---
title: "Over 50s Event"
type: "pdf"
year: "2009"
canonical: "/projects/1175"
---

# Over 50's Event 

Author application details:
Kate Robinson
South Yorkshire Police
Community Safety Department,
Building 1,
Nunnery Square,
Parkway,
Sheffield,
S2 5DH.
01142197016
kate.robinson@southyorks.pnn.police.uk
Partnership agency lead contact details
Sue Butler
South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service
Wellington Street
Sheffield
S1 3FG
01142532978
sbutler@syfire.org.uk

# Table of Contents

- [Over 50's Event](#over-50s-event)
- [Summary of application](#summary-of-application)
  - [Scanning:](#scanning)
  - [Analysis:](#analysis)
  - [Response:](#response)
  - [Assessment:](#assessment)
- [Words: 373](#words-373)
- [Description of project](#description-of-project)
  - [Scanning:](#scanning)
- [Analysis:](#analysis)
  - [Victim](#victim)
  - [Offender](#offender)
- [Location](#location)
- [Victim](#victim)
  - [Offender](#offender)
- [Location](#location)
- [2006 to 2008](#2006-to-2008)
- [Gender of Car Drivers](#gender-of-car-drivers)
- [Worst Road Types](#worst-road-types)
- [Response:](#response)
- [Assessment:](#assessment)
- [Feedback from attendees](#feedback-from-attendees)
- [Authorisation](#authorisation)

# Summary of application 

## Scanning:

Doorstep crime became a priority for South Yorkshire Police Community Safety Department in 2006. Research revealed that the same victim group were also a priority for South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue, NHS, Road Safety Teams and the Local Authorities.

With this in mind, a partnership was developed and objectives set as follows:
Aim:
To provide the over 50's with the knowledge and tools to enable them to avoid situations such as fire in the home and road traffic collisions and to enable them to effectively respond to doorstep callers.

To change perceptions of antisocial behaviour and personal safety, whilst maintaining the importance of these issues.

Objectives:
Develop working practices with partners.
Create an appropriate learning environment.
Improved levels of knowledge.
Increase confidence in South Yorkshire Police and partners.

## Analysis:

The over 50's age group accounts for $72 \%$ of victims of doorstep crime incidents, over $50 \%$ of people who die in house fires and $72 \%$ of road traffic collisions.

Analysis also showed us that antisocial behaviour and personal safety were a major concern for the public. This information was provided by members of the public whilst completing 'Your Voice Counts' community surveys.

Previous responses were assessed and a plan to address these issues was agreed by the partnership.

## Response:

The partnership developed an education package that was delivered through a number of awareness raising days. Over 1000 people over the age of 50 attended during a 10 day period, many of whom had been specifically invited due to their circumstances. Those who lived in identified 'hot spot' areas or those close to the motorway links were a priority. Attendees were invited through Over 50's groups, church organisations, retirement groups and Neighbourhood Watch.

## Assessment:

Knowledge levels were tested by conducting a before and after quiz. This enabled us to measure the amount of information that had been absorbed by the attendees. Questions related to the information they had received throughout the day. Follow up knowledge checks were conducted at 3 months and 6 months after the event to establish whether the information has been retained. The partnership now keeps a record of victims of doorstep crime, fires, carbon monoxide poisoning, road traffic collisions and antisocial behaviour so they can be invited to future events.

# Words: 373

# Description of project 

## Scanning:

'Doorstep crime is the name given to crimes carried out by bogus callers and rogue traders who call uninvited at people's homes under the guise of legitimate business or trade. ${ }^{11}$

Reducing the number of crimes against older people, in particular doorstep crime became a priority for South Yorkshire Police in 2006. This was identified through various means, including police statistics, community forums and national initiatives such as Operation Liberal - (http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/tradingstandards/tradingstandards05g3.htm).

Doorstep crime falls under the domestic burglary category. Figure 1 shows comparative figures of burglary against other crime types.

Figure 1.
![img-0.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-0.jpeg)

Police statistics for doorstep crime are gathered on a monthly basis by the Crime and Disorder Reduction Unit to enable them to monitor and respond to any incidents.

The community identified this as a significant concern through community forums: eg Neighbourhood Watch, Neighbourhoods Action Meetings, Joint Action Meetings. Concerns were raised in relation to burglary rather than doorstep crime, however, with further research it became clear that knowledge of doorstep crime was limited.

National initiatives such as Operation Liberal ${ }^{2}$ highlighted that doorstep crime has become a national problem and specific responses were required to effectively reduce this problem.

Police and partner data show that $72 \%$ of people who are doorstep crime victims are over the age of 50 and just over $50 \%$ of fire in the home victims are over the age of 50 . Further research showed the same age group were also the most likely to become victims of fire,

carbon monoxide poisoning, and they were more likely to be affected by antisocial behaviour and road traffic collisions.

To gather more information, South Yorkshire Police (SYP) brought together agencies such as South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue (SYFRS), Age Concern, Age Well, the National Health Service (NHS), Local Authorities, Trading Standards, Road Safety Teams, Victim Support and voluntary organisations. All of which had an interest in reducing the number of incidents.

SYP provided figures on the number of people over the age of 50 that had fallen victim to doorstep crime in the last five years, see table 1.

SYFRS provided figures on the number of deaths and injuries caused to people over the age of 50 in the last five years, see table 1.

Age Concern, Age Well and the NHS provided qualitative information from their members on what concerned them most within their communities. Groups such as Neighbourhood Watch, NHS Retired Group, Sheffield 50+ and various church groups also supplied information. Some comments were: 'lack of consideration from young people who hang around on the street corners and outside shops.' 'I think burglary is a real problem in my area, and I am concerned about kids who are always outside my local shop.'

Local Authorities provided figures on the number of people over the age of 50 that had died or been injured by carbon monoxide in the home for the last five years. (See table 1)

Trading Standards assisted with doorstep crime figures and qualitative information. Road Safety teams provided information on how many people over the age of 50 had died or been injured in a road traffic collision.

Number of people over the age of 50 that have been victims: Table 1

|   | $\mathbf{2 0 0 6}$ | $\mathbf{2 0 0 7}$ | $\mathbf{2 0 0 8}$  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  Door step crime offences | 419 | 328 | 304  |
|  Deaths caused by fire in the home | 8 | 4 | 9  |
|  Deaths caused by carbon monoxide poisoning | 50 | 21 | 30  |
|  Road traffic collisions | 1224 | 1190 | 991  |

The partnership could see no clear evidence of further criminal consequences deriving from any of these incidents, however they were having an impact on the over 50's community.

Rather than tackling all of the above problems individually, we decided that a co-ordinated approach was required. As the chosen areas are all very broad it would be hard to show a reduction in each one and prove that it was directly linked to initiatives we had delivered.

Alternatively, we decided to provide as many people as possible with the tools to deal with these problems, in an attempt to prevent them from happening in the first place.

After completing the scanning, we set the following aims and objectives.
Aim:
Provide people over the age of 50 with the knowledge and tools to enable them to avoid situations such as fire in the home, road traffic collisions and enable them to effectively respond to doorstep callers.

Change perceptions of antisocial behaviour and personal safety, whilst maintaining the importance of these issues.

Objectives:
Develop working practices with partners.
Create a learning environment where these issues can be tackled.
Improve levels of knowledge.
Improve confidence in SYP and partners.

# Analysis: 

Each topic was taken in turn and analysed to provide us with information required to formulate a response.

Doorstep crime -information provided by SYP, taken from intelligence interviews with offenders, victims and from crime analysis.

## Victim

The over 50's account for $72 \%$ of doorstep crime incidents. Looking at the over 60s and 70s, the percentages are $69 \%$ and $61 \%$ respectively.

Analysis showed that less than $2 \%$ of all distraction incidents involved a repeat victim. This would suggest that victims of distraction burglaries are not more likely to become repeat victims.

Victims are not targeted by gender / ethnicity or ability, as this is not normally known before the offender knocks on the door.

## Offender

The offender carries out an initial assessment of the occupier as to age and condition eg; speech, ability to walk, zimmer frame, stick, how they react to questions, eyesight etc.

Once in the property they isolate the victim from alarms or phone -only remaining in the property long enough for a thorough search. The main reason for targeting the old and infirm is their lack of recollection, therefore little prospect of identification if caught.

The offender is not put off when an occupier does not answer the door or not allow access they simply moved to the next likely property. If they fail $2 / 3$ times they would move to a new location.

They rarely worked with more than one other offender, more than two creates suspicion.

# Location 

Council properties - NOT privately owned - law of averages is that old person's properties are always on the edge of a council estate. Some of the other things offenders look for are:

- Ramp
- Net curtains
- Clean and tidy front
- One pint of milk on the doorstep
- Stickers on front door

Analysis showed that peak times for doorstep crimes are Wednesday - Friday between 11am and 4 pm .

Figure 2 shows where doorstep crimes offences have taken place across South Yorkshire. Red indicates the highest number of doorstep crime incidents. Blue indicates the lowest levels of doorstep crime incidents.

Figure 2.
![img-1.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-1.jpeg)

Figure 3 shows the times and days doorstep crime has occurred. Each hour of the day is represented by the numbers around the outside of the circle. The days are shown from Sunday, working inwards to Monday. The colours represent the number of offences. Red shows the highest number of offences, green showing the lowest.

Figure 3.
![img-2.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-2.jpeg)

Fire in the home -information was provided by SYFRS:

# Victim 

The over 50's are particularly vulnerable to house because they may:

- Use a chip pan
- Smoke
- Live alone
- Have low income
- Not have working smoke alarms
- Use electric blankets
- Be on medication
- Have impairment or a disability


## Offender

The most common cause of fire in the home is chip pans or oven rings, however other causes are:

- Cooker - grill
- Cigarettes
- Matches
- Cigarette lighter

# Location 

It is most common for house fires to occur are semi-detached houses, flats or terraced houses, in that order. The least likely premises are mobile homes and terraced sheltered accommodation.

Figure 4 shows times at which most fires in the home occur. 1700 is most common with ovens and grills being used during tea time.

Figure 4
Incidents by Time
![img-3.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-3.jpeg)

Figure 5 shows days on which most fires in the home occur.
Figure 5
Figure 6
![img-4.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-4.jpeg)

Figure 6 shows months in which most house fires occur. Although there is only a slight variation, December is most common.

Carbon monoxide poisoning - this information was provided by Local Authority Education Teams:

Three main groups of people have been identified as most 'at risk';

- elderly
- those living in rented accommodation
- those living in non-English speaking communities.

Research shows 60\% of elderly people do not have carbon monoxide alarms in their home, $25 \%$ of these state it is because they do not believe they are at risk of poisoning. 'The smaller or frailer a person is, the more quickly their body can be over come by carbon monoxide. This is why the elderly are more at risk of death through carbon monoxide poisoning. ${ }^{3}$

Winter is the season when people are most likely to suffer from carbon monoxide incidents. $45 \%$ of all carbon monoxide incidents occur in January, February and March. The reason for this is more people have their heating on more of the time.

Figures produced by CORGI show that UK hotspots are London, Yorkshire, the Midlands and Wales. Each region have different reasons for being susceptible, the most common reason is general lack of awareness or sense of danger. Last year Yorkshire was the top hot spot area, despite a large media campaign. This year it appears second. Although there is not a comparable difference in the awareness levels within Yorkshire, $40 \%$ of the population live in rented accommodation; this could be one of the reasons why there is such a high level of incidents. In Yorkshire, Doncaster and Barnsley appear to have suffered the most incidents. This may be because there are higher numbers of private rented accommodation in Doncaster and Barnsley compared with the rest of South Yorkshire.

The main cause of fatalities is lack of servicing and maintenance of gas appliances. The appliances most responsible for carbon monoxide incidents are gas boilers, closely followed by gas fires. Bad installation and poor repair of gas appliances were the next two highest causes. Local Authority Teams believe this could be related to high levels of illegal gas work.

Road traffic collisions - this information was provided by Road Safety Teams:
The data used to provide the following summaries is taken from a South Yorkshire mapping system. It uses data from the period 01/01/2006 to 31/12/2008 and looks at it in two ways, as collisions that have involved a casualty over 50 years of age and then specifically casualties over 50 years of age.

# 2006 to 2008 

In this period a total of 12,564 collisions occurred in South Yorkshire, of these 3,014 collisions involved someone in the over 50 bracket.

This means that overall this age bracket accounts for $24 \%$ of the overall collisions in South Yorkshire. However, this varies and is closer to $39 \%$ at the fatal end of the scale.

Figures suggest that January and December are the worst months and Fridays between 09:00 and 17:00 is easily the worst time period.

Mid to end of week and around lunchtime period carry the most collisions, autumn/winter period from Tuesday onwards also seems to be heavily populated.

Figure 7 shows the months and days on which most collisions occur. Red represents a high number.

Figure 7

|  | Sunday | Monday | Tuesday | Wednesday | Thursday | Friday | Saturday | Total |
| :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: |
| Jan | 1 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 9 | 9 | 6 | 43 |
| Feb | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 11 | 7 | 7 | 40 |
| Mar | 2 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 31 |
| Apr | 2 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 24 |
| May | 1 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 27 |
| Jun | 2 | 4 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 37 |
| Jul | 3 | 8 | 10 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 37 |
| Aug | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 17 |
| Sep | 2 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 4 | 9 | 5 | 37 |
| Oct | 2 | 5 | 13 | 13 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 49 |
| Nov | 5 | 8 | 7 | 10 | 4 | 13 | 7 | 56 |
| Dec | 5 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 13 | 8 | 50 |
| Total: | 28 | 50 | 76 | 76 | 62 | 83 | 73 | 448 |

# Gender of Car Drivers 

Male drivers make up $60 \%$ of the overall casualty total in this age group.
Figure 8 shows a comparison of males and females in relation to road traffic collisions.

Figure 8
![img-5.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-5.jpeg)

Figure 9 shows a map of South Yorkshire, demonstrating where road traffic collisions have occurred, and the severity

Figure 9
![img-6.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-6.jpeg)

Figures 10, 11 and 12 all show the circumstances in which road traffic collisions involving people of the age of 50 have occurred.

Figure 10
Car drivers over the age of 50 involved in road traffic collisions.
![img-7.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-7.jpeg)

Figure 11
Pedestrians over the age of 50 involved in road traffic collisions.
![img-8.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-8.jpeg)

Figure 12
Motorcycle drivers over the age of 50 involved in road traffic collisions.
![img-9.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-9.jpeg)

# Worst Road Types 

Tables 2 - 4 show types of roads on which most collisions occur, broken down by fatal, serious and slight

Table 2 - Fatal collisions.

|  | 20 yrs | 30 yrs | 40 yrs | 50 yrs | 60 yrs | 70 yrs |
| :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- |
| Motorway | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| A (M) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| A road | 0 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 14 | 1 |
| B road | 0 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| C road | 0 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unclassified | 0 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |

Table 3 - Serious collisions

|  | 20 yrs | 30 yrs | 40 yrs | 50 yrs | 60 yrs | 70 yrs |
| :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- |
| Motorway | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 17 |
| A (M) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| A road | 0 | 73 | 43 | 4 | 33 | 2 |
| B road | 0 | 40 | 11 | 0 | 11 | 0 |
| C road | 1 | 43 | 2 | 1 | 9 | 0 |
| Unclassified | 3 | 84 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 0 |

Table 4 - Slight collisions

|  | 20 yrs | 30 yrs | 40 yrs | 50 yrs | 60 yrs | 70 yrs |
| :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- |
| Motorway | 0 | 2 | 0 | 8 | 3 | 149 |
| A (M) | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 29 |
| A road | 1 | 533 | 365 | 35 | 120 | 24 |
| B road | 2 | 215 | 44 | 1 | 38 | 0 |
| C road | 6 | 268 | 31 | 3 | 30 | 0 |
| Unclassified | 28 | 551 | 31 | 2 | 34 | 0 |

Whilst conducting research we also discovered that antisocial behaviour and personal safety were a major concern for the public. This information was provided by members of the public whilst completing 'Your Voice Counts' community survey forms. ${ }^{4}$

Figure 13 shows the percentage of people who rate antisocial behaviour as a problem. Antisocial behaviour has been broken down in to 'noisy neighbours', 'rubbish or litter', 'people using or dealing drugs' and 'abandoned or burnt out cars'.

Figure 13
![img-10.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-10.jpeg)

Statistics are hard to gather in relation to anti social behaviour, so the above evidence gathered from the community filled this gap.

Previous responses to the above problems have taken an uncoordinated and 'quick win' approach. They have consisted of media campaigns, not supported by any real advice. Campaigns have not taken advantage of related times such as Christmas, Grandparents Day and Carers Week. Other responses have included attending events and conferences to deliver information to as many people as possible, meaning that many people will have received some information on a couple of the topics, but none will have received in depth information and guidance on how to address these problems. The partnership had originally discussed the idea of setting the aim of reducing the number of doorstep crime / fires in homes / road traffic collisions by $x \%$. However, after assessing previous responses, we agreed that those results would be unrealistic and unattainable.

It is now estimated that there are over twenty million people over the age of 50 in the UK, 633,598 residing in South Yorkshire. That means that for 633,598 people these issues are a priority for the community and for the partner agencies in South Yorkshire. ${ }^{5}$

# Response: 

In response to the analysis, the partnership designed the 'Over 50's Event' where members of the public were specifically invited to attend to learn about how to keep themselves safe and secure.

Priority was given to those people who had been repeat victims (even though analysis showed that it is rare for victims to be targeted on more than one occasion, we decided that these people were most in need of general safety and security information) and those that lived in areas that were identified as 'high risk'. This information was at first hard to gather as each partner stored different information in different formats. To overcome this, the partnership developed one database that would hold all information (doorstep crime victims, fire in the home victims and those who were invited to the events).

Ten days were planned over two weeks in September, with an average of 80 people attending per day. Days were broken down into districts (Doncaster, Rotherham, Barnsley and Sheffield) providing us with the opportunity to direct staff to attend on particular days, giving a 'local' feel to each day.

Numerous dates were looked at and discarded such as July and August due to the summer holidays and with many grandparents looking after children, winter months due to the cold and bad weather, we thought this might put people off attending. We picked the weeks in September that did not coincide with 'Races Week' at Doncaster Racecourse and 'Fresher's Weeks' at the Universities. These were avoided as many staff would have been tied up with duties elsewhere and would have been unable to assist with the event.

A Police district representative and a Fire Service Station Manager opened each day, both giving an insight into the work they are doing in their local communities.

Attendees were asked a number of questions at the beginning and at the end of the day. We explained that the reason was to gain a 'before and after picture' enabling us to evaluate how much they had learnt through out the day and how effective the information had been. To do

this we used 'quizdoms', small hand held computers linked to a projector screen. Questions appear on screen and the attendees are asked to press A, B, C or D on their handsets.

Attendees were then split into groups of ten and assigned a Police Community Support Officer and a Fire and Rescue Community Officer to guide them through the day.

The programme included:
Morning
Antisocial behaviour - delivered by SYP Children and Young Persons Officers with the help of volunteers from the local college. The scenario showed a number of young people in the park wearing hoodies and kicking a can. Attendees were asked for their perceptions and asked what they would do.

Road Safety - delivered by Local Authority Road Safety teams. Information on stopping times, eyesight, speeds and seatbelts was included.

Fire in the home - delivered by SYFRS. The main messages related to electric blankets, chip pans and smoke alarms.

Personal safety - Trading Standards Officers delivered this scenario. Information on protecting your bank details, using cash machines and protecting your belongings when out shopping was provided.

Home safety - Delivered by Health Education Teams, it covered topics such as carbon monoxide poisoning and postal scams.

Afternoon
Attendees were split into two groups, the first watched a scenario based on doorstep crime whilst the second group had an opportunity to visit a number of stalls providing information on subjects relating to information given out throughout the day.

Attendees were then brought back together and asked to answer the second set of questions. They completed a small questionnaire asking questions such as:
'would you like a free home fire safety check?'
'would you like free home crime prevention advice?'
'what have you enjoyed most about the day?'
This response was chosen due to the ability to tackle all subjects at once. Scenarios complimented each other very well as they were all delivered in the same format. Checks were carried out beforehand to ensure that consistent levels of information were delivered and the attendees would not be overwhelmed.

The event placed many demands on all partners, in terms of time and resources. Partners were eager to get on board and needed very little motivation as the event intended to address issues that would have a direct impact on each agency.
The project encountered a couple of unforeseeable problems. The main difficulty was ensuring that enough people would attend the event. Although people were invited, free of

charge, we specifically asked people to confirm whether they would be attending, as places were limited. Unfortunately, on one day we had considerably less people attend. This could have been down to a number of reasons, but more than likely, was due to the bad weather we had that morning.

The project encountered two other minor problems:

1. Some of the attendees forgot which scenario they were meant to be attending next and became slightly confused as to where they were meant to be. To resolve this the 'Police Support Volunteers' will be deployed in a 'meet and greet' role who will be able to direct people at future events.
2. The NHS were heavily involved in the planning stage and offered a large amount of commitment to the response. However that commitment was never met and had to be replaced at the last minute by another agency. The NHS have said they would like to continue to be involved, but on a smaller scale.

Links that have been made between partners are now proving very useful for other projects, proving that the event is sustainable and transferable.

Using 'The six Hallmarks of Effective Partnerships'6, the partnership have overcome difficulties encountered and are recognised as an agency who are now consulted and involved in a wider range of activites.

# Assessment: 

The results below show before and after questions relating to the event. Questions asked at the beginning of the day provide us with a baseline, results at the end of the day show how much has been learnt by the attendees.

![img-11.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-11.jpeg)

In relation to the Antisocial Behaviour scenario, the above questions were asked. These show that more people would now report young people drinking alcohol in the park on the 01142202020 number. This is the intended outcome. Scenario leaders pointed out that young people drinking in the park is not classed as an emergency and therefore 999 should not be dialled.
![img-12.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-12.jpeg)

These questions were asked in response to the personal safety scenario. This shows an increase of $15 \%$ of people who will now avoid using cash machines if they feel suspicious.
![img-13.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-13.jpeg)

These questions were asked in relation to the Doorstep Crime Scenario. It shows that after the event a further $14 \%$ of people will now keep their doors locked at all times.

![img-14.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-14.jpeg)

After attending the road safety scenario, attendees were unsure about when a seatbelt is required. For future events, this message needs to be clarified.
![img-15.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-15.jpeg)

These questions were asked in relation to the home safety scenario. This shows a further $5 \%$ of people would now refuse to give any details.

How worried are you about crime in your area?
![img-16.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/09-39/img-16.jpeg)

This shows that after the event more people were 'Very worried' and less were 'Slightly worried' / 'Not worried at all.' This is a concern as it shows that the reassurance messages had very little impact. Consideration needs to be given to revisiting the reassurance messages and how the questions are presented.

For future events, this will be addressed and extra care will be taken when explaining the law.
The fear of crime question came as a shock to the group, because conscious efforts had been made to include reassurance messages within each of the scenarios.

The partnership took the view that it may be inevitable for the fear of crime to have increased, after a whole day of talking about crime. However, in future consideration will be given to putting extra efforts into delivering reassurance messages.

With the exception of these two, the event achieved what was intended, to provide over 50's with knowledge and skills to enable them to keep themselves safe and secure.

During the event, 80 referrals were made for home fire safety checks and 87 made for free home security checks.

# Feedback from attendees 

Attendees were asked for constructive feedback and suggestions for future events:
'I would like to see a demonstration on how to put out a chip pan fire with a damp cloth / fire blanket.'
'No improvement needed'
'A very educational trip, very satisfied.'
Evaluation was also conducted at 3 months and 6 months after the event to ascertain whether the attendees had retained any of the information. The results showed that $90 \%$ of the information had been retained.

The event is now run on an annual basis and develops year on year. We hope to reach as many people as possible, those not previously attending would be given priority.

The partnership also recognised that although very clear objectives were set, there were a number of unexpected 'bonuses'.

- The partnership developed one database that holds all information relating to doorstep crime victims, fire in the home victims and those invited to the events.
- Stronger relationships and improved working systems between partners across South Yorkshire
- Raised the profile of the partnership. A number of other force areas have expresses an interest in running a similar project and have visited the event.
- Other partners from across South Yorkshire have now expressed an interest in becoming involved in the event. Agencies such as Oral Health, South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive and the Pension Service.
- No Cold Calling Zones ${ }^{7}$ have now been set up in areas identified by the attendees.
'We brought 120 Rotherham residents to the event this year. The feedback on the days was extremely positive. Delegates talked of how stimulating, informative and enjoyable it all was and how professionally it was organised. We are already setting up No Cold Calling Zones for some of our contacts. Others have requested talks for their community groups.'

Figures from the initial assessment shows that attendees left the day with more knowledge than they arrived with. We cannot measure how many incidents we have prevented, however, should the number of incidents decrease, this will be a bonus for the partnership.

Word Count: 3,989

```
    1}\mathrm{ Operation Liberal http://shint03u.southyorks.police.uk/newsletter/2009/january/operationliberal
    2 http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/tradingstandards/tradingstandards05g3.htm
    3}\mathrm{ Corgi Carbon Monoxide Report 2008.
    4}\mathrm{ www.southyorks.police.uk/nove/1002
    5}\mathrm{ Data taken from http://www.statistics.gov.uk/
    6 http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/guidance_for_effective_partnerships.pdf
    7}\mathrm{ Trading Standards http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/glos/pdf/Cold%20Calling.pdf
```


# Authorisation 

Chairperson: Chief Inspector lain Chorlton
Contact email address: iain.chorlton@southyorks.pnn.police.uk