--- title: "MOPPIN Up Dodge" type: "pdf" year: "2008" canonical: "/projects/654" --- # Goldstein Application 2008 # Table of Contents - [Goldstein Application 2008](#goldstein-application-2008) - [Details of application](#details-of-application) - [Section 1: Summary of application : MOPPIN UP DODGE](#section-1-summary-of-application-moppin-up-dodge) - [SCANNING](#scanning) - [ANALYSIS](#analysis) - [RESPONSE](#response) - [ASSESSMENT](#assessment) - [Section 2: Description of project](#section-2-description-of-project) - [SCANNING](#scanning) - [Overview of the problem](#overview-of-the-problem) - [SCANNING: Overview of the problem](#scanning-overview-of-the-problem) - [Appendix 3: Aerial Photograph of Estate](#appendix-3-aerial-photograph-of-estate) - [ANALYSIS](#analysis) - [Identification of the problem](#identification-of-the-problem) - [ANALYSIS: Identification of the problem.](#analysis-identification-of-the-problem) - [Routine Activity Theory's Double Triangle (Eck 2003)](#routine-activity-theorys-double-triangle-eck-2003) - [Features of location/place](#features-of-locationplace) - [Features of the victims](#features-of-the-victims) - [Features of the offender](#features-of-the-offender) - [Quantitative Analysis](#quantitative-analysis) - [Police Data](#police-data) - [CGA Data](#cga-data) - [Voids](#voids) - [Appendix 7: Average yearly void cost to CGA 2004 and 2005](#appendix-7-average-yearly-void-cost-to-cga-2004-and-2005) - [Environmental Management](#environmental-management) - [Qualitative Analysis:](#qualitative-analysis) - [CGA Option Study](#cga-option-study) - [Mappin for MOPPIN](#mappin-for-moppin) - [Appendix 8: Photograph of Mappin Model and data](#appendix-8-photograph-of-mappin-model-and-data) - [Environmental Visual Audit (EVA)](#environmental-visual-audit-eva) - [Appendix 9: Photographs of Crime Attractors](#appendix-9-photographs-of-crime-attractors) - [Consultation with University of Central Lancashire (UCL)](#consultation-with-university-of-central-lancashire-ucl) - [Local Youths](#local-youths) - [Appendix 10: Graph showing percentage of crime detected to local youths](#appendix-10-graph-showing-percentage-of-crime-detected-to-local-youths) - [Considered Analysis](#considered-analysis) - [RESPONSE](#response) - [What we did to address the problem](#what-we-did-to-address-the-problem) - [RESPONSE: What we did to address the problem](#response-what-we-did-to-address-the-problem) - [Specific](#specific) - [MOPPIN](#moppin) - [Appendix 11: Lancashire NIM Model](#appendix-11-lancashire-nim-model) - [Appendix 12: Eck's adaptation of PAT model](#appendix-12-ecks-adaptation-of-pat-model) - [Enforcement responses](#enforcement-responses) - [Appendix 13: Press cutting of enforcement action](#appendix-13-press-cutting-of-enforcement-action) - [Situational crime prevention responses](#situational-crime-prevention-responses) - [Social Crime prevention responses](#social-crime-prevention-responses) - [ASSESSMENT](#assessment) - [The results of our approach](#the-results-of-our-approach) - [ASSESSMENT : The results of our approach](#assessment-the-results-of-our-approach) - [Process evaluation:](#process-evaluation) - [QUANTATIVE](#quantative) - [Impact Evaluation](#impact-evaluation) - [Crime//Calls to service objectives (using interrupted time series to evaluate)](#crimecalls-to-service-objectives-using-interrupted-time-series-to-evaluate) - [Reduction achieved 57\% set against target of 20\%](#reduction-achieved-57-set-against-target-of-20) - [Reduction achieved 37\% set against target of 20\%](#reduction-achieved-37-set-against-target-of-20) - [Appendix 17 Graph showing reductions to Burglary/Criminal Damage/ASB](#appendix-17-graph-showing-reductions-to-burglarycriminal-damageasb) - [Control Area](#control-area) - [Spatial Displacement/Diffusion area](#spatial-displacementdiffusion-area) - [Cost Saving](#cost-saving) - [CGA objectives using pre- post design](#cga-objectives-using-pre-post-design) - [QUALATATIVE](#qualatative) - [Crummock Road objectives](#crummock-road-objectives) - [Appendix 22: Chief Superintendent Barton's Report](#appendix-22-chief-superintendent-bartons-report) - [Appendix 23: Photograph of Lancashire Fire \& Rescue](#appendix-23-photograph-of-lancashire-fire-rescue) - [QUANTATIVE \& QUALATITIVE](#quantative-qualatitive) - [Disrupt drug dealing / dissolve FPOG](#disrupt-drug-dealing-dissolve-fpog) - [Appendix 24: Press cutting of Peter Killeen](#appendix-24-press-cutting-of-peter-killeen) - [Appendix 25: Graph showing reduced offending rates 12 months pre and post ASBO for top 5 offenders](#appendix-25-graph-showing-reduced-offending-rates-12-months-pre-and-post-asbo-for-top-5-offenders) - [Reduce fear of crime](#reduce-fear-of-crime) - [Improve Environmental appearance of estate.](#improve-environmental-appearance-of-estate) - [QUALITATIVE](#qualitative) - [Promote sustainable change](#promote-sustainable-change) - [Increase community involvement](#increase-community-involvement) - [CONCLUSION](#conclusion) - [JUST TO MAKE SURE](#just-to-make-sure) - [Appendix 1](#appendix-1) - [Reference List](#reference-list) - [Internet:](#internet) - [Publications:](#publications) - [Appendix 2](#appendix-2) - [Key Partners](#key-partners) - [Appendix 4: Graph to show all crime and calls to service 2004/5 in monthly time](#appendix-4-graph-to-show-all-crime-and-calls-to-service-20045-in-monthly-time) - [Appendix 12 Eck's adaptation of PAT model](#appendix-12-ecks-adaptation-of-pat-model) - [Preston's worst thief banned from home](#prestons-worst-thief-banned-from-home) - [String](#string) - [by Judith Dorean](#by-judith-dorean) - [Appendix 14: Photograph showing Target Hardening - Crummock Road gates](#appendix-14-photograph-showing-target-hardening-crummock-road-gates) - [Applications of the Public and Public Service](#applications-of-the-public-and-public-service) - [Use of Publicity](#use-of-publicity) - [Reassuring the Public](#reassuring-the-public) - [Appendix 21 Graph showing reductions in void costs to CGA](#appendix-21-graph-showing-reductions-in-void-costs-to-cga) - [Appendix 22: Chief Superintendent Barton's Report](#appendix-22-chief-superintendent-bartons-report) - [Summary](#summary) - [Appendix 24: Press cutting of Peter Killeen](#appendix-24-press-cutting-of-peter-killeen) - [Glossary of Terms:](#glossary-of-terms) - [Acceptable Behaviour Contract (ABC)](#acceptable-behaviour-contract-abc) - [Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB)](#anti-social-behaviour-asb) - [Anti-social Behaviour Injunction (ASBi)](#anti-social-behaviour-injunction-asbi) - [Anti-social Behaviour Order (ASBO)](#anti-social-behaviour-order-asbo) - [Closure Orders](#closure-orders) - [Community Gateway Association](#community-gateway-association) - [Conviction Related Anti-Social Behaviour Order (CRASBO)](#conviction-related-anti-social-behaviour-order-crasbo) - [Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP)](#crime-and-disorder-reduction-partnership-cdrp) - [Crime Attractor](#crime-attractor) - [Crime Generators](#crime-generators) - [Dispersal Orders](#dispersal-orders) - [Parenting Orders:](#parenting-orders) - [Police and Communities Together (PACT)](#police-and-communities-together-pact) - [Prolific and other Priority Offender (PPO)](#prolific-and-other-priority-offender-ppo) - [RAFT](#raft) - [Restorative Justice](#restorative-justice) - [Streetwise Soccer](#streetwise-soccer) - [Sure Start](#sure-start) - [The Prince's Trust](#the-princes-trust) - [The Tower Project](#the-tower-project) - [Section 3: Agency and Other Information](#section-3-agency-and-other-information) - [Contact details:](#contact-details) - [Section 4: Endorsement by Senior Representative](#section-4-endorsement-by-senior-representative) - [Central Division - 'Moppin' up Dodge](#central-division-moppin-up-dodge) ## Details of application Title of the project: 'MOPPIN' up Dodge Name of Police Force: Lancashire Constabulary, Lancashire, England. Contact person: PC 1623 Gary Salisbury Email address: gary.salisbury@lancashire.pnn.police.uk Full postal address: Fulwood Police Station, 87 Watling Street Road, PRESTON, PR2 8BQ Telephone number: 01772209516 Fax number: 01772209532 Name of endorsing senior representatives(s): Name of organisation, position and/or rank of endorsing senior representatives(s): Lancashire Constabulary Full address of endorsing senior representatives(s): Chief Inspector Paul Wilson Central Division Operating Centre Lancaster Road North Preston Lancashire Please tick box to indicate that all organisations involved in the project have been notified of this entry (this is to prevent duplicate entries of the same project): # Section 1: Summary of application : MOPPIN UP DODGE ## SCANNING - Neighbourhood within top 10\% of deprived communities in England - Largely made up of rented accommodation - Data scan indicates crime, ASB, drug reports were disproportionately high - New tenancies unsustainable - Local community and elected representatives highlighted that disorderly youth were at the heart of the problem - Negative press reports appeared to add to fear of crime - Little community involvement/responsibility - Poor initial design of neighbourhood did not discourage disorderly behaviour Evaluation process begins, measures of problems considered ## ANALYSIS - Small estate managed by Community Gateway Association (CGA) - One way on/off estate, rear backed by woodland, multi play areas - Mapping for MOPPIN - Community INTL from PACT and CGA meetings/Standard Police \& CGA recording systems - Consultation with local university \& local elected politicians - Environmental visual audit - Research using recognised experts and good practice models - Community questionnaire/option appraisal - Service provider data/Deprivation levels/local school data Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Timeliness (SMART) objectives were then set with accountability mechanisms built in. ## RESPONSE Our responses were made up of enforcement, situational and social crime prevention backed up by research into crime science. We developed a 12 month process evaluation plan to track our responses and to check progress. - Standard law/ housing enforcement - Innovative Crime \& Disorder legislation (ASBOs, ASBIs, Dispersals, Closures) - Media campaign - Diversion tactics, youth outreach \& buddy system - Reparation, restorative justice and ABCs - Target hardening (improve lighting/fencing), - Modify public places to discourage disorderly behaviour (POP guide 6, Michael S. Scott) - Early intervention schemes \& Princes Trust ## ASSESSMENT - Process evaluation completed - Impact evaluation completed, $57 \%$ reduction in all crime, $47 \%$ reduction calls to service - Interrupted time series with control and diffusion areas indicates most responses have worked - CGA voids reduced by $48 \%$ - Hot spots redesigned including creating legitimate place/activities for youth - CCTV installed - Option appraisal completed - Gang/drug culture disrupted - Community garden completed/Surestart building opened/ tenants group thriving - Community sampling - Residents group (RAFT) and PACT meetings focus on traffic management and woodland improvement # Section 2: Description of project ## SCANNING ## Overview of the problem # SCANNING: Overview of the problem The Farringdon Park neighbourhood (locally known as DODGE CITY) is situated in the Ribbleton Ward of Preston. According to the UK Government Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2003 the area is in the top 10\% of deprived communities in England. The neighbourhood is built on an area that was originally a woodland and recreational park used by the cotton workers of Preston in the mid 1800s. The rear of the estate is still backed by woodland which is known locally as Brockholes Wood. The estate is made up of 210 family dwellings which are mainly semi detached with gardens front and rear. There are also 60 one bedroom apartments which are the same design as the houses but with occupants living on the ground and first floors respectively. ## Appendix 3: Aerial Photograph of Estate The landlord of the rented housing stock is Community Gateway Association (CGA) the stock transferred to them from Preston City Council at the end of 2005. In 2005 a new Neighbourhood Policing team took over the area. Scanning identified a disproportional number of problems for a small residential area with high levels of crime, particularly burglary and criminal damage): - Escalating reports of Crime/Anti Social Behaviour (ASB) - Gang culture: Farringdon Park Original Gangsters (FPOG) - Poor environmental appearance and Crime attractor - Fly tipping - Overt drug dealing \& taking - Poor initial design of neighbourhood - Unsustainable tenancies \& high repair costs (and repeat victims) - No diversionary activities - No community involvement - Underused community centre - Deprived community - Blame culture - Service provider 'hotspot' Appendix 4: Graph 1 to show all crime and calls to service 2004/5 in monthly time From the few residents who were engaging there appeared to be a blame culture; that problems in the area were caused by people who did not live in the area. The partnership requested patience from the community in order to complete a detailed analysis rather than instigate 'knee jerk' responses. # ANALYSIS ## Identification of the problem # ANALYSIS: Identification of the problem. In order to find 'pinch points' (Tilley 2002) the following detailed analysis was carried out using the PAT 2 triangle as a frame work: ## Routine Activity Theory's Double Triangle (Eck 2003) ## Features of location/place - Social housing residential estate - Poor design (crime attractor) - Woodland to rear - Hotspot for service providers - Poor infrastructures ![img-0.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-0.jpeg) - No alternative locations for youth ## Features of the victims - New tenants - Service providers / visitors to the area - All residents - Brockholes Wood Primary/Nursery School ## Features of the offender - Male - White British - 12 - 30 years - Farringdon Park Original Gangsters - Poorly educated offender and parents - Often drug dependent - Truant, excluded pupils, unemployed - Persistent Young Offenders (PYO) - Disregard for criminal justice system - LOCAL YOUTHS # Quantitative Analysis ## Police Data To understand the severity of the problem, it was important to scrutinise the Police information systems and analyse crime figures. In order to conduct accurate analysis it was decided to measure a two year period at monthly intervals up to our planned response date which was January 2006. As we drilled down we were beginning to understand that burglary, criminal and anti social behaviour appeared to be significant problems. Appendix 5: Graph 2 showing burglary, criminal damage and ASB stats for 2004/5 monthly intervals We also looked at the financial cost of the three crimes that we were considering paying greater attention and using as indicators. Appendix 6: Pie chart showing Average Cost of BIAD, Damage and ASB for 2004/5 ## CGA Data Whilst the majority of data came from police systems, information was also collated from a variety of other sources. Partnership data from CGA highlighted the cost of void repair, criminal damage, loss of revenue and environmental costs. ## Voids The prime concern for CGA was the cost including criminal damage of the large numbers of void properties, because of the appearance and reputation of the estate it was very difficult to let tenancies and more importantly sustain those tenancies. It cost an average of $\$ 10,638$ per void including the rent loss, and the expense of repair and securing. ## Appendix 7: Average yearly void cost to CGA 2004 and 2005 ## Environmental Management CGA were spending on average 4.5 hours per week at a unit cost of $\$ 150.32$ per hour. This included removal of fly tipping and street cleansing. This related to a total cost of $\$ 35,174$ per year (2004/5). ## Qualitative Analysis: ## CGA Option Study CGA carried out an Option Study with a view to obtaining the opinion of local residents. This involved a The study showed: - $61 \%$ lived on area for more than 5 years - $72 \%$ were afraid to go out at night time - $60 \%$ of homes managed by CGA - $45 \%$ of residents thought environmental appearance a major problem - $54 \%$ of residents thought drugs were a major problem - $55 \%$ of residents thought image and reputation (as Dodge City) were a major problem - $45 \%$ were not aware of a community group - $85 \%$ did not wish to be involved in the community group The study also provided data with regards to what people thought about their area and their willingness to be involved in the community group. # Mappin for MOPPIN Information and intelligence was being gathered at various community meetings involving residents and local elected representatives. However we identified an information gap with regards to people who did not live on the neighbourhood or were too afraid to attend meetings or participate in the CGA study. With this in mind a group of children from Brockholes Wood School were provided with a small amount of funding and asked to produce a model of the local area. This model was then used to gather data from outside school and at various points in the community. We have called this process 'MAPPIN for MOPPIN' and the community used 'flags' to identify issues. Although this process does appear quantative it is not scientific enough to be an effective measure, however it does give the community a sense of involvement and ownership of the problem. 676 flags were attached to the model on different occasions. Different coloured flags were used to identify the communities' priorities with a white flag for positive comments. People were asked to identify their priority for resolution of the problem using a key that the children had devised for short(s), medium (m) and long (L) term solutions. There were 543 negative comments, 112 positive and 21 spoilt ballots. ## Appendix 8: Photograph of Mappin Model and data # Environmental Visual Audit (EVA) An EVA was carried out with representatives from service providers, stakeholders, local elected representatives and Preston's Crime \& Disorder Partner (CDRP). The community had already been consulted following the option study and 'MAPPIN for MOPPIN', and environmental appearance had been highlighted as a priority. Similarly, Crummock Road was identified as a crime attractor ## Appendix 9: Photographs of Crime Attractors ## Consultation with University of Central Lancashire (UCL) In order to benefit from the best possible skills and advice available (as suggested by George Kelling), a number of meetings were undertaken with the Head of Criminology at UCL. Following a site visit and a meeting of stakeholders and partners the following recommendations were made: Situational crime prevention: The key 'pinch points' (Tilley 2002) would involve target hardening and the blocking off not only escape routes, but also the main footpath connecting the neighbouring estate. Social crime prevention: The model of a "buddy" system was identified as being appropriate in this situation; pairing existing residents with new tenants to provide local knowledge and \& support. ## Local Youths Although the community initially stated that the majority of crime and ASB was caused by youths from neighbouring districts who called themselves the Farringdon Park Original Gangsters, following detailed analysis, it was identified that members of this gang were in fact local youths. ## Appendix 10: Graph showing percentage of crime detected to local youths ## Considered Analysis During Analysis we also considered information from Preston Health Trust, with regards to health and deprivation levels. Other information considered relating to deprivation was obtained from the Brockholes Wood School. We decided that this information although useful was not relevant to our project. All types of crime were analysed but the data and the information from the community with regards to burglary, criminal damage and ASB persuaded us not to set targets for other crimes. # RESPONSE ## What we did to address the problem # RESPONSE: What we did to address the problem In order to respond appropriately we set project objectives using the SMART model. With the help of the local media and community groups our planned responses began on $1^{\text {st }}$ January 2006. ## Specific $>$ reduce all crime by $15 \%$ $>$ reduce burglaries by $20 \%$ $>$ reduce criminal damage by $20 \%$ $>$ reduce all calls to service by $15 \%$ $>$ reduce ASB reports by $20 \%$ $>$ reduce voids by $50 \%$ $>$ option appraisal re: future of Crummock Road $>$ disrupt drug dealing $>$ disrupt FPOG and 'gang culture' $>$ increase community engagement \& tackle 'fear of crime' $>$ improve environmental appearance of estate $>$ promote sustainable change Measurable $>$ measure set against the statistics and data from 2004/5 set against 2007 Achievable $>$ integrating POP \& NIM (MOPPIN) $>$ using applied crime science $>$ with community support $>$ strong partnership working $>$ neighbourhood policing (at no extra cost) Relevant $>$ objectives were relevant to the analysis and responded to community concerns Timed $>$ time frame of two years; 31/12/07 assessment date set, team confident of a successful handover # MOPPIN The team were keen to demonstrate at the Neighbourhood Policing street level that POP and NIM (MOPPIN) could be used in a complimentary way in order to achieve certain objectives. We decided to use Eck's adaptation of the PAT model to identify 'pinch points' of intervention. ## Appendix 11: Lancashire NIM Model ## Appendix 12: Eck's adaptation of PAT model ## Enforcement responses - 12 drug warrants - 10 ASBOs - 2 ASBIs - 3 Closure Orders - Individual Support Orders - Parenting Orders - High profile arrests/prosecution of persistent offenders - 8 Notices of seeking Possession - 1 Demotion of Tenancy - 3 Evictions - Target offenders - Target interventions - INTL visits - Rat trap - Patrol and hotspots - Mobile Police Station ## Appendix 13: Press cutting of enforcement action ## Situational crime prevention responses - Target hardening: - closing various access points from estate into Brockholes Wood - gating entrance to Crummock Road (see photo) - Estate clean up (followed up by broken windows approach, Wilson \& Kelling 1982/ Kelling \& Coles 1996) - Improve lighting on houses, certain streets and footpaths - Improve fencing and individual boundaries - Obtain funding for CCTV - Option appraisal completed with regards to future of Crummock Road (crime attractor) - Influence redesign of Crummock Road from a cul-de-sac to a thoroughfare (long term pinch point) - Modifying public places to discourage disorderly behaviour Appendix 14: Photograph showing Target Hardening - Crummock Road gates # Social Crime prevention responses - Restorative justice, in particular for young criminal damage offenders - Youth Intervention Programme/Positive Activities for Young People - (Youth intervention schemes) - Outreach work provided by Lancashire Youth Services - Princes Trust working with Brockholes Wood school to build community garden on school grounds - Youth Offending Team/ Probation reparation - Tower Project (referring local drug users to a local drug rehabilitation project) - Residents group - buddies - Promote use of the community centre - School involvement (local neighbourhood officer now school governor) - ABCs (Acceptable Behaviour Contracts) - Streetwise Soccer - Use of media (to reduce fear of crime improve negative reporting and to promote positive action) - Other responses were considered see Appendix 27 We project managed our responses by having regular process evaluation meetings to make sure people and agencies were delivering what they had promised. It took us a year to implement our responses and as well as community meetings we used the local press to publicise what we were doing. Adapted from: The different mechanisms associated with publicity - Kate Bowers \& Shane Johnson. Appendix 15: press model # ASSESSMENT ## The results of our approach # ASSESSMENT : The results of our approach ## Process evaluation: Having taken over a year to implement there were times when some of our responses did not go to plan. Slippage centred around the situational crime prevention responses which involved some sort of physical change in the area. It also took time for the Courts to process our targets for enforcement responses. The data being evaluated at our early/mid project meetings in 2006 did not indicate any improvement and caused concern amongst the team. However by the end of 2006 we saw dramatic decreases which continued into 2007. Assessment has been done against each of the project objectives. ## QUANTATIVE ## Impact Evaluation ## Crime//Calls to service objectives (using interrupted time series to evaluate) As detailed in the SMART model we used average data from 2004/5 measured against that of 2007. From technical data recording systems used by the Police we were able to conduct an interrupted time series evaluation method. This method was not available for partner data. All crime 2004/5 = 257 / year All crime $2007=110$ Reduction achieved $=\mathbf{5 7 \%}$ set against target of $\mathbf{1 5 \%}$ Calls to service for 2004/5 = 977 / year Calls to service in $2007=529$ Reduction achieved $=\mathbf{4 6 \%}$ set against target of $\mathbf{1 5 \%}$ Appendix 16: Graph (4)showing reductions to Crime \& calls for service Burglary/Criminal Damage/ASB objectives (using interrupted time series to evaluate) Burglary 2004/5 = 24.5 / year Burglary $2007=11$ Reduction achieved 55\% set against target of 20\% Criminal Damage 2004/5 = 122 / year Criminal Damage $2007=52$ # Reduction achieved 57\% set against target of 20\% ASB 2004/5 = 207.5 / year ASB $2007=131$ ## Reduction achieved 37\% set against target of 20\% ## Appendix 17 Graph showing reductions to Burglary/Criminal Damage/ASB ## Control Area In order to claim cause for the reductions in crime we chose a control area, an estate in Preston known locally as 'The Trees' neighbourhood. This area is of a similar size, layout, and design and is within the top 10\% of deprived communities within the UK, it is predominately rented properties. It has suffered similar problems to our response area. The areas are separated by two cemeteries and other neighbourhoods; having interrogated Police intelligence and data systems there are no connections with regards either neighbourhood. We decided to evaluate all crime and calls to service using our response and control area. All crime on response area $2004 / 5=207$ All crime on response area $2007=110$ All crime on control area 2004/5 = 308 All crime on control area $2007=318$ All calls on response area $2004 / 5=977$ All calls on response area $2007=529$ All calls on control area 2004/5/ = 1307 All calls on control area $2007=1254$ Appendix 18: Graph showing comparison of all crime and calls to service in the response and control areas. ## Spatial Displacement/Diffusion area Further to the control we looked at the neighbourhood adjoining the response area to evaluate Displacement or Diffusion. We interrogated the Police intelligence and data systems and noted that some offences committed on this area were detected to nominals from the response area. (Please see above for response area data) All crime on Displacement/Diffusion area 2004/5 = 177.5 All crime on Displacement/Diffusion area $2007=157$ All calls on Displacement/Diffusion area 2004/5 $=654$ All calls on Displacement/Diffusion area $2007=644$ Appendix 19 Graph showing comparison of all crime and calls to service in the response and displacement/diffusion areas. Calculating a Responses Net effect (Assessing Responses to Problems: Tool Guide 1: John Eck 2002) Formula to standardise the changes in crime: $=\frac{\text { crime after }- \text { crime before }}{\text { crime before }}$ Response area: =\frac{110-207}{110}=-0.882 Displacement/Diffusion area: =\frac{157-177.5}{157}=-0.115 Control area: =\frac{318-308}{318}=+0.032 | | Change in Problem Level | | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | | Decline | Increase | | Response Area | $-0.882$ | $+$ | | Displacement/Diffusion Area | $-0.115$ | $+$ | | Control Area | $+$ | $-0.032$ | | Response's Net Effect | $-1.029$ | | Net effect $=$ sum of 3 proportional changes The figure of -0.882 highlights an overall decline in the problem in the response area, whilst the -0.115 figure proves that diffusion as opposed to displacement had been occurred. The increase in the problem level on the control area suggests that without partnership intervention, on the balance of probabilities, the problem level on the response area would have also increased. Decline in the response area problem level, plus diffusion and an increase in the problem level in the control area equates to a negative net effect on crime. # Cost Saving As the data shows we have achieved our objectives by considerable margins. From this and using the information from the previously mentioned Home Office paper we can calculate our cost savings on the set objectives. The figures only represent the savings on our specific objectives and due to all crime and all calls to service also reducing the savings are actually greater than we have highlighted. - Average yearly cost of Burglary 2004/5 = \$112,700 - Yearly cost of Burglary $2007=\$ 50,600$ - This represents a saving of $\$ 62,100$ - Average yearly cost of Criminal Damage 2004/5 = \$124,440 - Average cost of Criminal Damage 2007 = \$52,020 - This represents a saving of $\$ 72,420$ - Average yearly cost of ASB 2004/5 = \$128,650 - Average cost of ASB $2007=\$ 76,880$ - This represents a saving of $\$ 51,770$ ## CGA objectives using pre- post design - Objective target reductions: Voids 50\% achieved 58\% - Savings for 2007 are $\mathbf{\$ 2 2 0 , 4 6 7}$ - A strategic decision was reached to offset the income loss of the Crummock Road flats (see next objective), by the gains in the cost of criminal damage and void security. Demolition took place in June 2007. Appendix 20: Photograph of Demolition Appendix 21: Graph showing reductions in void costs to CGA # QUALATATIVE ## Crummock Road objectives With regards to the Crummock Road area we resorted to level 3 of Goldstein's hierarchy lever table. ## Appendix 22: Chief Superintendent Barton's Report Although CGA is our partner in this project we needed to influence their senior management to make an important strategic decision regarding Crummock Road. Thus business plans were brought forward and consultants employed, they determined the flats to be unfit for purpose. Occupants were relocated, and the site is being demolished in order to build family dwellings. The cul-de-sac was gated off to prevent drug dealing, fly tipping and further damage to the flats before the demolition took place. When the area was gated there was an opportunity for the site to be used in a positive manner. Lancashire Fire and Rescue were supplied with a key to the gates which allowed them access to the buildings and they used it as a training area. ## Appendix 23: Photograph of Lancashire Fire \& Rescue When the new development takes place we aim to influence the changing of Crummock Road from a cul-de-sac into a thoroughfare. This would go some way to address the initial poor design of the estate and have a positive impact for the future. ## QUANTATIVE \& QUALATITIVE ## Disrupt drug dealing / dissolve FPOG As a result of our 'MOPPIN' approach we have achieved a number significant criminal convictions that have impacted on the area. Three of our main targets have now been charged with Supplying Class 'A' Drugs. Two of these offenders are in prison and the third is on remand awaiting trial. These three targets were key members of the FPOG, which is now of little significance in the area. FPOG were local offenders, and the majority are now on ASBOs prohibiting them from associating with other gang members. This has significantly influenced their motivations and reduced their offending rates. The associates, housing, drug use, criminality, family networks and other aspects of intelligence for each member of the FPOG was scrutinised to a high level. This highlighted motivations for the offenders' behaviour, and provided the partnership with further control mechanisms akin to the Problem Analysis Triangle. This tactic, and the widespread usage of ASBO's to influence an offender's motivation, was based primarily on the Routine Activity Theory. At the time this approach was relatively innovative, however the constabulary have recently implemented an Offender Management Unit (OMU) into mainstream business consisting of both police and partners working together. # Appendix 24: Press cutting of Peter Killeen ## Appendix 25: Graph showing reduced offending rates 12 months pre and post ASBO for top 5 offenders ## Reduce fear of crime Whilst the partnership used publicity as a tool to reduce \& remove the fear of crime, qualitative methods of assessment have also been carried out. Random sampling and a door knocking exercise revealed a significant decline in the fear of crime. This has manifested itself in a desire by residents to get involved in community activities and brought the good neighbour principal back to Farringdon Park. Children are able to play safely on the streets and residents taking the lead in traditional housing management functions such as estate walkabouts. This qualitative method of assessment highlights the changes in attitudes and public confidence, and the area now considers itself to have developed a sense of spirit and ownership. A priority of the community was provision of CCTV which has now been achieved and has been installed further reducing the fear of crime. A quote from the residents group RAFT (Residents Association of Farringdon and Thirlmere) "with the commitment shown by our CBMs and housing manager we have every faith in them to deliver promises, and things can only continue to get better" ## Improve Environmental appearance of estate. Having identified the grotspots in our analysis and following on from clean up days the environmental appearance of the estate has improved considerably. The residents have shown a commitment to maintain the appearance of the estate and this reflects in the kerb side appeal; attracting new residents to the area. Only one hour per week cleansing service is now required. Savings for 2007 are $\mathbf{\$ 2 7 , 3 5 8}$. Because of the savings made, CGA have allocated $\mathbf{\$ 1 0 , 0 0 0}$ to the residents group for Environmental improvements; empowering the community and providing a sense of ownership. The savings that have been made and reinvested were in part due to our broken windows approach. Crummock Road was gated off and it was impossible for a vehicle to fly tip in the cul-de-sac. We hope that following the obvious improvements in the appearance of the estate, the residents themselves will continue to dispose of their rubbish in a more responsible way. During Analysis the woodland area at the rear of the estate was highlighted as being a grotspot and also drug dealing had been flagged as an issue. During our research we discovered that there had been a lot of work being done by a group called 'Friends of Brockholes Wood'. This is led by the Wildlife Trust and supported by a Neighbourhood Management scheme. Funding had been obtained and plans drawn up with a brief of restoring the wood to its former beauty. On seeing the plans it was obvious that the group had done extensive research into the design elements such as gates and footpaths from estate access points, which will be a great improvement. They had already unknowingly adopted the POP approach and apart from fully supporting their efforts we have left this work with the group and attended meetings in a supporting/advisory role. # QUALITATIVE ## Promote sustainable change So far we have evaluated data following enforcement and situational crime prevention responses. We now assess Social Crime Prevention responses which were aimed at redirecting potential offenders away from the criminal Justice system. The Community Centre is now being used to its full potential and offers a full range of services for the whole community. Other diversionary activities are available on the estate including a soccer training scheme "Streetwise Soccer" provided by the City Council. The residents group 'RAFT' now have a dedicated Community Development Officer from CGA who is supporting the group to access external funding streams to further improve the estate and provide activities for children and adults; including outreach work to promote healthy sex and drug education accessing difficult to reach groups. We can also show how restorative justice can be successful in influencing young people, in this instance preventing the creating of new gangs as FPOG no long exists. During July 2006 a new Surestart building was being constructed next to the school, approximately $\$ 50,000$ of damage was caused to the building over a weekend in the school holidays. Eventually eight local juvenile offenders were located and each went through the restorative justice process. None of these eight have committed further offences or come to our notice since, no further damage has been caused to the building. During the project we have been keen to use reparation as a way of promoting sustainable change, by encouraging a better understanding amongst local offenders of the causes and effects of offending patterns of behaviour. Many of our local offenders have been involved in reparation through environmental improvement work as an alternative to custodial sentences and in doing so have improved the appearance of their estate. This work has provided a sense of justice for victims and the offenders have developed pride in the projects in which they have been involved. Appendix 26: Press cutting showing reparation in action # Increase community involvement Some of our young residents on the verge of criminality were encouraged to join a Princes Trust Project that we had attracted to the area. The aim was to build a community garden at Brockholes Wood School. This was completed by a group of 20 young people, 5 of whom came from our area. This garden completed in the Autumn of 2006, remains undamaged. Significantly, none of the 5 residents have come to Police attention since. At the start of the initiative, local officers launched a PACT (Police And Communities Together meeting) at the local community centre. Although initially, this meeting suffered from low attendance rates, the local residents group RAFT have now taken ownership of the meeting, with local residents taking minutes and carrying out other administrative functions. ## CONCLUSION Following our assessment we can say that the problems declined and we met our objectives as stated on the SMART model. From detailed evaluation we also believe that our responses caused this decline and that using this process on similar problems in other areas may also have a positive effect. At the end of 2007 the key members of the team moved onto other projects in the City of Preston and resources were focused elsewhere. In effect there was a 'handover' of the neighbourhood back to the community. So SARA became SARAH and the people of 'Dodge City' can enjoy an improved quality of life. ## JUST TO MAKE SURE Following 'Handover' at the end of 2007 the team did a check on data just to make sure 'the lid was still on'. It was decided to check all crime only for the first three months of the assessment year (2007) against the first three months of 2008: All crime on response area Jan, Feb, Mar $2007=34$ All crime on response area Jan, Feb, Mar $2008=18$ As we can see the data still shows continuing improvement which is very pleasing as this may also be an indication of sustainability which would be very satisfying indeed. # Appendix 1 ## Reference List ## Internet: www.crimereduction.co.uk www.popscenter.org www.securedbydesign.com www.respect.gov.uk ## Publications: Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers (John E. Eck, Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Solving Tools Series Guide No. 1 Center for ProblemOriented Policing) 2002 Crime Prevention \& Community Safety (Nick Tilley, Willan Publishing) 2005 Disorderly Youths in Public Places (Michael S. Scott, Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem- Solving Tools Series Guide No. 6 Center for Problem-Oriented Policing) 2004 Implementing Responses to Problems (Rick Brown \& Michael S Scott, Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Solving Tools Series Guide No. 7 Center for Problem-Oriented Policing) 2007 National Community Safety Plan 2006-2009 (HM Government) 2006 Problem-orientated Policing \& Partnerships (Karen Bullock, Rosie Erol, \& Nick Tilley, Willan Publishing) 2006 Preston Local Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy 2005 (Preston Strategic Partnership) Putting Theory to Work: Implementing Situational Prevention and Problem Oriented Policing (Johannes Knutson and Ronald V. Clarke - editors, Monsey, NY :Criminal Justice Press) 2006 Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis for field settings. (Cook, T. D., \& Campbell, D. T., Boston: Houghton Mifflin). 1979 # Appendix 2 ## Key Partners Community Gateway Association University of Central Lancashire Preston Youth Offending Team Princes Trust Preston Probation Service Preston Drug \& Alcohol Services Victim Support Lancashire Evening Post Lancashire Partnership Against Crime Lancashire Primary Care Trust Local Councillors Preston Youth Services Brockholes Wood Junior School RAFT : Local Residents Association One Voice : Neighbourhood Management Scheme Friends of Brockholes Wood Preston Fire \& Rescue Lancashire Ambulance Service Preston City Council Cleansing/Highways/Parks Department ![img-1.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-1.jpeg) # Appendix 4: Graph to show all crime and calls to service 2004/5 in monthly time ![img-2.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-2.jpeg) Appendix 5: Graph to show burglary, criminal damage and ASB statistics 2004/5 in monthly time. ![img-3.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-3.jpeg) Appendix 6 Average yearly cost of BIAD, damage and ASB for 2004 and 2005 (Source: The Economic \& Social Cost of Crime, Home Office Research paper 217) ![img-4.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-4.jpeg) Appendix 7 Average yearly void cost to CGA 2004 and 2005 ![img-5.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-5.jpeg) ![img-6.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-6.jpeg) The data obtained was as follows: Negative comments - 86 flags, Grotspot - Crummock Road (68s, 10m, 8L) - 73 flags, Drug dealing - Crummock Road (59s, 7m, 7L) - 69 flags, Drugs individual addresses (56s, 2m, 11L) - 64 flags, Drug dealing - Brockholes Wood (52s, 8m, 4L) - 62 flags, Grotspot - Brockholes Wood (38s, 6m, 18L) - 54 flags, Footpath between Farringdon Cres. \& Brockholes Wood - Unsafe at night' (42s, 3m, 9L) - 53 flags, Grotspot - various play areas on the estate (41s, 7m, 5L) - 43 flags, Motorcycle nuisance - various parts of the estate ( 33s, 7m, 3L) - 39 flags, Unsafe at night - Brockholes Wood (25s, 5m, 10L) Positives (white flags) - 57 flags Brockholes Wood School - 20 flags Brockholes Wood - 15 flags Community centre - 12 flags Play areas - 8 flags Local gas station/shop There were 543 negative comments, 112 positive comments and 21 spoilt ballots. ![img-7.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-7.jpeg) Appendix 10: Graph showing percentage of crime detected to local youths ![img-8.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-8.jpeg) ![img-9.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-9.jpeg) # Appendix 12 Eck's adaptation of PAT model ![img-10.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-10.jpeg) # Preston's worst thief banned from home ![img-11.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-11.jpeg) E5131E B\&th: Brian Salisbury ![img-12.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-12.jpeg) AMAN dubbed the worst thief in Preston has been banned from the area where he grew up and where three generations of his family still live. Heroin addict Brian Salisbury, 27, of Mardale Road, Farrington Park, Preston, has been barred for five years by an ASBO from entering the estate where his mother, father, two sisters and their children have their homes. He was also banned from entering the whole of the Fishwick area and the Deepdale Retail Park, where the traders had already issued their own bars on him up to a year ago. ## String District judge Peter Wood issued the ASBO order after hearing that Salisbury, whose first offence was in 1992, had committed a string of at least 16 offences and been convicted 32 times - 25 of them for theft-related offences - since 1999. He also noted that Salisbury had also asked for many other offences to be taken into consideration when he was convicted by the courts. He also asked him for 12 weeks for his latest theft. He was caught on CCTV in his local shop with his girlfriend's baby in its pram, stealing items including baby oil and groceries. On the film, Salisbury could clearly be seen taking stock from the shelter and hiding it inside the pram. Sue Crabb, Locumblay Crown Prosecution Service's spectator anti-social behaviour prosecutor, said: "It is a very serious step to bar someone from ## by Judith Dorean judith.dorean@lqn.co.uk the area where he lives and has lived all his life. But his behaviour has been such that the only way to prevent his anti-social behaviour in that area is to bar him from that area." Paolo Paserini, defending, said Salisbury had spent all his life on the estate and would find it extremely difficult if he was unable to cast his family's homes. He was currently living with his sister on the estate and so the order would effectively make him homeless. He said his client accepted the bans on entering the Deepdale Retail Park and the Fishwick ward, but was strongly insisting the order to stay away from Farrington Park. The judge said that Salisbury's offending had wrecked the lives of his neighbours. He issued the burning order for five years, but said that he could appeal after two years. P. Dave Johnson, community boat manager for the Farrington Park area, said the advent of Salisbury's crimes were carried out within half a mile of his home. He said: "We believe he is the most prolific thief in Preston. "Some people on the Farrington Park estate consider themselves to be beyond the reaches of the criminal system because they have lived there for so long. Just because they have lived on the estate for generation upon generation, it does not entitle them to stay in that area and commit crime." ## Appendix 14: Photograph showing Target Hardening - Crummock Road gates ![img-13.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-13.jpeg) ![img-14.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-14.jpeg) # Applications of the Public and Public Service ## Use of Publicity - Encourages safety practices within the public - Publicity aimed at making the public act: - Crime prevention advice - Publicising the available assistance with crime - Publicity informing the public of successes and increased levels of safety: - Publicising the success of crime prevention ## Reassuring the Public - Publicity informing the public of successes and increased levels of safety: - Publicising the success of crime prevention ![img-15.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-15.jpeg) Appendix 17: Graph showing reductions to Burglary, Criminal Damage and ASB (means - - -) ![img-16.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-16.jpeg) Appendix 18: Graph showing comparison of all crime and calls to service in the response and control areas. ![img-17.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-17.jpeg) Appendix 19 Graph showing comparison of all crime and calls to service in the response and displacement/diffusion areas. ![img-18.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-18.jpeg) ![img-19.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-19.jpeg) # Appendix 21 Graph showing reductions in void costs to CGA ![img-20.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-20.jpeg) # Appendix 22: Chief Superintendent Barton's Report ## Summary The police are now regularly called to this street which is completely free of residents to reports of arson, fly tipping, drug dealing, anti-social behaviour and reports of fugitives using it as a means of escape from the police. The street is unusual in that for the cost of erecting two short lengths of fencing and gating, the area can be made totally secure from vehicle access and significantly more secure from criminal access. There needs to be an environmental clean up to remove dangerous discarded litter and burnt remnants from arson attacks. The fencing will then prevent this problem recurring. The street represents a striking visual eye sore to the area and is a significant threat to the amenity of Farringdon Park. I understand the street is not scheduled for redevelopment until after 2010. The condition of the properties now would suggest there is going to be a more than significant deterioration over the next few years. I am given to understand that Gateway have an option to redevelop the buildings from four flats into two semi-detached houses using the pre-existing fabric. I have to say I find it very difficult to imagine how this will be a feasible or commercial decision considering the current condition of the properties. Should the decision be that the site is redeveloped, without using existing walls and roofs, then I would suggest the properties need demolishing now rather than in four years time. The site will need to be securely fenced during any redevelopment and therefore it makes sense for that secure fencing to be put in place now to reduce to a minimum the threat to the site and the attendant anti-social behaviour. The walk through also revealed a problem with BT junction boxes. Albeit not a Gateway issue it was highlighted as a common graffiti problem throughout Preston and one that needs to be explored urgently with BT to provide a long term solution. The site is proving to be a useful wildlife haven and those responsible for maintaining the visual amenity of the site should also make the most of the opportunity for increased wildlife diversity. I forward this report not only to the team who walked through the site but also to Diane Bellinger, Community Gateway Association, Jim Carr, Chief Executive of Preston City Council and Vice Chair of the CDRP, and Inspector June Chessell. I would urge those with particular responsibility for this area to continue the dialogue. However, as Chair of the CDRP I would see it as an urgent consideration that the site is both cleaned up and fenced off then the site cleared i.e. buildings demolished prior to any long term new development. *[Signature]* ![img-21.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-21.jpeg) # Appendix 24: Press cutting of Peter Killeen ![img-22.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-22.jpeg) Appendix 25: Graph showing reduced offending rates 12 months pre and post ASBO for top 5 offenders ![img-23.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-23.jpeg) Appendix 26: Press cutting showing reparation in action ![img-24.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-24.jpeg) Appendix 27 Other Responses considered: The partnership project managed the POP from the outset, each drawing on their strengths. Numerous additional responses were considered post-analysis, which for various reasons were not deemed feasible for a long term project: 1 High visibility foot / mobile patrol: Not sustainable, costly, resource intensive 2 Penalty Notices for Disorder (PND). Many of the offenders were juvenile and or unemployed, having no means to pay a fine. 3 Test purchasing. Farringdon Park offenders did not pose a significant threat level to the whole of Preston to warrant such an operation. 4 Community volunteers. At the outset, the community were reluctant to assist police; however the residents association has now taken ownership of the PACT (Police And Communities Together) meetings administration. 5 Lottery funding. Not available 6 Mobile police station. Used in the short term only. Not sustainable. 7 Undercover operation. Offenders were sceptical toward outsiders, and such a long term measure could not be justified. 8 Compulsory purchase order. Not possible. 9 Restorative Justice. Used for juvenile offenders as a pro-active measure, but not on target nominals following risk assessments. 10 Name \& shame. Media coverage was used to reduce fear of crime as opposed to shame offenders. Identities of juvenile offenders protected by legislation. # Glossary of Terms: ## Acceptable Behaviour Contract (ABC) Acceptable behaviour contracts are voluntary agreements made between people involved in anti-social behaviour and the local police, the housing department, the registered social landlord, or the perpetrator's school. They are flexible in terms of content and format although not without legal significance and have proved effective as a means of encouraging young adults, children, and parents to take responsibility for unacceptable behaviour. They are being used to improve the quality of life for local people by tackling behaviour such as harassment, graffiti, criminal damage and verbal abuse. ## Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) Anti-Social Behaviour is behaviour conducted in an anti-social manner that has caused or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to the public. ## Anti-social Behaviour Injunction (ASBi) Anti-Social Behaviour Injunctions are Civil Community Orders introduced to allow Registered Social Landlords to apply for legal protection for their tenants. This covers behaviour that causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. ## Anti-social Behaviour Order (ASBO) Anti-social Behaviour Orders are Civil Community Orders which were introduced by the government in 1999. They are intended to protect the public from behaviour that causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress ## Closure Orders The police and designated persons have the power to close down premises (sometimes called 'crack houses') from being used for the supply, use or production of Class A drugs where there is associated serious nuisance or disorder. ## Community Gateway Association CGA is a housing association with the tenants at the heart of the decision making process. It is a member led organisation which has recently taken ownership and management of around 6000 properties from Preston City Council. # Conviction Related Anti-Social Behaviour Order (CRASBO) Civil Community Orders which are made on conviction as a preventative rather than punitive measure and which are intended to protect the public from behaviour that causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress - see Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO). ## Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) are statutory partnerships which incorporate a combination of police, local authorities and other organisations and businesses, who work together to develop and implement strategies for tackling crime and disorder at a local level. ## Crime Attractor These are places affording many criminal opportunities that are well known to offenders. People with criminal motivation are drawn to such locales. Such places might start off being known only to locals, but as their reputation spreads increasing numbers of offenders are drawn in, thus increasing the number of crime and disorder events. ## Crime Generators These are places to which large numbers of people are attracted for reasons unrelated to criminal motivation. Providing large numbers of opportunities for offenders and targets to come together in time and place does produce disorder. ## Dispersal Orders The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 gives the police powers in designated areas to disperse groups of two or more where their presence or behaviour has resulted, or is likely to result, in a member of the public being harassed, intimidated, alarmed or distressed. ## Parenting Orders: Parenting Orders can be given to the parents/carers of young people who offend, truant, or who have received an Anti-social Behaviour Order. The recipient of such orders will normally be required to attend counselling or guidance sessions for up to three months. The may also have conditions imposed on them such as attending meetings with teachers at their child's school, ensuring their child does not visit a particular place unsupervised, or ensuring their child is at home at particular times. # Police and Communities Together (PACT) Police and Communities Together (PACT) meetings are regularly conducted by Community Beat Managers and Neighbourhood Policing Teams. PACT is our way of maintaining close links with the local community, through which we set local policing priorities, tackling the issues that local people have identified. ## Prolific and other Priority Offender (PPO) A Prolific and Other Priority Offender (PPO) is a targeted individual who is locally selected by use of the National Intelligence Model in identifying those who are causing most harm to their communities. ## RAFT The Residents Association of Farringdon and Thirlmere is the local tenants group. ## Restorative Justice "Restorative Justice" is a form of Victim/Offender Mediation that exists within the Criminal Justice System process whereby all parties with a stake in a particular conflict or offence come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the conflict or offence and its implications for the future. ## Streetwise Soccer This is a multi-agency initiative, established in response to youth nuisance. Key agencies refer young people who are at risk of offending to the scheme. Participants are encouraged and given coaching in a wide range of activities which are seen to carry 'street credibility'. These activities include soccer, boxing, basket ball and dance. ## Sure Start Sure Start is the Government programme aimed at delivering the best start in life for every child. The emphasis is on early education, childcare, health and family support. The aim of Sure Start will be achieved by helping services development in disadvantaged areas alongside financial help for parents to afford childcare AND rolling out the principles driving the Sure Start approach to all services for children and parents. ## The Prince's Trust The Prince's Trust was founded in 1976 by The Prince of Wales. Having completed his duty in the Royal Navy, His Royal Highness became dedicated to improving the lives of disadvantaged young people in the UK, and began The Trust to deliver on that commitment. The Trust has become the UK's leading youth charity, offering a range of opportunities including training, personal development, business start up support, mentoring and advice. At a local level, community initiatives are devised and implemented by participants, who are subsequently able to, 'make a difference' to communities, whilst benefiting from support and guidance provided by coordinators from both the Police and Fire Service. # The Tower Project This was devised by Lancashire Constabulary to provide an assertive treatment and rehabilitation for persistent offenders who commit crime to finance a drugs habit. This initiative involves police officers, probation and health services working in partnership to identify support and monitor offenders who wish to break a drugs habit. # Section 3: Agency and Other Information This problem solving initiative was initially devised and developed by 2 Community Beat Managers in Preston working on partnership with the local housing manager from Community Gateway Association who had responsibility for ASB enforcement in the relevant area. It was subsequently adopted by the division as the sole response to achieving long term reductions for both police and partners. The team of 3, made a commitment to the project from the outset, and benefitted from previous problem oriented policing experience in dealing with Return of the Happy Shopper initiative in 2005. Lancashire Constabulary provides support and guidance in all problem solving initiatives and is committed to Problem Oriented Policing. Officers are encouraged to undertake problem solving as part of everyday business with a view to tackling medium to long term problems. To assist this POP's coordinators offer advice and guidance. There are no additional incentives given. A number of manuals and guidelines were used during the management of this project including: * Using Analysis for Problem Solving: POPS Guide * Becoming a Problem Solving Analyst: Ronald V. Clarke \& John Eck * Assessing Responses to Problems: John Eck 2002 * Putting Theory to Work: Johannes Knutsson \& Ronald V. Clarke. * www.popcenter * www.securedbydesign.com * www.crimereduction.co.uk No problems were identified with the problem-solving model. The Youth Offending Team, Probation Service and Princes Trust Scheme committed personnel to this project at the Reparation \& Restorative Justice stages. This was at no additional cost, and although coordinated by the partnership, was part of their day to day activity. The demolition of Crummock road, although costly, did not required additional funding, as business plans were already in place. These plans were brought forward due to leverage from the police (as per Goldstein's hierarchy of levers; level 3). # Contact details: - PC 1623 Gary Salisbury Email address: gary.salisbury@lancashire.pnn.police.uk - Fulwood Police Station, 8 Watling Street Road, PRESTON, PR2 8BQ - Sue Roach (CGA) Email address: sue.roach@communitygateway.co.uk - PS 2423 Dave Johnson Email address: David.Johnson@lancashire.pnn.police.uk # Section 4: Endorsement by Senior Representative Please insert letter from endorsing representative: ![img-25.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/08-27%28F%29/img-25.jpeg) Michael Cunningham Deputy Chief Constable Lancashire Constabulary HQ, PO Box 77, Hutton, Preston, Lancs. PR4 5SB Telephone: 01772 412206; Fax: 01772 614916; E-mail: Michael.cunningham@lancashire.pnn.police.uk 30 May 2008 Rob T. Guerette, Ph.D School of Criminal Justice Florida International University University Park, PCA 366B 11200 S.W. 8th Street Miami, FL 33199 Dear Rob The Herman Goldstein Award 2008 # Central Division - 'Moppin' up Dodge I am delighted to personally endorse and forward the attached entry in respect of this year's Herman Goldstein Award. I look forward to hearing from you in due course. Should any of the Lancashire submissions be successful in these awards I would be grateful if I am the first point of contact for the Force. If you have any enquiries regarding this application please do not hesitate to contact my office on the telephone number shown. Alternatively, you may wish to speak with Chief Inspector Richard Blackburn, in the HQ Neighbourhood Policing Implementation Team, who is co-ordinating these competition entries on the force's behalf. Richard is available on telephone number 01772413570. Yours sincerely Michael Cunningham Deputy Chief Constable