected drug activity.](#these-are-the-steps-that-your-neighborhood-must-take-to-ensure-the-elimination-of-suspected-drug-activity) - [Step \#](#step) - [Step \#](#step) - [Step \#](#step) - [Step \#](#step) - [N.A.D.](#nad) - [WE WON!](#we-won) - [N.A.D.](#nad) - [WE WON!](#we-won) - [**0P165**](#0p165) - [**Neighbors Against Drugs**](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [Target Locations](#target-locations) - [Target Locations](#target-locations) - [WAIVER OF LIABILITY](#waiver-of-liability) - [APPENDIX C](#appendix-c) - [Goal Statements](#goal-statements) - [Yard Sign Activity - Volunteer list](#yard-sign-activity-volunteer-list) - [Victory Party Activity - Volunteer List](#victory-party-activity-volunteer-list) - [School Projects Activity - Volunteer list](#school-projects-activity-volunteer-list) - [(N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [Heightening Community Awareness Activity - Volunteer list](#heightening-community-awareness-activity-volunteer-list) - [(N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [Court Appearance Activity - Volunteer List](#court-appearance-activity-volunteer-list) - [(N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [Fund Raiser Activity - Volunteer list](#fund-raiser-activity-volunteer-list) - [(N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [Neighborhood Adoption Program](#neighborhood-adoption-program) - [(N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [Working With Property Owners](#working-with-property-owners) - [APPENDIX E(1)](#appendix-e1) - [Neighbors Against Drugs](#neighbors-against-drugs) - [Mission Statement](#mission-statement) - [The Team](#the-team) - [N.A.D. Concept](#nad-concept) - [Goals \& Objectives](#goals-objectives) - [$\checkmark$ Five-year goals](#checkmark-five-year-goals) - [Financial Plan Neighborhood Effort](#financial-plan-neighborhood-effort) - [$\checkmark$ Victory Parties](#checkmark-victory-parties) - [$\checkmark$ Victory Parties continued](#checkmark-victory-parties-continued) - [Financial Plan Community Effort](#financial-plan-community-effort) - [$\checkmark$ Billboard Campaign](#checkmark-billboard-campaign) - [$\checkmark$ Billboard campaign continued](#checkmark-billboard-campaign-continued) - [Billboard campaign continued](#billboard-campaign-continued) - [Advertising ads](#advertising-ads) - [Finance Plan Education](#finance-plan-education) - [$\checkmark$ Sheboygan Area School District](#checkmark-sheboygan-area-school-district) - [Resource Requirements](#resource-requirements) - [$\checkmark$ Personnel requirements](#checkmark-personnel-requirements) - [$\checkmark$ Resource requirements](#checkmark-resource-requirements) - [$\checkmark$ Amount of financial support needed:](#checkmark-amount-of-financial-support-needed) - [Rewards](#rewards) - [Key Issues](#key-issues) - [Contributions](#contributions) - [$\checkmark 501$ (3)](#checkmark-501-3) - [APPENDIX F(1)](#appendix-f1) # CONTENT Letter of endorsement from Chief of Police - David E. Kirk Letter of endorsement from Mayor of Sheboygan - Juan Perez Letter of endorsement from the Sheboygan Press, Executive Editor - Mike S. Knuth Summary............................................................................................................i-ii Introduction...............................................................................................1 - 2 Description of project .................................................................................2-15 Scanning............................................................................................2 - 3 Analysis............................................................................................4 - 5 Response........................................................................................6 - 10 Assessment....................................................................................10 - 15 Agency/Officer/Professor information............................................................15 - 16 ## APPENDICES A. Daily Drug Diary Used by neighbors of suspected drug house to document suspected drug activity. B(1). Residential Pre-test and Post-test Survey Forms Pre-test Survey conducted by NAD volunteers prior to yard signs being posted and after "Daily Drug Diaries" have been returned to NAD coordinator. Post-test conducted by NAD volunteers in victorious neighborhoods. B(2). Attention Reminder notice for "Pre-test Survey" takers. This is given prior to going into targeted neighborhood. B(3). What Is Suspected Drug Activity Information shared with neighbors of suspected drug house for "Drug Diary" documentation. Also for general distribution. B(4). Business Card Information placed in plastic bag and left on door knob if nobody is home. Occurs during pre and post test surveys. B(5a). Pre-test Door Hanger Information placed in plastic bag and left on door knob if nobody is home. Occurs during pre-test surveys. B(5b). Post-test Door Hanger Information placed in plastic bag and left on door knob if nobody is home. Occurs during post-test surveys. B(6). NAD Sign Sign with NAD logo, placed in front of homes, but not the suspected drug dealer. B(7). Target Locations Chart used to monitor status of targeted neighborhoods. B(8). Waiver of Liability Read, explained and signed by all NAD volunteers. C(1). 12 Goal Statements C(2a). Yard Sign Volunteer List Volunteers sign up sheets for various NAD activities. C(2b). Victory Party Volunteer List Volunteers sign up sheets for various NAD activities. C(2c). School Project Volunteer List Volunteers sign up sheets for various NAD activities. C(2d). Heighten Community Awareness Volunteer List Volunteers sign up sheets for various NAD activities. C(2e). Court Appearance Volunteer List Volunteers sign up sheets for various NAD activities. C(2f). Fundraiser Volunteer List Volunteers sign up sheets for various NAD activities. C(3). Neighborhood Adoption Program Civic groups, business, etc...build a team and claim a territory as their own. Responsible for getting rid of the dealers and keeping the territory dealer free. D. Working With Property Owners A outline of options when working with property owners. E(1). Key Stake Holders E(2) Business Plan Power point presentation given to area businesses. F(1). Media F(1a). T.V. News Broadcast - video Coverage of the NAD program by Milwaukee and Green Bay stations. F(2). Media Documentation, Various newspaper columns, letters to Editor, Press Editorials All make references to Neighbors Against Drugs. G(1). "Neighbors Against Drugs" Brochure Used in parades and general distribution. Also left with neighbors during "Pre-test surveys". G(2). NAD Confidentiality, "You Can Make A Difference Without Anyone Knowing" Handout material distributed in neighborhoods with suspected drug activity. Also used for general distribution. G(3). Neighbors Against Drugs Window Cling Handed out as a free item. H(1). Did NAD Miss A Drug House Handout Notice used to inform neighbors of victory and asking for any information on suspected drug activity. This is used prior to going public about the victory. H(2). Victory Party Notice Notice hand delivered to each residence in victorious neighborhood 1 week prior to party. H(3). Victory Party Reminder Hand delivered to each neighborhood 1 day prior to "Victory Party". I. Calls For Service J. Assessment Of Initial 12 Goals K. Billboards Past and current billboards posted through out the community. L. Yard Sign Activity Guidelines Guidelines for survey takers M. Step To Targeting A Suspected Drug House Outline describing the steps taken for abating a suspected drug house. N. NAD In A Parade - video NAD volunteers participate in every community parade, in some volunteers are able to distribute NAD brochures. O. Endnotes P. References ![img-1.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/05-13%28F%29/img-1.jpeg) # SHEBOYGAN POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY POLICING June 15, 2005 To The Goldstein Award Selection Committee: Please accept our nomination of Officer Todd Priebe and the "Neighbors Against Drugs" program for consideration to receive the 2005 Herman Goldstein Award. The Sheboygan Police Department has been proud to support the efforts of this group as it has grown to become a vital component in the battle against illegal drugs in the community. From a humble beginning Officer Priebe has guided a group of volunteers in a quest to take charge of activities in their own neighborhoods and stop drug trafficking. The true grassroots effort has impacted the drug trade in Sheboygan in ways traditional law enforcement is unable to. As you review the methodology employed by Officer Priebe we believe you'll see that this project is an excellent example of what can be accomplished when the police and citizens form a partnership for a common good. Officer Priebe utilized the SARA model to arrive at a product that we believe has the sustainability to continue to positively impact our city. As more and more neighborhoods claim "victory" momentum grows. The "Neighbors Against Drugs" program brought statewide attention to Sheboygan. The program was selected as the winner of the 2004 Sir Robert Peel Award, presented by the Wisconsin Association of Community Oriented Policing. It is our belief that the project is worthy of further recognition on a national level. We respectfully submit this project for your review and thank you for your efforts to further problem oriented policing. David E. Kirk Chief of Police, Sheboygan WI Jeffrey P. Johnston Community Policing Lieutenant, Sheboygan Police 828 Center Avenue Sheboygan, WI 53081 Telephone: 920-459-3338 Fax: 920-459-0205 E-mail: johnston@ci.sheboygan.wi.us ![img-2.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/05-13%28F%29/img-2.jpeg) June 21, 2005 To: Goldstein Award Selection Committee Dear Committee Members: I would like to support Officer Todd Priebe and the "Neighbors Against Drugs" program for the 2005 Herman Goldstein Award. Under the direction of Officer Priebe, the Sheboygan Police Department entered into a very successful partnership with the citizens of the community to rid our neighborhoods of drug dealing. I have witnessed first-hand the great achievements made in purging drug dealers from our city. The efforts of NAD has united the community in its common goal to make our city a safer place for all residents. NAD has sent its anti-drug message loud and clear to the dealers trying to do business in Sheboygan. The victories that Neighbors Against Drugs has claimed are numerous and well-earned. Officer Priebe and NAD deserve a multitude of gratitude for the wonderful work they are doing for the City of Sheboygan. I highly recommend Officer Priebe and the NAD program for the Goldstein Award. Sincerely, Juan Perez, J.D. Mayor OFFICE OF MAYOR CITY HALL 828 CENTER AVE., SUITE 301 SHEBOYGAN, WI 53081-4495 920/459-3317 FAX 920/459-0256 ![img-3.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/05-13%28F%29/img-3.jpeg) # The Sheboygan Press **SHEBOYGAN, WISCONSIN 53082-0358** **414-457-7711** **June 20, 2005** **To:** Goldstein Award Selection Committee **Dear Committee Member:** I know you have a difficult job, as it is never easy to determine a winner from a large group of excellent candidates. I hope my letter will assist you as you work through this difficult process. I have lived in Sheboygan for 15 years. My wife and I are proud to call Sheboygan home, and we are proud to be raising our three children in this community. While Sheboygan has been considered a great place to raise a family for a long time, our community, like so many others in this country, has had to face a growing drug problem. As the editor of the local newspaper I have seen an increase in drug activity in our community in the 15 years. Our paper has published a number of stories about drug dealers who have moved into Sheboygan, and we have written several stories about dealers who have been arrested and prosecuted. And in the past couple years we have published several stories about an excellent, grassroots community-policing program called NAD (Neighbors Against Drugs). From the first time I met Sheboygan Police Officer Todd Priebe, I knew Sheboygan was lucky to have such a committed public servant. Todd has organized groups of neighbors throughout the community, and they have been extremely successful in their mission to move drug dealers out of neighborhoods. When NAD began to organize and focus its attention on suspected drug dealers, I expected to receive phone calls from people complaining about the community group. As an editor, I know there are always at least two sides to every story, and I expected to hear a lot of negative reaction regarding NAD's efforts. To this day I have still not received one negative phone call regarding NAD's work in Sheboygan. We have published several stories on the group's efforts to improve the community, and I have not spoken with anyone who has a bad thing to say about NAD. Considering the number of suspected drug dealers NAD has targeted in the past couple years, I find it amazing I have not taken a complaint call or received a letter attacking the citizens group. I think that is a tribute to the excellent work NAD is doing, and a tribute to the fair, measured approach that has helped move a lot of suspected drug dealers out of targeted neighborhoods. Sincerely, *Mike S. Knuth* Executive Editor, The Sheboygan Press # NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS NONCRIMINAL APPROACHES TO RIDDING NEIGHBORHOODS OF DRUGS SHEBOYGAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, 2005 THE PROBLEM: In April 1997 Readers Digest ranked Sheboygan, Wisconsin as the best place in the country to raise a family. By 2003 law enforcement was faced with unprecedented demographic changes, increases in reported illicit drug dealing, and an introduction to crack-cocaine. A paid DEA consultant commented that Sheboygan appeared to be in a time warp with regards to crack-cocaine and was experiencing the impact of the drug in a similar manner of larger urban areas a decade prior. After several meetings between the drug unit and the community policing unit, it was found that many suspected drug houses were not being followed up on due to the tedious process of traditional law enforcement investigations and gathering enough evidence to get search warrants to make an arrest. ANALYSIS: After a five-month planning session between community volunteers, local politicians, business leaders, and a community police officer a mission statement and goals were created. Neighborhood residents became directly involved in analyzing and verifying the drug activity problems. Drug diaries filled out by community members to further substantiate complaints and volunteers administered door-to-door pretest interviews to gather additional data on fear of crime and bystander effects as well as corroborating evidence that drug activity was being witnessed by residents. RESPONSE: Following verification of drug activity problems specific neighborhoods were targeted through the following responses: 1) Posting NAD logo anti-drug signs with the lone exception being the suspected drug house 2) Educational meetings with property owners about civil abatement procedures and evictions of problem tenants 3) Utilization of media to explain the intentions of NAD | | 4) Victory parties held after dealers were evicted, moved out, or desisted in dealing | | --- | --- | | | 5) Posttests given to the effected neighborhood to evaluate potential changes and test sustainability | | ASSESSMENT | Twenty months of NAD implementation has resulted in “victory” being claimed in 18 neighborhoods and the elimination of 59 drug houses. Currently there are 8 active neighborhoods. Comparison of posttest-pretest surveys indicated significant changes with perceptions of neighborhood safety (82% vs. 40%, respectively; p<.001) and suspected drug houses (5% vs. 52%, respectively; p<.001). In relationship to the bystander effect, 78% of posttest respondents reported being more willing to call the police since NAD intervention and 51% reported being more willing to talk to their neighbors about suspected drug houses. | # NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS ## NONCRIMINAL APPROACHES TO RIDDING NEIGHBORHOODS OF DRUG DEALING BY EMPOWERING COMMUNITY RESIDENTS AND PLACE MANAGERS The initial premise of Neighbors Against Drugs (NAD) was to identify apparent drug houses through input from those most affected by the dealing (i.e., the community members). Traditionally, residents who complained about drug dealing in their neighborhoods received little follow-up from law enforcement. Through a problem-oriented approach, it was suggested that these residents may offer quality information about disorder in their neighborhood if they were given minimal training. The NAD approach began by training complainants on how to recognize some common cues that drug dealing is likely taking place and to document what they observe in formatted drug diaries. Although a few residents received training but failed to return diaries, most were very enthusiastic and provided ample information to Sheboygan community police officers. The drug diaries and the NAD program were not set-up to necessarily reach levels of probable cause to enforce criminal laws against dealers, yet many of the residential drug diaries easily met these levels of legal standard. Once it was verified through the diaries that drug dealing was taking place in a neighborhood, NAD volunteers administered door-to-door pretest surveys to the entire targeted neighborhood. These pretest surveys provided additional data concerning levels of neighborhood fear, if the respondent lived in rental or owner-occupied housing, willingness to support NAD, etc. More importantly, the surveys also verified through multiple neighbors that a suspected drug house(s) existed. The pretests were followed with volunteers placing bright red signs with the Neighbors Against Drugs logo boldly emblazoned on it in front of all homes except the suspected drug house. This type of neighborhood intervention sent a clear message that the drug dealers were being watched and their illegal activities were not welcome. It also showed unity and prevented any neighbor from being singled out for retaliation. Next, property owners were contacted by mail and then met with to explain civil abatement. Once it was determined that drug dealing no longer existed in the targeted neighborhoods farewell victory parties were held followed by posttest survey interviews to verify sustainability of the NAD program. The following demonstrates how the SARA model was utilized before the NAD approach evolved out of growing community concern. Click on APPENDIX, thus bringing up the appendix. # SCANNING NAD originated in Sheboygan, Wisconsin through the leadership and vision of Officer Todd Priebe and began by focusing on alternative approaches to the increased complaints about neighborhood drug dealing. The city is a natural corridor between larger cities such as Green Bay, Milwaukee, and Chicago, and was found to be vulnerable to dealers who reportedly found a public in demand, larger profit margins and seemingly less risk of apprehension. This information came from known dealers in the neighborhood who worked as informants for the Multi-jurisdictional Enforcement Group (MEG drug unit) at the county level. It has been suggested that the supply of illicit drugs generally follows demand as a response ${ }^{1}$. The state as a whole is infamous for being the beer capital of the nation and the number one ranked state in terms of binge drinking. Perhaps this reputation is also suggestive of lower-levels of tolerance regarding any mind altering substances. After frequent meetings with the MEG drug unit and officers designated to nontraditional problem-solving, it was found that while there were many tips given to the MEG unit, many were not being followed up on since this method of policing was long and tedious and often did not result in search warrants or enough probable cause evidence needed to make an arrest. With growing concerns from business leaders and politicians that increased drug dealing was hindering the city's future viability, officers set-out to partner with community members to discover how extensive the problem was and if alternative anti-drug strategies could be utilized. A hired consultant and retired DEA Agent who headed the New York Office from 1985-1991 (Robert Stutman) made two recent trips to Sheboygan and through his qualitative analysis commented that the city seemed to be in a time warp and was experiencing crack-cocaine the way that major urban areas did the decade prior, albeit on a smaller scale. In preparation for future analysis, Officer Priebe began to hold well publicized openforum community meetings with concerned citizens in July 2003. At these meetings it was found that dealing was going on in select neighborhoods for well over decade, but an influx of crack-cocaine was now effecting the city more than what had been seen in previous years. This information seemed to verify the information acquired from the DEA consultant. At these meetings the NAD title emerged along with a mission statement and goals through a group consensus. The mission stated simply "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs by taking neighborhoods back one by one." Goals that followed the mission were pragmatic in terms of organizing volunteers and getting start-up funding, but also generally considered how the community would apply pressure on residencies who were dealing drugs. # ANALYSIS In an effort to more fully analyze the drug problem in select neighborhoods and go beyond hearsay of drug unit informants, ex-users and those who attended the initial community meetings, willing complainants were trained on how to fill-out a drug diary (see APPENDIX A). These diaries were then used to determine if there was at least reasonable suspicion to suspect drug activity in select neighborhoods in addition to giving more substantive data to officers. If the diaries were deemed consistent, the County MEG Unit was conferred to limit replicated interventions. If the MEG Unit was actively engaged in an investigation with the specified drug house or neighborhood, the diary information would be funneled to investigators and no further action would be taken by NAD until that investigation ended. At this stage, complaining citizens were simply asked to be a conduit for information but were not expected to be aggressive at cleaning up their own neighborhoods. Through an analysis of what the MEG Unit was not actively working on, officers found gaps and ways to test the effectiveness of the NAD problem-oriented response. This response challenged the traditional approach of undercover drug operations since it was often found that search warrants were being repeated in houses where previous drug arrests had been made less than a few months prior. There is clear evidence that traditional law enforcement approaches are not effective in long-term changes and can make matters worse in terms of driving up retail prices and possibly increasing crime and violence ${ }^{2}$. Another unintended consequence of traditional enforcement that was of concern to the NAD group was alienation of community members who were not typically followed-up on by MEG Unit officers. NAD diverges from traditional policing by its innovative analysis of drug diaries and pre and posttest surveys (see APPENDIX B(1)). Pretest surveys further communicates a given problem to the neighborhood and aids in bringing together their collective response. In addition, these surveys provide the necessary follow-up that concerned community members crave. Pretest results indicated that several community members knew about suspected drug houses before being informed that there may be a drug house in their neighborhood. Pretest survey results not only confirmed what was being reported in the drug diary by the original complainants, but also pointed to the given apathy of the neighborhood and bystander effects³ since many were aware of drug activity in their neighborhoods but were failing to report. Indeed, citizen reporting drug activity is challenging and generally lower than reports of crimes where there is a clear victim⁴. Despite this bystander effect, many departments are overwhelmed by citizen reports of drug activity, most reports are for low level dealing⁵ and a majority of complaints offer little useful information to the police or are redundant⁶. NAD set out to not only provide a clear reporting mechanism for concerned citizens but also to improve on the information they were giving to the police. ### Setting Goals The Chief of the Sheboygan Police Department worked with city engineering department and obtained separate office space to house the NAD materials and run consistent meetings. The office was large enough to display news stories about NAD, signs, forms, etc. The building would be seen by volunteers as inspiring and conducive to their continued efforts. Through several planning community meetings from July 2003 – November 2003, the mission statement was created and complemented by proceeding goals. A core group of volunteers worked with the police in creating twelve goals during the initial 5 months of planning and determining a list of core stakeholders. The goal statements can be found in APPENDIX C(1). # RESPONSE After the five month analysis process the NAD volunteers began to converge on the targeted neighborhoods. Neighborhoods became targeted after substantiating evidence was acquired through drug diaries. The response stage began by sending trained volunteers out to the community to conduct door-door pretest interview surveys. The final question on the survey was to receive permission to post a NAD sign in the respondents' front yard. Ninety-two percent of respondents gave permission to have NAD signs posted in their front yards. Seven percent of those who refused were concerned about lowering their property values. The other one percent constituted language barriers with the interviewers. ## Putting up the NAD signs Pretest surveys were followed up within a week by posting antidrug NAD signs throughout the targeted neighborhood. Generally houses selected for intervention included the street segment paralleling the suspected drug house and houses on the same side of the street. The reasoning behind the signage was to inform drug active residencies that they were being watched and residents in the area were not going to tolerate their behavior. These antidrug signs (see APPENDIX B(6)) would be posted in the given neighborhood with the lone exception being the suspected drug house. All the neighborhood signs would be posted at the same time to avoid singling out any neighbors. This unified approach was believed to send a clear message that the dealer(s) does not have just one complainant but an entire neighborhood against their activities. Occasionally, theft of signs occurred and subsequently placed in front of the dealer's residency. This, while an annoyance, was actually a sign of successful impact on the neighborhood. These problems have been dealt with by increased monitoring of the signs and diligence in replacing any that are stolen and removing any that are put in front of targeted drug houses. # Nuisance civil abatement (Increasing Place Guardianship) In an effort to work simultaneously with the signage approach, landlord or property owners of the location where the suspected drug activity was taking place were contacted and informed about the actions of NAD. The intent of this contact was to make the property owner aware that neighbors were watching and did not want drug activity in their neighborhood. This initial contact was designed to be educational and encouraged the property owner to take action against the problem tenants (see APPENDIX D). Not all drug houses were rental properties and it was discovered that in many owner-occupied housing residencies, the dealer was not actually the owner (e.g., live-in boyfriend). Anecdotal data from the neighborhoods found that community pressure often forced the dealer to leave the property even when the original owners remained. Increasing place guardianship through educating property owners can be effective at blocking opportunities for drug dealing as levels of guardianship are increased by vigilante property owners ${ }^{7}$. In addition to formal letters being sent to the property owners, several were met with face-to-face by police officers and the city set-up landlord training referencing tenant screening. This was a useful step since prior research has indicated that letters from the police to property owners coupled with meetings increases the probability that serious action will be taken against troubled tenants. The educational process for property owners was critical for the sustainable success of NAD. Part of the process was convincing landlords that drug dealers are more likely to operate in locations where place managers do not attempt to exert control over their property ${ }^{8}$. # Multiplying partnerships and Securing funds In organizing the continued success of the NAD response, several support structures were sought after including key stakeholders and media outlets. For a more full explanation of each key stakeholder see APPENDIX E(1) and for coverage of media accounts including video coverage of NAD see APPENDIX F(1), APPENDIX F(1a), APPENDIX F(2). # Problems and Limitations of the NAD Response Efforts to organize the NAD program were not without difficult challenges. As expected whenever you amass a group of volunteer strangers, personality conflicts emerge. Officer Priebe's diplomacy and participatory leadership style became vital to keeping the program on track and moving in the right direction. Tied closely to this were delicate issues that the volunteers faced. When volunteers went into neighborhoods to survey citizens, at times they encountered people who were in denial that there was any community drug problem. Volunteers were trained to be tactful and explain what the evidence showed while not being overly forceful. This was coupled with the citizens who believed there was a drug problem but did not want to get involved. Self-righteous volunteers who believed in their cause needed to recognize that even though their cause was just, it could not be forced upon people. Efforts have and continue to be made to aggressively communicate that NAD is not just a police or criminal justice program, but a holistic community effort driven by grassroots volunteers, yet funded and implanted by government, law enforcement, and local business support. The importance of the wider community supporting the community and the police only serving as a catalyst is not lost in determining the long-term success of the NAD initiative. In addition, some community members have not grasped the concept that efforts of NAD are not dependant on specific names or testifying in court. These residents also need to understand the concept of uniting neighborhoods in an effort to eliminate opportunities for not singling anyone out for retaliation. Officer Priebe was quick to address this through dispersing increased educational material that clearly defines the NAD initiative and confidentiality process (See APPENDIX G(1), APPENDIX G(2)). Other growing pains included over-ambitious targeting of neighborhoods or accurately defining what consists of a neighborhood. Research is inconsistent on how to accurately define a neighborhood for evaluation purposes ${ }^{9}$ with everything from census tracts, block groups, to face blocks being used. By targeting too large a neighborhood volunteers occasionally were overwhelmed and frustrated. Choosing the correct size area, or properly defining what a neighborhood consists of, has become must easier as experience mounts. In addition, it has been found, not surprisingly, the further you move away from a suspected drug house the less likely you will have residential knowledge about the drug activity. Targeted "neighborhoods" now consist of street segments shared with the suspected drug house and residencies directly across the street from the drug house. These residencies are often limited to no more than fifteen houses away from the drug house (or a total of 30 properties surrounding the drug house). Some of these properties may include multiple residencies (i.e., duplex housing or apartment buildings). As word of the NAD program spread, both via the media and word of mouth, public demand for more targeted areas rose and that made it difficult for timely responses. Difficulties continue to arise in having enough volunteers to keep up with the requests for NAD neighborhood intervention. Solutions have included use of volunteers outside of the immediate community such as undergraduate criminal justice students from Lakeland College. It is also important to point out that the mission statement for NAD reads taking back neighborhoods one by one rather than a holistic blitz on each neighborhood with reported drug activity. Assessment also benefits from the neighborhood by neighborhood approach. # ASSESSMENT ## How victories are proclaimed Assessment shows that the NAD program has had a significant impact on neighborhood drug problems. As of June 1, 2005, NAD has claimed "victory" in 18 neighborhoods and eliminated 59 suspected drug houses. There are currently ongoing efforts in nine more neighborhoods that encompass a total of twelve more suspected drug houses. Victories are not claimed lightly. Victory occurs in one of two ways. Either the occupants from the targeted drug house stop their neighborhood dealing or they move. The method used to evaluate this success is direct contact with the landlords and the affected neighbor residents. The response from property owners has been exceptional and very little resistance has been found after sending a letter of notification and meeting directly with property owners as suggested according to abatement research ${ }^{7,8}$. Residents and/or informants have reported that suspected dealers have: 1. Moved to another location in Sheboygan. 2. Stopped dealing in the affected neighborhood. 3. Moved out of town. 4. Left their residence and went into treatment. Each of these documented outcomes was cause for a claim of victory and an ensuing victory party included the media, affected neighborhood members, volunteers, and invited political leaders. The evaluations being compiled by qualitative interviews of the neighbors adds legitimacy to the evaluation process. The neighbors have no incentive to claim victory if they are still suffering the negative affects of the drug activity. NAD is not looking for a short-term fix. Activity must have stopped or the subject must have left the area for a period of approximately two months before victory is claimed. Prior to making this claim, a notice is hand-delivered to every area resident informing them of the anticipation of counting the neighborhood as victorious and asking if there was any information that has been overlooked regarding suspected drug activity (see APPENDIX H(1)). Likewise, if one tenant moves out and the new tenant continues the suspected drug activity, the neighborhood is not claimed victorious until the dealing has actually ceased. This has been the case in some of the targeted neighborhoods that have experienced the NAD intervention and was encouraging since neighbors were vigilant against the reemergence of drug dealing in their neighborhood. This vigilance has included neighbors contacting property owners directly, rather than NAD or police dispatch, when disorder or suspected criminal activity arises. While these instances are indicative of successful community empowerment, they are difficult to track through official data, such as calls for service. # Calls for Service data Problem-oriented policing guides suggest that calls for service be looked at when assessing POP projects. However, this data source was not judged as an effective method of assessment since many of the neighborhoods suffered from apathy and bystander effects resulting in low levels of direct drug complaints through calls for service. For a more full explanation of how calls for service were analyzed in the first neighborhood that NAD intervened see APPENDIX I. # Posttest Results After victories were claimed and neighborhood parties bidding farewell to the dealers were conducted and sponsored by NAD, follow-up was again made through door-to-door posttest interviews (see APPENDIX B). The average number of months that passed from the victory party to posttest interviews was four, but there are currently nine neighborhoods that are still in need of posttest survey interviews. This 120-day post response surpasses an ABA sponsored study in Milwaukee, in which researchers did a 75-day follow-up on abated drug houses through an attempted undercover buy ${ }^{10}$. The follow-up assessment of NAD is much more extensive in terms of not only gauging if a new drug house is present or if the originally targeted drug house(s) returned, but also comparing levels of fear and willingness to call the police or communicate concerns with other neighbors. To date there is 252 usable posttest surveys compared to 559 usable pretest surveys. In measuring demographics in Table 1, differences between pre and posttest results were nonsignificant giving us confidence that these samples are comparable. TABLE 1. Descriptive Statistics | Variable | Pretest (N=559) | Posttest (N=152) | | --- | --- | --- | | Gender | | | | Male | $37 \%$ | $39 \%$ | | Female | $63 \%$ | $61 \%$ | | Age $^{5}$ | 44 | 49 | | Housing | | | | Owner-occupied | $73 \%$ | $76 \%$ | | Rental | $26 \%$ | $24 \%$ | ${ }^{5}$ Denotes average age of respondents. Standard deviation consisted of 19 years with a min of 14 max of 91 years of age. Table 2 compares the differences between other pretest and posttest survey results. TABLE 2. Comparing Pretest and posttest results | Question | Pretest ( $\mathrm{N}=559$ ) (\% RESPONDING 'YES') | Posttest ( $\mathrm{N}=252$ ) (\% RESPONDING 'YES') | | --- | --- | --- | | Do you feel your neighborhood is safe? *** | 40 | 82 | | Would you have or have you hesitated to call the police? $(\mathrm{p}=.08)$ | 43 | 20 | | Is there unfamiliar neighborhood disorder/activity? *** | 50 | 14 | | Do you suspect a drug house on your block? *** | 52 | 5 | | Do you support NAD | 96 | 98 | | Do you grant NAD the permission to post a sign in your front yard? | 96 | X | Clearly, the change scores in pre and posttest survey results are indicative of the positive impact of NAD. Significant differences exist in terms of perceptions of safety, unfamiliar neighborhood activity, and suspected drug houses. Results acquired thus far show promise for the NAD intervention having sustainability with perceptions of a suspected drug house returning in only 5 percent of posttest survey respondents. Although bystander effects appear to have been reduced through NAD intervention ( $23 \%$ change) this difference remains slightly insignificant. # Posttest Qualitative Highlights Examples of open-ended qualitative posttest responses from the neighborhoods include: 1. There is less traffic 2. Not as much of the loud car stereos going by 3. I feel safer 4. Cars are no longer getting broke into 5. This is the first time in years that I allow my children to play outside when its dark 6. Sign idea is really good and it worked 7. Thanks for being in the neighborhood 8. The drug house is much quieter 9. Glad to know that NAD is there to fight the problem and if you call there will be a response 10. It's a cool program and has reduced the amount of traffic 11. No more problems since the drug people left 12. The neighborhood looks and feels much safer and we no longer have to watch television in the dark 13. This is a much better place to live 14. NAD helped rid the neighborhood of most the drug activity and did make a difference 15. Keep up the good work 16. We would have sold our house if it wasn't for NAD These types of reported quality of life changes have made the NAD program a success according to the wider Sheboygan community. ### Assessing if the original objectives were met The assessment phase also included an evaluation of the original twelve goals devised by the NAD volunteers. This portion of the assessment can be found in APPENDIX J. Generally, all goals were met and were exceeded due to an impressive outpouring of public support. ### Recognition from outside reviewers Levels of public acceptance and support are important measures that should not be overlooked in the assessment stage of NAD. In March 2004, the Elks Club honored Officer Priebe with their Citizen of the Year award in recognition of his efforts and success with the NAD program. This prestigious award established the NAD program as being a recognizable, significant and a worthwhile community/police partnership that successfully utilized an innovative problem-oriented approach. In January 2005, NAD won the Wisconsin Association for Community-Oriented Policing (WACOP) award and was recognized for having made the most significant contribution in the state with regards to innovative policing. # Future Challenges In looking towards the future, NAD will continue ongoing assessment of reliability that includes larger sample sizes from both Sheboygan and other communities. Green Bay and Plymouth, Wisconsin are now testing the NAD program in their communities and a few more have also inquired about the program from across the country. Continued assessment and evolution is a necessary component of NAD as it makes itself an intregal part of the community. In an effort to continue the momentum of NAD a series of billboards have been displayed around the Sheboygan area and can be seen in APPENDIX K. ## AGENCY AND OFFICER INFORMATION The NAD program was initiated by one officer and after proven success, received full support by officers and staff. Officer Todd Priebe was one of three original COPPS AHEAD Officers, and received training in POP and COP. Officer Priebe was given no incentives by the police department. Incentives were driven by the need for making a positive impact on a growing problem for the sake of the community's future. Training and experience in small problem solving projects gave the confidence needed to initiate a large-scale project. Confidence grew with the partnership of Professor Brandon Kooi from Lakeland College. The biggest issue was the lack of confidence by fellow officers and supervision that community members are the solution to the community's drug problem. The NAD program received no local, state, or federal dollars. Members of the community donated all money. Numerous businesses gave "in- kind" contributions. NAD has received over $\$ 20,000$ in monetary and "in-kind" contributions. Officer Priebe and his family have given personal time (off the clock) to ensure the success of the program. Project Contact People: Officer Todd Priebe Police Officer 828 Center Avenue Sheboygan, WI 53081 Phone: 920-459-3341 Fax: 920-459-0205 tpriebe@ci.sheboygan.wi.us Brandon Kooi, Ph.D. Lakeland College Criminal Justice Department P.O. Box 359 Sheboygan, WI 53082 Phone: 920-565-1577 kooibr@lakeland.edu # What Is Suspected Drug Activity and Daily Drug Diary ![img-4.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/05-13%28F%29/img-4.jpeg) ## What Is Suspected Drug Activity ## 1. Based on reasonable suspicion i. Conclusion made by law enforcement officer ii. Three (3) or more observations of any combination of the following, all observed with-in a span of a several hours; a. Short term vehicle and/or foot traffic (3-15 minutes) by unknown individuals. b. Hosting, individuals staying 15 to 45 minutes. c. Individual(s) display signs of being paranoid. d. Suspected dealer or buyer approaches parked vehicle or individual walking on sidewalk. e. Personal observation of drug use or over hearing a drug deal. f. Observation of exchanging of money/drugs, individual may put hand in a pocket while walking away from suspected drug dealer. g. Individual parks their vehicle away from suspected drug house, while available parking is available at the suspected drug house, individual then walks up to suspected drug house. h. Noticeable signal (porch light on, etc...) followed by heavy, short-term vehicle or foot traffic, or hosting. i. Individual returns to suspected drug house for the $2^{\text {nd }}, 3^{\text {rd }}$, or $4^{\text {th }}$ time in same day. j. Vehicle with several individuals, one person exits vehicle and visits suspected drug house. k. Honking of car horn from a passing car, a subject then exits suspected drug house and meets with occupant of vehicle. Entry \#12 Date: $\qquad$ Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ Entry \#13 Date: $\qquad$ Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ ## Entry \#10 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ ## Entry \#11 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ I. Increased activity when a particular person is present. m. Occupants of vehicle picks up suspected drug dealer and drives off, returns minutes later and drops off suspected dealer. n. Suspected dealer appears to be making deliveries, leaves and returns a short time later, may return with different people driving suspected dealer home, stays home for brief period of time then leaves again. (Important note- listed are examples of suspicious behavior, not a complete list. After a period of observation, people will be able to determine for themselves what method of drug dealing is being used. At some point there will always be an exchange, however, the exchange may not be in person. Money and drugs may be placed in varied locations. Watching the suspected drug dealer before and after having contact with someone is important. Money maybe handed off in a handshake, the dealer will then instruct the buyer where to find his drugs. Multiple series of suspicious behavior such as those discussed would lead one to believe that there is suspected drug activity. Hosting has been described by drug users as a way drug dealers are disguising (often exposing a drug house) short-term vehicle and foot traffic. Drug dealers will have drug users use drugs prior to the user leaving the suspected drug house, taking anywhere from 15 to 45 minutes.) 2. Suspected dealer appears to be making deliveries, leaves and returns a short time later, may return with different people driving them home, stays home for brief period of time then leaves again. 3. Two (2) separate observations of persons parking their car away from suspected drug house and walking up to the suspected drug house, when there is available parking at suspected drug house. 4. Direct Evidence. Personal observations of use or exchanging of money/drugs, individual may put a hand in a pocket while walking away from suspected drug dealer. Over hearing dialog between individuals, of which clearly makes references to drugs. ## Instructions for completing Daily Drug Diary Use the listed examples from page $1 \& 2(a-n)$ to document the suspected drug activity of one drug house or location. This booklet contains 13 entries. Use a new entry for every suspected drug deal. Date, beginning time \& ending time, and description of suspected drug activity are necessary information. For each entry record the description of suspected drug activity by circling all the letters (a-n) (there may be more than one) that apply for the particular entry. Use the comment section for any special notations. Record only truthful information. Making false claims will only prolong successful efforts. Document entries when vehicle and foot traffic is frequent. Don't need a license plate (tag) number for an entry to be made. When completed: Mail to: Sheboygan Police Department, Attn: Officer Todd Priebe, 828 Center Avenue, Sheboygan, WI, 53081 OR drop off at the Sheboygan Police Department *Required information-will be kept confidential *Name $\qquad$ (of person completing this form - your name will be kept confidential) *Address $\qquad$ *Phone $\qquad$ E-mail $\qquad$ Name(s) of suspected dealer(s) (if known) $\qquad$ $\qquad$ *Address or location of suspected drug activity $\qquad$ Entry \#8 Date: $\qquad$ Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: $\qquad$ Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: $\qquad$ Comments: $\qquad$ $\qquad$ $\qquad$ Entry \#9 Date: $\qquad$ Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: $\qquad$ Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: $\qquad$ Comments: $\qquad$ $\qquad$ ## Entry \#6 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ ## Entry \#7 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ Does suspected drug dealer appear to have a job? $\square$ YES $\square$ NO $\square$ UNK How many people live in the suspected drug dealers home? Adults $\qquad$ Children $\qquad$ Who appears to be responsible for the suspected drug dealing? Adult (parent) $\square$ YES $\square$ NO $\square$ UNK Juvenile (siblings) $\square$ YES $\square$ NO $\square$ UNK Vistor (friend) $\square$ YES $\square$ NO $\square$ UNK Is there a frequency of unknown people staying days/weeks or months at a time? $\square$ YES $\square$ NO Are these people responsible for the suspected drug dealing? $\square$ YES $\square$ NO $\square$ UNK Is it possible there is a legitimate business being operated out of the home? $\square$ YES $\square$ NO $\square$ UNK ## Entry \#1 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ ## Entry #2 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ ## Entry #3 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ ## Entry #4 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ ## Entry #5 Date: Beginning time: $\qquad$ Ending time: $\qquad$ Description of suspected drug activity (circle all that apply): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N License plate number \& vehicle color or description of vehicle: Description of person visiting the suspected drug house or name: Comments: $\qquad$ N.A.D. "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" # Residential Survey Pre-test NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS SURVEY Introduce yourself and partner. "Hi, we're volunteers from Neighbors Against Drugs. May I have two minutes of your time to ask you some questions?" "THIS INFORMATION WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL." Volunteer Names $\qquad$ Date $\qquad$ Address $\qquad$ Language Barrier problem Yes No Language Spoken Spanish Hmong Bosnian Unk. Resident Owner-occupied Rental Gender Male Female What is your age $\qquad$ ? 1. How long have you lived at this location? $\qquad$ 2. Do you feel your neighborhood is safe and crime free? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ 3. Would you or have you hesitated at all to call the police about neighborhood problems? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ 4. What are the main problems within this neighborhood? 5. Has there been unfamiliar activity in your neighborhood such as strangers and lots of cars coming and going at all hours? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ "How long?" $\qquad$ 6. Do you suspect drug activity in your neighborhood? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ Don't Know $\qquad$ 7. Do you know of any specific suspected drug houses in your neighborhood? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ "Where?" $\qquad$ 8. NAD has reason to believe there is a suspected drug house in your neighborhood, the address is (Show map) " 9. Would you support efforts made by Neighbors Against Drugs (NAD) to eliminate the sale of illegal drugs in your neighborhood? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ If no, why $\qquad$ 10. Permission to leave a yard sign? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ Downstairs Tenant YES NO Upstairs Tenant YES NO Property Owner YES NO 11. Do you have any suggestions? $\qquad$ "We would like to leave this information with you. It has a name and number you can call if you have any further questions or concerns." "Please follow all 4 steps on the 'Drug Activity Notification Procedures' form, it's extremely important to the success of this effort." "Thank you for your time." Notes: (How cooperative was the respondent? Any questions/comments from the respondent?) $\qquad$ N.A.D. "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" # Residential Survey Post-test Volunteer Names $\qquad$ Date $\qquad$ Address $\qquad$ ## NEIGHBORS AGAINST DRUGS SURVEY Introduce yourself and partner. "Hi, we're volunteers from Neighbors Against Drugs. May I have two minutes of your time to ask you some evaluation questions regarding NAD?" "THIS INFORMATION WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL." | Language Barrier problem | Yes | No | Language Spoken | Spanish | Hmong | Bosnian | Unknown | | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | | Resident | Owner-occupied | Rental | Gender Male | Female | | | | What is your Age $\qquad$ ? 1. How long have you lived at this location? $\qquad$ 2. Do you feel your neighborhood is safe and crime free? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ 3. Would you or have you hesitated at all to call the police about neighborhood problems? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ 4. Are you more willing to call the police on suspected neighborhood problems since NAD intervened in your neighborhood? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ How has the neighborhood changed since NAD intervened? 5. Are you more willing or have you talked to your neighbors more since NAD intervened in your neighborhood? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ 6. What are the main problems within this neighborhood or have these problems gone away since NAD intervened? 7. Has there been unfamiliar activity in your neighborhood such as strangers and lots of cars coming and going at all hours? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ "How long?" $\qquad$ 8. Do you suspect drug activity in your neighborhood? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ Don't Know $\qquad$ 9. Do you know of any specific suspected drug houses in your neighborhood? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ "Where?" $\qquad$ 10. Do you support the efforts made by Neighbors Against Drugs (NAD) to eliminate the sale of illegal drugs in your neighborhood? YES $\qquad$ NO $\qquad$ If no, why $\qquad$ 11. Do you have any further suggestions? $\qquad$ "THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME." Notes: (How cooperative was the respondent? Any questions/comments from the respondent?) $\qquad$ # N.A.D "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs" ## Attention: ## Be sure to follow the survey script!!!! Only go to those addresses highlighted in green, go to both apartments if it's a two family home. We need only 1 person willing to testify in court, however, I think we should get as many as possible. Remember - There is strength in numbers. Suspected drug activity is marked with red X . Prior to going out to do the survey, read over the "Continuing Drug Activity Survey" and the "Daily Drug Diary" Complete the "Continuing Drug Activity Survey." You will notice on the back there is a copy of the "Daily Drug Diary", that is there just to possibly make things a little easier when going over the diary with the resident. The "Daily Drug Diary" is to be completed by the resident and sent to me. Stress the importance of this diary, no diary, no civil case, no by-by drug dealer. Be sure they realize we're going after the property owner, not the drug dealer. This is a safe approach in dealing with the suspected drug dealers. If you have any questions about the "Daily Drug Diary" just give a call. I think you can figure it out. I tried to make it easier for people to fill it out. Now you will notice that they are given examples at the top of the page with a letter. In each entry, the individual only needs to circle the letters that apply (there can be more than 1) to that particular date and time. License plate number and names are also important, if they can get it. My: work number is 459-3341, 7:40am - 4pm (generally speaking) Home number is 452-9035 Cell number is $980-7808$ Prior to leaving be sure they have the "Daily Drug Diary" which is double sided and an envelope. The individual only has to insert the completed diary, lick the envelope and drop it in the mailbox. N.A.D. "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs." # Drug Activity Notification Procedures ## These are the steps that your neighborhood must take to ensure the elimination of suspected drug activity. ## Step \# 1. Watch for Suspicious Activity a. High volume, short-term activity MAY be an indicator of drug transactions. i. Several short-term visits with in a brief period of time increase likely hood of drug activity. ii. People parking their cars a block away and walking to the suspected drug house. iii. People walking to the drug house and then taking a walking around the block. iv. People leaning into cars that pull up in the vicinity of the drug house, then car drives away. v. People shaking hands. vi. People picking up garbage and walking away. vii. Lots of cell phone use. b. Large gatherings of people occurring with frequency, but not necessarily limited to late night activity. c. Windows obscured by paint, boards, etc... to prevent observation into building. d. People appear to share cigarettes, pipes, or appear to make exchanges with money. ## Step \# 2. Watch for Direct Evidence a. Items discarded in yards, alleyways, or streets can include pipes, plastic baggies with the corners missing, or the plastic baggie tie offs (corners). b. Odor of marijuana or other drugs. c. Witnessed obvious drug deal. d. Report loud music, fights, speeding cars, etc... ## Step \# 3. When any of the above applies contact the police, non-emergency 459-3333, emergency 911 a. Phone the police and tell the dispatcher your making a N.A.D. call b. Provide the dispatcher with as much as possible of the following information: i. What is happening and where ii. Suspect description 4. What is the person wearing 5. Race/height/weight/age 6. Direction of travel iii. Vehicle description 7. Make/model 8. Color 9. License plate number 10. Direction of travel ## Step \# 4. Contact property owner. Request action on their part, or the neighborhood will take civil action. | Neighbors Against Drugs | Neighbors Against Drugs | | --- | --- | | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | | N.A.D. | N.A.D. | | Need information or have questions contact: | Need information or have questions contact: | | Community Policing Unit | Community Policing Unit | | 459-3341 | 459-3341 | | Neighbors Against Drugs | Neighbors Against Drugs | | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | | N.A.D. | N.A.D. | | Need information or have questions contact: | Need information or have questions contact: | | Community Policing Unit | Community Policing Unit | | 459-3341 | 459-3341 | | Neighbors Against Drugs | Neighbors Against Drugs | | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | | N.A.D. | N.A.D. | | Need information or have questions contact: | Need information or have questions contact: | | Community Policing Unit | Community Policing Unit | | 459-3341 | 459-3341 | | Neighbors Against Drugs | Neighbors Against Drugs | | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | | N.A.D. | N.A.D. | | Need information or have questions contact: | Need information or have questions contact: | | Community Policing Unit | Community Policing Unit | | 459-3341 | 459-3341 | | Neighbors Against Drugs | Neighbors Against Drugs | | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | "Neighbors helping neighbors fight against illegal drugs" | | N.A.D. | N.A.D. | | Need information or have questions contact: | Need information or have questions contact: | | Community Policing Unit | Community Policing Unit | | 459-3341 | 459-3341 | | N.A.D. | N.A.D. | | --- | --- | | *Neighbors Against Drugs* | *Neighbors Against Drugs* | | “Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs” | “Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs” | | Dear Resident: | Dear Resident: | | Volunteers from “Neighbors Against Drugs” had stopped at your home and wish to get in touch with you. | Volunteers from “Neighbors Against Drugs” had stopped at your home and wish to get in touch with you. | | Your neighborhood has been targeted by “Neighbors Against Drugs”, because of suspected drug activity near your home. | Your neighborhood has been targeted by “Neighbors Against Drugs”, because of suspected drug activity near your home. | | The volunteers need about 2 minutes of your time. It’s important for the volunteers to talk to everyone in the neighborhood about the suspected drug activity. | The volunteers need about 2 minutes of your time. It’s important for the volunteers to talk to everyone in the neighborhood about the suspected drug activity. | | Please phone _______________, @______________, between______________ | Please phone _______________, @______________, between______________ | | to make arrangements for 2 minutes of your time. | to make arrangements for 2 minutes of your time. | | Thank you. | Thank you. | | By working together, we will win this battle! | By working together, we will win this battle! | ## N.A.D. Neighbors Against Drugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs" ## WE WON! Dear Resident: Volunteers from "Neighbors Against Drugs" had stopped at your home and wish to get in touch with you. Your neighborhood had been liberated from drug dealing. Volunteers wish to ask you few questions related to the antidrug effort. The volunteers need about 2 minutes of your time. It's important for the volunteers to talk to everyone in the neighborhood about the progress. Please phone $\qquad$ , @ $\qquad$ , between to take the survey over the phone. It will take only a few minutes of your time. Thank you. By working together, we won this battle! ## N.A.D. Neighbors Against Drugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs" ## WE WON! Dear Resident: Volunteers from "Neighbors Against Drugs" had stopped at your home and wish to get in touch with you. Your neighborhood had been liberated from drug dealing. Volunteers wish to ask you few questions related to the anti-drug effort. The volunteers need about 2 minutes of your time. It's important for the volunteers to talk to everyone in the neighborhood about the progress. Please phone $\qquad$ , @ , between to take the survey over the phone. It will take only a few minutes of your time. Thank you. By working together, we won this battle! # **0P165** ## **Neighbors Against Drugs** ![img-5.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/05-13%28F%29/img-5.jpeg) N.A.D. "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs" # Target Locations | Location | Address | Suspect Name | Drug Unit Contacted | Street Crimes Contacted | Patrol Contacted | Suspected Drug Activity Confirmed | NAD Team Assigned | Neighborhood Volunteers Located | Communicator Implemented | Signs Posted | Suspected Drug Activity Continues | Landlord Contacted | Attorney's Letter Sent | Victory Claimed | Suspected Dedging moved back in | Victory | Party | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | | DUC | SCC | PC | SDA Conf. | NTA | NVL | CI | SP | SDA Cont. | LLC | ALS | VC | SDAM BI | V | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | N.A.D. "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs" # Target Locations | Location | Address | Suspect Name | Drug Unit Contacted | Street Crimes Contacted | Patrol Contacted | Suspected Drug Activity Confirmed | NAD Team Assigned | Neighborhood Volunteers Located | Communicator Implemented | Signs Posted | Suspected Drug Activity Continues | Landlord Contacted | Attorney's Letter Sent | Victory Claimed | Suspected Dealing moved back in | Victory | Party | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | | DUC | SCC | PC | SDA Conf. | NTA | NVL | CI | SP | SDA Cont. | LLC | ALS | VC | SDAM BI | V | | | | 2715 or 2713 S 19th | Called Dave Tempest | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 916 Ontario Ave | | Y | Y | Y | Y | | | | | | | | | 4/10 | | | | | 1010 N 9th St | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1117/1119 N 15th St | "Say Say" | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1122 N. 15th St | Zack Wolf | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1419 St. Clair Ave | Kemel Green | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1013 Bluff Ave | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1527B N 12th St | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1537 N. 12th St | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3149 North Ave | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 518A N 14th St | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 520 S. 13th St | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1301 Jefferson Ave | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1309 Penn Ave | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1318 Virginia Ave | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1324 Virginia Ave | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1329 Jefferson Ave | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1436 Jefferson Ave | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1809 N. 12th St | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Address | Suspect Name | DUC | SCC | PC | SDA Conf. | NTA | NVL | CI | SP | SDA Cont. | LLC | ALS | VC | SDMB I | V | Party | | # WAIVER OF LIABILITY Neighbors Against Drugs ("NAD") and its financial agent, $\qquad$ (fill in who if any, the local NAD organization is using for the 501 (3) nonprofit status) $\qquad$ appreciate the volunteer support they receive from individuals, organizations, clubs, their members, and others. Volunteers provide services to help in NAD's neighborhood antidrug efforts and allow NAD to continue its efforts without a constant concern about fundraising. In addition to managing its expenditures, NAD and $\qquad$ (same name inserted above) $\qquad$ must manage their risk. Therefore, it cannot assume financial or other responsibility for damage, injury, or loss that volunteers may incur in the course of providing volunteer services. Please read and sign the statement set forth below as assurance that you understand and accept this agreement. I hereby release the local Neighbors Against Drugs organization, Neighbors Against Drugs, Inc., and $\qquad$ (same name inserted above) $\qquad$ its officers and employees, from any and all liability whatsoever for any personal injury, property damage, or property loss that I may incur through my performance of volunteer services for Neighbors Against Drugs during the year $\qquad$ . Signature: $\qquad$ Today's date: $\qquad$ # APPENDIX C ## Goal Statements 1. Secure start-up funding for local NAD community coalition. 2. Determine key volunteer leadership to coordinate and assist NAD efforts. 3. Train key leadership on implementing NAD. 4. Determine key targeted neighborhoods through liaisons with law enforcement. 5. Determine centralized meeting location, schedule bimonthly meeting times in the mornings and afternoons, and organize NAD materials at this meeting location. 6. Schedule and market open-forum meeting times for community volunteers. 7. Train neighbors on how to complete drug diaries and train volunteers on how to complete pretest interview surveys from residents in targeted neighborhoods. 8. Maintain frequent contact with media outlets concerning the neighborhood antidrug strategy. 9. Have signs made and follow-up pretest surveys with sign postings in the targeted neighborhoods. 10. Contact available landlords about abatement procedures. 11. After verifying that dealers have left or dealing has desisted over a period of months, organize victory parties. 12. Implement post-test surveys and create sustainability. (N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fights against illegal drugs" # Yard Sign Activity - Volunteer list Involves: Surveys (Pre-test), Sign placement/maintenance, Confirmation Notice, Surveys (Post-test) Activity Coordinator $\qquad$ | Volunteer Name | Address | Phone | Email | | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | 1. $\qquad$ 2. $\qquad$ 3. $\qquad$ 4. $\qquad$ 5. $\qquad$ 6. $\qquad$ 7. $\qquad$ 8. $\qquad$ 9. $\qquad$ 10. $\qquad$ 11. $\qquad$ 12. $\qquad$ 13. $\qquad$ 14. $\qquad$ 15. $\qquad$ 16. $\qquad$ 17. $\qquad$ 18. $\qquad$ 19. $\qquad$ 20. $\qquad$ (N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fights against illegal drugs" # Victory Party Activity - Volunteer List Involves: Organizing neighborhood victory party, notifying victorious neighborhood of victory party. Activity Coordinator $\qquad$ Volunteer Name Address Phone Email 1. $\qquad$ 2. $\qquad$ 3. $\qquad$ 4. $\qquad$ 5. $\qquad$ 6. $\qquad$ 7. $\qquad$ 8. $\qquad$ 9. $\qquad$ 10. $\qquad$ 11. $\qquad$ 12. $\qquad$ 13. $\qquad$ 14. $\qquad$ 15. $\qquad$ 16. $\qquad$ 17. $\qquad$ 18. $\qquad$ 19. $\qquad$ 20. $\qquad$ (N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fights against illegal drugs" # School Projects Activity - Volunteer list Involves: develop school projects with school counselors (Red Ribbon Week-October) Activity Coordinator $\qquad$ | Volunteer Name | Address | Phone | Email | | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | 1. $\qquad$ 2. $\qquad$ 3. $\qquad$ 4. $\qquad$ 5. $\qquad$ 6. $\qquad$ 7. $\qquad$ 8. $\qquad$ 9. $\qquad$ 10. $\qquad$ 11. $\qquad$ 12. $\qquad$ 13. $\qquad$ 14. $\qquad$ 15. $\qquad$ 16. $\qquad$ 17. $\qquad$ 18. $\qquad$ 19. $\qquad$ # (N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fights against illegal drugs" ## Heightening Community Awareness Activity - Volunteer list Involves: Information sharing with local media, advertising, information booths, parades Activity Coordinator $\qquad$ Volunteer Name $\quad$ Address Phone Email 1. $\qquad$ 2. $\qquad$ 3. $\qquad$ 4. $\qquad$ 5. $\qquad$ 6. $\qquad$ 7. $\qquad$ 8. $\qquad$ 9. $\qquad$ 10. $\qquad$ 11. $\qquad$ 12. $\qquad$ 13. $\qquad$ 14. $\qquad$ 15. $\qquad$ 16. $\qquad$ 17. $\qquad$ 18. $\qquad$ 19. $\qquad$ 20. $\qquad$ # (N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fights against illegal drugs" ## Court Appearance Activity - Volunteer List Involves: Attending court hearings - directly related to drug offenses, write letters requesting clarification of poor judge rulings. Activity Coordinator $\qquad$ | | Volunteer Name | Phone | Email | | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | | 1. | | | | | 2. | | | | | 3. | | | | | 4. | | | | | 5. | | | | | 6. | | | | | 7. | | | | | 8. | | | | | 9. | | | | | 10. | | | | | 11. | | | | | 12. | | | | | 13. | | | | | 14. | | | | | 15. | | | | | 16. | | | | | 17. | | | | | 18. | | | | | 19. | | | | | 20. | | | | # (N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fights against illegal drugs" ## Fund Raiser Activity - Volunteer list Involves: raise money (private donations, private foundations, grants, bake sales, etc...) for NAD activities Activity Coordinator $\qquad$ | Volunteer Name | Address | Phone | Email | | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | | 1. | | | | | 2. | | | | | 3. | | | | | 4. | | | | | 5. | | | | | 6. | | | | | 7. | | | | | 8. | | | | | 9. | | | | | 10. | | | | | 11. | | | | | 12. | | | | | 13. | | | | | 14. | | | | | 15. | | | | | 16. | | | | | 17. | | | | | 18. | | | | | 19. | | | | | 20. | | | | # (N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fights against illegal drugs" ## Neighborhood Adoption Program "Neighborhood Adoption Program": involves assigning a team from a eligible organization, club, church, association, union, group or corporation to a territory that has 1 (one) or more suspected drug houses. After the team is trained, liberating their territory from suspected drug activity begins. The team will canvas a designated area around a suspected drug house and complete a "Pre-test Survey". This survey will provide additional information about the neighborhood. After completion of the survey phase, the team decides when to post the NAD yard signs. Everyone in the neighborhood gets a NAD yard sign the same day. Stolen signs are recognized and replaced by team members. Police are called if a NAD yard sign ends up in front of the suspected drug house. When victory is claimed, the team posts "Victory" signs, and completes door-to-door Post-test survey. The team celebrates with neighbors at the neighborhood victory party. If a suspected drug house appears in another neighborhood with in the team territory, the team repeats the process. Eligibility list: civic organizations (service clubs), churches, associations, local labor unions, retired labor unions, special interest groups, businesses and corporations. Requirements: Each individual organization, club, church, association, union, group, and corporation, inquiring about the "Neighborhood Adoption Program" must have: 1. Minimum of 6 (six) dedicated and committed individuals 2. 1 (one) of the 6 (six) individuals must attend local NAD meetings and then update the other 5 (five) individuals as well as their parent organization, club, church, association, union, group, business or corporation. 3. All of the individuals must attend 3 (three) training sessions - What is NAD all about (approx. 1 hour) - What is suspected drug activity (approx. 1 hour) - "Yard Sign Activity" (approx. 1 hour) 4. Follow the guidelines set by the local NAD organization Responsibilities: Receive training Provide updates Complete door to door surveys (Pre-test, Post-test) Post NAD yard signs \& Victory signs Maintain posted NAD signs Celebrate victory Use local media outlets for promoting "Neighborhood Adoption Activity" Estimated time per individual per month: approx. 3 (three) hours # (N)eighbors (A)gainst (D)rugs "Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs" ## Working With Property Owners 1. Confirm suspected drug activity a. Completed drug diary by neighbors b. Search warrant and/or arrest of occupant from suspected drug house. i. Information provided by Drug Investigators (Narcotic Investigators) ii. Local NAD organization offers Drug Investigators (Narcotic Investigators) to follow up after execution of search warrant and/or drug related arrest. 2. NAD will assist property owner with eviction. 3. NAD periodically checks with Drug Investigators (Narcotic Investigators) for following up with evictions 4. Contact property owner a. Owner occupied i. Law enforcement representative for the local NAD organization make personal contact with property owner 5. Inform property owner of the documentation of suspected drug activity at (give address of the suspected drug house) 6. Clearly state that no one is claiming that they (property owner) are using or dealing drugs, however, someone from their (property owner) property is responsible for suspected drug activity. 7. The neighbors and the local NAD organization want the suspected drug activity to either stop or they (property owner) will be taken to civil court for failing to abate the drug nuisance. Failing to abate the drug nuisance could result in the shutting down of the property or sale of. ii. Letter from the local NAD organization Civil Attorney. 8. Inform property owner of the documentation of suspected drug activity at (give address of the suspected drug house) 9. The neighbors and the local NAD organization want the suspected drug activity to either stop or they (property owner) will be taken to civil court for failing to abate the drug nuisance. Failing to abate the drug nuisance could result in the shutting down of the property or sale of. b. Renter occupied i. Law enforcement representative for the local NAD organization make personal contact with property owner 10. Inform property owner that his/her property @ (give address of suspected drug house) is suspected to having drug activity, verified by drug diary documentation. 11. Offer property owner the use of drug diary documentation for the purpose of evicting tenant. a. Property owner accepts offer i. Provide copy of drug diary 12. NAD keeps original copy ii. Block out name of person that completed drug diary b. Property owner will evict or remove responsible tenant based on other reasons, drug diary not needed c. Local NAD organization insures that property owner has taken action for purpose of abating the drug nuisance 1. Property owner options a. Eviction i. Based on property owners reasons for eviction ii. Based on local NAD organizations drug diary documentation, completed by neighbors 2. Landlord serves eviction notice (check local laws for proper eviction procedures) a. Tenant moves without going to court b. Tenant fights eviction in court i. Will take time for eviction process ii. Will have to start over if eviction is lost in court b. New lease agreement (only for those situations where suspected drug dealer isn't on the lease) (tenant must agree to all of the following) i. Property owner explains to the tenant, that NAD has documentation of suspected drug activity and that NAD is holding the property owner responsible for abating the drug nuisance. If property owner doesn't take action, property owner could lose the property. ii. Tenant is given a second chance iii. New lease is a month to month lease agreement iv. Suspected drug dealer is not allowed on property and must remove from the property all personal belongings v. Special notation on the new lease agreement 3. If lease doesn't already state, write on the lease agreement, "Any suspected drug activity is grounds for immediate eviction". 4. If lease doesn't already state, write on the lease agreement, "Any police contact, other than for emergency situations, is grounds for immediate eviction". vi. Property owner and tenant agree to new lease, and sign proper paper work c. Make a deal. Property owner makes a deal with tenant for immediate removal of suspected drug dealer (property owner and/or neighbors don't want to wait for eviction process) i. The deal is based on that the property owner holds a security deposit and/or tenant owes back rent. ii. Property owner explains to the tenant, that NAD has documentation of suspected drug activity and that NAD is holding the property owner responsible for abating the drug nuisance. If property owner doesn't take action, property owner could lose the property. iii. Property owner offers a deal. iv. Property owner looks over the property and notes damages. v. Property owner determines how much (maximum) he/she is willing to give up to get rid of the suspected dealer. How much of the damages is the property owner willing to absorb in losses. vi. Property owner determines how quickly the tenants should be out (3-5 days) vii. Property owner starts with smaller offers, if tenant doesn't agree, property owner sweetens the deal. viii. Security deposit will be given as soon as the tenant is moved out and the apartment is clean (or arrangements agreed upon). What makes deals work is based on the fact that most tenants need the return of the security deposit in order to get another place to live. Tenants will more likely move if they know that the security [full or partial] deposit will be returned Example: property owner notes approximately $\$ 200$ in damages. Property owner has a $\$ 500$ security deposit. Tenants rent is two (2) weeks late. Owner wants the tenant out badly. He/she decides the maximum will be; giving back the $\$ 500$ security deposit, forgetting the back rent, don't have to clean the apartment, if the tenant is out by the end of the weekend. The property owner starts the offer with; If the tenant is out by the end of the weekend, he will deduct only $\$ 150$ from the security deposit for damages, and forget the back rent. Sunday night, after the tenant is moved out and apartment is cleaned, the tenant will be given a check for $\$ 350$. Tenant says "NO". Property owner response is; same as above, but you won't have to clean the apartment. Tenants response is "OK".) 3. Landlord/Tenant training Through the means of media outlets, seminars, workshops, etc... educate property owners how to conduct thorough background checks, how and why to use a rental application, landlord and tenant rights, how to evict, how to make a deal, etc.... # APPENDIX E(1) Traditional law enforcement alone has been found to have a limited effect on drug markets and only through collaborative multi-agency approaches will substantial change occur ${ }^{11}$. In an effort to assess who was involved or was a potential "stakeholder" in the NAD initiative the following were identified: 1. City Government - It was critical that political figures acknowledged that drug use/abuse exists in the community and they publicly stated that they support efforts to try to keep the problem from becoming worse. Sheboygan had reputation as being a safe city and a great place to raise a family and that reputation was at stake. Political acknowledgement of volunteers increases citizen morale and their willingness to participate. This type of acknowledgement and increased volunteer morale has been found in several successful communityled activities against drug markets ${ }^{12}$. 2. Citizens - They have tremendous motivation to take control of the neighborhood's destiny. Citizens wanted to feel safe in their neighborhood, maintain property values, and be vigilante against drug dealing and the disorder they saw accompanying the dealing. 3. Recovering addicts/dealers - Information from those who have been part of a drug subculture are often motivated not only by their own need to stay "clean", but also to prevent their children or friends from following the same path. Consequently, they become valuable sources of information, especially in regards of being a barometer for judging the overall impact of NAD. 4. NAD volunteers - Community volunteers became the most significant stakeholders. Their backgrounds and motivations were varied and many of them were touched in one way or another by drug use or abuse. The volunteers are melded together with a common goal of making a difference when it came to neighborhood drug dealing. 5. Property owners - Eck (1998) refers to these as place managers and through proper education almost all were convinced of their critical role in ridding neighborhoods of illicit drug dealing. Owner's overall responsibility to the property needed to be assessed and often educated in terms of that responsibility. 6. Area businesses - During the analysis of the problem, local businesses leaders emerged and were involved in some initial meetings. It was discovered that the drug issues in the neighborhoods had implications in the workplace. Area business leaders were motivated to have a clean and sober work force and also to have their businesses located in a City with a positive reputation for not tolerating drugs or crime. Additionally, the business community became a valuable source of financial and material support. 7. Legal staff (City Attorney and District Attorney's Office) - Local prosecutors were involved in the problem on two levels. First, they are intimately involved in the "traditional" method of drug enforcement and prosecution. Secondly, they became a resource for innovative initiatives being considered by NAD. Their motivation was to have solidly, legally-defensible actions taken by both police officers and citizens. 8. Sheboygan Area School District - The school system, on all levels from students to staff, are affected by drug activity and availability in the community. In analyzing the issue, it was clear that NAD could not exist in a vacuum and needed support from multiple entities in order to effectively address the community's tolerance for mind altering substances. 9. Lakeland College Criminal Justice - Partnership with the practical applications of the NAD program and scientific evaluation continues to be a critical link in testing the reliability of the intervention. Lakeland College has become not only a stakeholder in regards to evaluation assistance, but has also assisted in sending criminal justice students to conduct residential field interviews and has placed interns for more extensive assistance in setting up community meetings, organizing victory parties and training volunteers. 10. Law Enforcement - The problem-solving approach allowed officers to more fully understand how they can strategize the NAD program to prevent drug dealing through educating and empowering the community. Officers, including administrators, needed to be convinced about the complimentary efforts of the NAD program on the city's goal of ridding (or limiting the effects) of drugs from Sheboygan neighborhoods. When it came to police department issues, the NAD group needed to work closely with both the Drug Unit and the Patrol Division. As noted in the analysis section, the MEG drug unit remained a viable option for dealing with some drug houses so NAD did not want to interrupt their efforts by focusing on the same house. There was also a need to keep the patrol division and telecommication staff apprised of when and where NAD efforts were taking place. Since the response phase was going to require citizen volunteers to go out into neighborhoods, safety through team work was stressed among the group. In was mandated that any female volunteers were teamed with male volunteers and participants never worked alone. 11. Sheboygan Pride, Inc. - Through successful marketing of NAD initiatives (see APPENDIX E \& LINKS to VIDEO COVERAGE) well-known community and business leaders began to donate funds to support the efforts of NAD. A key financial resource and partnership that followed these outside supporters was a non-profit organization called Sheboygan Neighborhood Pride, Inc. This organization was created to unite and serve citizens, community organizations, and law enforcement, in quest to reduce crime and improve the quality of life in the community. Neighborhood Pride, Inc. became the fiscal agent for Neighbors Against Drugs and the formation of this non-profit group made it the perfect conduit for citizens and businesses wishing to contribute money to the NAD efforts. Donations through Sheboygan Pride, Inc. become tax deductible to the donator and are then funneled to the NAD organization allowing for the group to remain self-sufficient and not in need of tax revenue. Also, the board overseeing Neighborhood Pride, Inc. naturally became one more check and balance for the actions and initiatives of NAD. By having control of its own funding sources and volunteers realizing the enormity of their impact, sustainability of the NAD program is believed to be solid. # Neighbors Against Drugs Business Plan # Mission Statement $\checkmark$ Neighbors helping neighbors in the fight against illegal drugs. # The Team Officer Todd Priebe - Sheboygan Police Department $\checkmark$ Fritz Rammer $\checkmark$ Community Leaders $\checkmark$ N.A.D. Volunteers Citizens of Sheboygan $\checkmark$ Sheboygan Police Department # N.A.D. Concept $\checkmark$ N.A.D. unites neighbors and empowers neighborhoods to rid drug dealing . Continually heighten the community awareness of the growing drug problem. # Goals \& Objectives ## $\checkmark$ Five-year goals - Neighborhoods free from drug dealing - Strengthen neighborhoods to prevent relapsing - Increased public awareness - Provoke paralleling community efforts. # Financial Plan Neighborhood Effort Item: N.A.D. signs - 52 stolen - 15 damaged - 300 needed for multiple neighborhood efforts - Cost - $\$ 1.98$ each - Total - \$726.66 # $\checkmark$ Victory Parties - Purpose: to bond and strengthen neighborhood - Items: Concession trailer, \$3,640.00 - 2 gas grills, $\$ 169.00$ each - 4 coolers, $\$ 69.00$ each - 2 folding tables, $\$ 35.00$ each - 2 Nesco roasters, $\$ 66.00$ each - Total, \$4,456.00 # $\checkmark$ Victory Parties continued - Food items needed for each party, approximately 15 a year. - Estimates based on 50 adults and 10 children - Estimated cost of meat per party - $\$ 70.00$ - Estimated cost of drinks per party - $\$ 30.00$ - Estimated cost of hard rolls per party - $\$ 20.00$ - Estimated cost of pickles/onions per party - $\$ 16.00$ - Total cost for food per party - $\$ 136.00$ - Total cost for 15 parties a year - \$2,040.00 - Entertainment - Music DJ - \$100.00 per party (already donated \$300) - Total for 1 year - $\$ 1.500$ # Financial Plan Community Effort ## $\checkmark$ Billboard Campaign - Reason: to heighten the community awareness - Vinyl wraps - Reusable, allows for use in the city, county and other communities. - Current billboard ideas - "Drug dealers aren't welcome in our city of Sheboygan" - "Not my kid...." The worst assumption a parent will ever make. - "Parents are you buying alcohol or pot for your kid?" - "Parents are you still buying alcohol or pot for your kid?" # $\checkmark$ Billboard campaign continued - Parents won't be buying their kid alcohol or pot anymore. - South High School students from S.A.S.A. - Keep billboards up until the finances run short - Costs - smaller billboard - low volume areas - \$150 posting fee for each billboard (public service rate) - $\$ 700$ for vinyl wrap - Costs - larger billboard (currently only 1) - Negotiable rate (will work with Kohler Co.) - $\$ 1800$ for vinyl wrap # Billboard campaign continued - Costs - smaller billboard - high volume - $\$ 600$ per month - What NAD prefers to do - Already have received donated vinyl and space - In addition to donated space, target high traffic areas - 1 time a year - "Not my kid..." - \$600 - Parent series - \$1,800 - Total cost, \$2,400 a year # Advertising ads - Marcus Cinema - 52 weeks - \$5,460 - Sheboygan Transit advertising - King display (street side on city bus) - \$155/month/12 month contract - \$165/month/6 month contract - \$175/month/3 month contract - \$160 production cost - Total cost for 1 ad, 1 year - \$2,020 # Finance Plan Education ## $\checkmark$ Sheboygan Area School District - Looking for funding (contact person, School board member - Jeff Squire, 208-8112) - ATOD Facilitator - \$60,000 a year - DARE program - Current method, \$110,000 a year # Resource Requirements ## $\checkmark$ Personnel requirements - Need additional volunteers - Neighborhood surveys - Victory parties ## $\checkmark$ Resource requirements - Financial support needed to ensure NAD activities reach full potential and expand into other communities throughout Sheboygan County. - Current funding through; - Brat fry's/bake sales/T-shirt sales - Private donations - Sheboygan Jaycee's Golf Outing - Lamar, billboard space # $\checkmark$ Amount of financial support needed: - As presented, 1 year, includes concession trailer, not including ATOD facilitator or DARE officers - \$18,603 - \$42,441 for 3 years - \$70,735 for 5 years - This doesn't include a new home for NAD, if the Armory is sold. # Rewards $\checkmark$ Rewards - Drug dealing free neighborhoods - Decrease crime rate - Prevention of violent crime - Drug education reinforced at home and by the community - Increased community awareness promotes safer and drug dealing free work places # Key Issues $\checkmark$ Near term - Not enough volunteers $\checkmark$ Long term - Lack of paralleling efforts # Contributions ## $\checkmark 501$ (3) $\checkmark$ Sheboygan Neighborhood Pride, Inc. Attn: NAD 2522 S. $7^{\text {th }}$ Street Sheboygan, WI 53081 # APPENDIX F(1) Partnerships with key stakeholders and positive media coverage not only gave the NAD initial creditability but it has also served to continually motivate volunteers. We suggest every POP project create stakeholders and seek out media support when considering overall sustainability of projects. Media news stories Video links