Title: National Institute of Justice Journal 237. Series: N/A Author: NIJ Published: October 1998 Subject: drug treatment, gun violence, technology in law enforcement, international issues, community policing 91 pages 157,000 bytes ------------------------------- Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text file. To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat graphic file available from this Web site or order a print copy from NCJRS at 800-851-3420. ------------------------------ U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice National Institute of Justice Journal October 1998 Addiction Is a Brain Disease--and It Matters Also in this Issue: Crime's Decline--Why? The IDENT System: Putting "Structure to the Chaos of the Border" Reducing Crime by Harnessing International Best Practice Using City-Level Surveys to Better Understand Community Policing ------------------------------ Director's Message The content of this fall edition of the National Institute of Justice Journal is indicative of the broad spectrum of NIJ's research and development activities and interests. For example, the lead article, "Addiction Is a Brain Disease--and It Matters," summarizes a message delivered by Dr. Alan I. Leshner, Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, at one of NIJ's annual research and evaluation conferences. The scientific insights reported by Dr. Leshner have important implications for NIJ's Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program and the joint NIJ- ONDCP (Office of National Drug Control Policy) treatment-oriented efforts to help break the link between drugs and crime (see "Breaking the Cycle of Drug Abuse in Birmingham" in the July 1998 issue). This edition's second article ("Crime's Decline-- Why?") consists of summaries of several papers presented at an NIJ-sponsored conference held earlier this year at the Northwestern University School of Law. The summary by Alfred Blumstein and Richard Rosenfeld notes that the largest contribution to the decline in homicides during the past several years stems from the reduction in the use of handguns by young people. That kind of outcome, in Boston at least, was facilitated by the NIJ-sponsored Boston Gun Project (see "Pulling Levers: Getting Deterrence Right" in the July 1998 issue). How technology is helping the Border Patrol achieve its goals is one focus of "The IDENT System." IDENT technology, originally conceived of and used by the U.S. Navy to process Haitian refugees, is illustrative of a major objective of NIJ's Office of Science and Technology--that is, to support and facilitate adaptation of certain U.S. Department of Defense technologies to criminal justice uses. Reflecting NIJ's growing interest and involvement in matters international is "Reducing Crime by Harnessing International Best Practice." The Institute's recently established International Center fosters dialogue between U.S. researchers, practitioners, and policymakers and their counterparts in other countries on many important topics. The issue's last feature, "Using City-Level Surveys to Better Understand Community Policing," notes the upcoming availability of software developed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics to enable police and sheriffs' departments to collect local victimization data as well as to obtain data on citizens' perceptions of community policing and neighborhood issues. The availability of such tools will further the goals of NIJ's substantial research and development efforts in the area of community policing, including evaluations, technology, and local police-researcher partnerships. Jeremy Travis Director National Institute of Justice ------------------------------ National Institute of Justice Jeremy Travis Director NIJ Journal Editorial Board Sally T. Hillsman Deputy Director for Office of Research and Evaluation John L. Schwarz Deputy Director for Office of Development and Dissemination David Boyd Deputy Director for Office of Science and Technology Bernard V. Auchter Cheryl A. Crawford James O. Finckenauer Mary G. Graham Marj P. Leaming Christy A. Visher Issue Editors William D. Falcon Jolene Hernon ------------------------------ The National Institute of Justice Journal is published by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice, to announce the Institute's policy-relevant research results and initiatives. The Attorney General has determined that publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public business required by law of the Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. The National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), a centralized national clearinghouse of criminal justice information, is sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs agencies and the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Registered users of NCJRS receive the National Institute of Justice Journal and NCJRS Catalog free. To become a registered user, write NCJRS User Services, Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000, call 800-851-3420, or e-mail askncjrs@ncjrs.org. The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. ------------------------------ Contents Issue No. 237 Features Addiction Is a Brain Disease--and It Matters Alan I. Leshner Crime's Decline--Why? Alfred Blumstein, Richard Curtis, Jeffrey Fagan, June Kim, Gary LaFree, Robert Nash Parker, Irving Piliavin, Richard Rosenfeld, Christopher Uggen, and Franklin E. Zimring The IDENT System: Putting "Structure to the Chaos of the Border" Thomas V. Brady Reducing Crime by Harnessing International Best Practice Irvin Waller and Brandon C. Welsh Using City-Level Surveys to Better Understand Community Policing Steven K. Smith and David W. Hayeslip Departments Events New & Noteworthy Recent NIJ Publications NIJ in the Journals ------------------------------ Addiction Is a Brain Disease--and It Matters by Alan I. Leshner* *Alan I. Leshner, Ph.D., is Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). This article is based primarily on what Dr. Leshner wrote in Science (October 3, 1997) and reflects his presentation at the July 1997 Research and Evaluation Conference, sponsored by the National Institute of Justice and other components of the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Dramatic advances over the past two decades in both the neurosciences and the behavioral sciences have revolutionized our understanding of drug abuse and addiction. Scientists have identified neural circuits that are involved in the actions of every known drug of abuse, and they have specified common pathways that are affected by almost all such drugs. Research has also begun to reveal major differences between the brains of addicted and nonaddicted individuals and to indicate some common elements of addiction, regardless of the substance. However, a dramatic lag or gap exists between these advances in science and their appreciation by the general public or their application in either practice or public policy settings. For example, many, perhaps most, people see drug abuse and addiction as social problems, to be handled only with social solutions, particularly through the criminal justice system. On the other hand, science has taught that drug abuse and addiction are as much health problems as they are social problems. The consequence of this perception gap is a significant delay in gaining control over the drug abuse problem. Part of the lag and resultant disconnect comes from the normal delay in transferring any scientific knowledge into practice and policy. However, other factors unique to the drug abuse arena compound the problem, such as: --The tremendous stigma attached to being a drug user or, worse, an addict. The most beneficent public view of drug addicts is as victims of their societal situation. However, the more common view is that drug addicts are weak or bad people, unwilling to lead moral lives and control their behavior and gratifications. To the contrary, addiction is actually a chronic, relapsing illness, characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use.[1] The gulf in implications between the "bad person" view and the "chronic illness sufferer" view is tremendous. As just one example, many people believe that addicted individuals do not even deserve treatment. This stigma, and the underlying moralistic tone, is a significant overlay on all decisions related to drug use and drug users. --Ingrained ideologies. Some who work in the drug abuse prevention and addiction treatment fields also hold ingrained ideologies that, although usually different in origin and form from the ideologies of the general public, can be just as problematic. For example, many drug abuse workers are themselves former drug users who have had successful treatment experiences with a particular treatment method. They therefore may zealously defend a single approach, even in the face of contradictory scientific evidence. In fact, many drug abuse treatments have been shown to be effective through clinical trials.[2] These difficulties notwithstanding, we can and must bridge this informational disconnect if we are to make real progress in controlling drug abuse and addiction. It is time to replace ideology with science. Drug abuse and addiction as public health problems What has the science shown and what are the implications? At the most general level, research has shown that drug abuse is a dual-edged health issue as well as a social issue. Drugs have well-known and severe negative consequences for abusers' health, both mental and physical. But drug abuse and addiction also have tremendous implications for the health of the public, since drug use, directly or indirectly, is now a major vector for the transmission of many serious infectious diseases, particularly HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, and tuberculosis--and for the infliction of violence as well. Because addiction is such a complex and pervasive health issue, overall strategies must encompass a committed public health approach, including extensive education and prevention efforts, treatment, and research. Science is providing the basis for such public health approaches. For example, two large sets of multisite studies[3] have demonstrated the effectiveness of well-delineated outreach strategies in modifying the HIV-risk behaviors of addicted individuals, even if they continue to use drugs and do not want to enter treatment. This runs counter to the broadly held view that addicts are so incapacitated by drugs that they are unable to modify any of their behaviors. It also suggests a base for improved strategies for reducing the negative health consequences of injection drug use for the individual and for society. What matters in addiction? Scientific research and clinical experience have taught us much about what really matters in addiction and where we need to concentrate our clinical and policy efforts. However, too often the focus is on the wrong aspects of addiction, and efforts to deal with this difficult issue can be badly misguided. Any discussion about psychoactive drugs inevitably turns to the question of whether a particular drug is physically or psychologically addicting. In essence, this issue revolves around whether dramatic physical withdrawal symptoms occur when an individual stops taking a drug--what is typically called physical dependence by professionals in the field. The assumption that often follows is that the more dramatic the physical withdrawal symptoms, the more serious or dangerous the drug must be. This thinking is outdated. From both clinical and policy perspectives, it does not matter much what physical withdrawal symptoms, if any, occur. First, even the florid withdrawal symptoms of heroin addiction can now be easily managed with appropriate medications. Second, and more important, many of the most addicting and dangerous drugs do not produce very severe physical symptoms upon withdrawal. Crack cocaine and methamphetamine are clear examples. Both are highly addicting, but cessation of their use produces very few physical withdrawal symptoms, certainly nothing like the physical symptoms accompanying alcohol or heroin withdrawal. What does matter tremendously is whether a drug causes what we now know to be the essence of addiction: compulsive drug seeking and use, even in the face of negative health and social consequences.[4] These are the characteristics that ultimately matter most to the patient and where treatment efforts should be directed. These elements also are responsible for the massive health and social problems that drug addiction brings in its wake. Addiction is a brain disease Although each drug that has been studied has some idiosyncratic mechanisms of action, virtually all drugs of abuse have common effects, either directly or indirectly, on a single pathway deep within the brain, the mesolimbic reward system. Activation of this system appears to be a common element in what keeps drug users taking drugs. This is not unique to any one drug; all addictive substances affect this circuit.[5] Not only does acute drug use modify brain function in critical ways, but prolonged drug use causes pervasive changes in brain function that persist long after the individual stops taking the drug. Significant effects of chronic use have been identified for many drugs at all levels: molecular, cellular, structural, and functional.[6] The addicted brain is distinctly different from the nonaddicted brain, as manifested by changes in brain metabolic activity, receptor availability, gene expression, and responsiveness to environmental cues. Some of these long-lasting brain changes are idiosyncratic to specific drugs, whereas others are common to many different drugs.[7] We can actually see these changes through use of recently developed technologies, such as positron emission tomography. The common brain effects of addicting substances suggest common brain mechanisms underlying all addictions.[8] That addiction is so clearly tied to changes in brain structure and function is what makes it, fundamentally, a brain disease. A metaphorical switch in the brain seems to be thrown following prolonged drug use. Initially, drug use is a voluntary behavior (see "When Does Drug Use Start? How Does It Proceed?"), but as that switch is thrown, the individual moves into the state of addiction, characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use.[9] Understanding that addiction is, at its core, a consequence of fundamental changes in brain function means that a major goal of treatment must be either to reverse or to compensate for those brain changes. This could be accomplished through either medications or behavioral treatments (behavioral treatments alter brain function in other psychobiological disorders[10]). Elucidation of the biology underlying the metaphorical switch is key to the development of more effective treatments, particularly antiaddiction medications. Addiction is not just a brain disease Of course, addiction is not that simple. Addiction is not just a brain disease. It is a brain disease for which the social contexts in which it both has developed and is expressed are critically important. The case of the many thousands of returning Vietnam war veterans who were addicted to heroin illustrates this point clearly. In contrast to addicts on the streets of America, it was relatively easy to treat the returning veterans' addictions. This success was possible because they had become addicted while in an almost totally different setting from the one to which they returned. At home in the United States, they were exposed to very few of the conditioned environmental cues that had initially been associated with their drug use in Vietnam. Exposure to those conditioned cues can be a major factor in causing persistent or recurrent drug cravings and drug use relapses even after successful treatment.[11] The implications are obvious. If we understand addiction as a prototypical psychobiological illness, with critical biological, behavioral, and social context components, our treatment strategies must include biological, behavioral, and social context elements. Not only must the underlying brain disease be treated, but the behavioral and social cue components must also be addressed, just as they are with many other brain diseases, including stroke, schizophrenia, and Alzheimer's disease. Addiction is a chronic, relapsing disorder Addiction is rarely an acute illness. For most people, it is a chronic, relapsing disorder. Total abstinence for the rest of one's life is a relatively rare outcome from a single treatment episode. Relapses are more the norm. Thus, addiction must be approached more like other chronic illnesses--diabetes, chronic hypertension- -than like an acute illness, such as a bacterial infection or a broken bone.[12] This has tremendous implications for how we evaluate treatment effectiveness and treatment outcomes. Viewing addiction as a chronic, relapsing disorder means that a good treatment outcome--and the most reasonable expectation--is a significant decrease in drug use and long periods of abstinence, with only occasional relapses. Thus, a reasonable standard for treatment success is not curing the illness but managing it, as is the case for other chronic illnesses.[13] Conclusion Addiction as a chronic, relapsing disease of the brain is a totally new concept for much of the general public, for many policymakers, and, sadly, for many health care professionals. Many of the implications have been discussed above. But there are others. At the policy level, understanding the importance of drug use and addiction for the health of individuals and of the public affects many of our overall public health strategies. An accurate understanding of the nature of drug abuse and addiction also affects our criminal justice strategies. For example, if we know criminals are also drug addicted, it is no longer reasonable to simply incarcerate them. If they have a brain disease, imprisoning them without treatment will be futile. If they are left untreated, their crime and drug use recidivism rates are frighteningly high. However, if addicted criminals are treated while in prison, both types of recidivism can be reduced dramatically.[14] It is therefore counterproductive not to treat addicts while they are in prison. At an even more general level, understanding addiction as a brain disease also affects how society approaches and deals with addicted individuals. We need to face the fact that even if the condition initially comes about because of a voluntary behavior (drug use), an addict's brain is different from a nonaddict's brain and the addicted individual must be dealt with as if he or she is in a different brain state. We have learned to deal with people in different brain states for schizophrenia and Alzheimer's disease. As recently as the beginning of this century, we were still putting individuals with schizophrenia in prison-like asylums, whereas now we know they require medical treatments. We now need to see the addict as someone whose mind (read: brain) has been altered fundamentally by drugs. Treatment is required to deal with the altered brain function and the concomitant behavioral and social functioning components of the illness. Understanding addiction as a brain disease explains in part why historic policy strategies focusing solely on the social or criminal justice aspects of drug use and addiction have been unsuccessful. They are missing at least half of the issue. If the brain is the core of the problem, attending to it needs to be a core part of the solution. ------------------------------ Notes 1. O'Brien, C.P., and A.T. McLellan, Lancet 347 (1996): 237. 2. Ibid.; McLellan, A.T., et al., in Treating Drug Abusers Effectively, ed. J.A. Egertson et al., Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1997. 3. Booth, R., et al., Drug Alcohol Depend. 42 (1996): 11; Colon, H.M., et al., AIDS Educ. Prev. 7 (1995): 195; Stephens, R.C., et al., in Handbook on Risk of AIDS, ed. B.S. Brown and G.M. Beschner, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1993: 519-556; and Wiebel, W.W., et al., J. Acquired Immune Defic. Syndr. 12 (1996): 282. 4. American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association Press, 1994; and Institute of Medicine, Pathways of Addiction, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1996. 5. Koob, G.F., Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 13 (1992): 177; and Koob, G.F., et al., Semin. Neurosci 6 (1994): 221. 6. Hyman, S.E., Neuron 16 (1996): 901; Nestler, E.J., Neuron 16 (1996): 897; Melega, W.P., et al., Behav. Brain Res. 84 (1997): 259; Ortiz, J., et al., Synapse 21 (1995): 289; Volkow, N.D., et al., Am. J. Psychiat. 147 (1990): 719; Nestler, E.J., et al., Mol. Psychiat. 1 (1996): 190; and Self, D.W., and E.J. Nestler, Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 18 (1995): 463. 7. Nestler, E.J., J. Neurosci. 12 (1992): 2439; Robinson, T.E., and K.C. Berridge, Brain Res. Rev. 18 (1993): 247; Terwilliger, R.Z., et al., Brain Res. 548 (1991): 100; and Koob, G.F., Neuron 16 (1996): 893. See also notes 6 and 7. 8. Leshner, A.I., Hospital Practice: A Special Report, Minneapolis: McGraw-Hill, 1997; Koob, Trends in Pharmacol. Sci.; Koob et al., Semin. Neurosci; Koob, Neuron; Nestler et al., Mol. Psychiat.; and Self and Nestler, Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 9. The state of addiction--both the clinical condition and the brain state--are qualitatively different from the effects of large amounts of drugs. The individual, once addicted, has moved from a state where drug use is voluntary and controlled to one where drug craving, seeking, and use are no longer under the same kind of voluntary control, and these changes reflect changes in brain function. But the exact mechanisms involved are not known. For example, it is not clear whether that change in state reflects a relatively precipitous change in a single mechanism or multiple mechanisms acting in concert, or whether the shift to addiction represents the sum of more gradual neuroadaptations. Moreover, there are individual differences in both the vulnerability to becoming addicted and to the speed of becoming addicted. For some individuals the metaphorical switch moves quickly, whereas for others the changes occur quite gradually (see notes 6, 7, and 8). 10. Baxter, L.B., et al., Sem. Clin. Neuropsychiat. 1 (1996): 32. 11. Childress, A.R., et al., NIDA Res. Monographs 84 (1988): 25; Daley, D.C., and G.A. Marlatt, in Substance Abuse: A Comprehensive Textbook, 3rd ed., ed. J.H. Lowinson et al., Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1997; O'Brien, C.P., Pharmacol. Rev. 27 (1975): 535; O'Brien, C.P., et al., Addictive Behav. 15 (1990): 355; and Grant, S., et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93 (1996): 12040. 12. O'Brien and McLellan, Lancet. 13. See notes 1 and 2. 14. Inciardi, J.A., et al., J. Drug Issues 27 (1997): 261; and Wexler, H.K., and D.S. Lipton, in Drug Treatment and Criminal Justice, ed. J.A. Inciardi, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 1993: 261-278. ------------------------------ WHEN DOES DRUG USE START? HOW DOES IT PROCEED?* Studies indicate that children most often begin to use drugs at about age 12 or 13, and many researchers have observed that although some young teens move from the illicit use of legal substances (such as tobacco and alcohol) to the use of illegal drugs (marijuana is usually the first), the majority do not. This progression from tobacco and alcohol use to later use of illicit drugs has been observed in a number of studies. The precise order of drug use in this progression is variable and seems to parallel social attitudes and norms and the availability of drugs. But it cannot be said that smoking and drinking at young ages cause later drug use. Nor does this sequence imply that the progression is inevitable. It does say that for someone who ever smoked or drank, the risk of moving on to marijuana is 65 times higher than that for a person who never smoked or drank. The risk of moving on to cocaine is 104 times higher for someone who smoked marijuana at least once in his or her lifetime than for a person who never did.** Research suggests that this progression, if it does occur, depends on a number of complex biological, psychological, and social environmental factors, such as early involvement with antisocial, drug-using people. Indeed, all these possibilities could play a part. *Text for this sidebar was recently provided by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. **Figures are from an analysis of 1991-93 data from the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. ------------------------------ Crime's Decline--Why? The following six brief discussions on facets of the decline in crime during the past several years are summaries of papers presented at a conference held in March 1998 by the National Institute of Justice, the Northwestern University School of Law, and The Journal of Law and Criminology. The latter will publish the full-length papers on which the summaries are based in a forthcoming issue (volume 88, number 4). For an overview on crime's decline, please refer to "Highlights of Crime's Decline," which presents charts prepared by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. ------------------------------ Assessing the Recent Ups and Downs in U.S. Homicide Rates by Alfred Blumstein and Richard Rosenfeld* *Alfred Blumstein is the J. Erik Jonsson Professor of Urban Systems and Operations Research, university professor, and former dean of the H. John Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management, Carnegie Mellon University. He is also Director of the National Consortium on Violence Research. Richard Rosenfeld is Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. He is a member of the National Consortium on Violence Research. The U.S. homicide rate has managed some sharp swings over the past two decades. Following a peak in 1980, the rate hit a trough of 7.9 per 100,000 population in 1985. It then climbed 24 percent to a peak rate of 9.8 in 1991. Since then, it has been declining markedly, reaching a rate of 7.4 in 1996. The 1997 rate will fall still further to a level below 7, lower than any annual rate since 1967. The jubilation over this decline is mixed with widespread curiosity over the factors responsible for it. We explore some of those factors, focusing particularly on disaggregation of certain complex trends. A general theme is that the aggregate homicide rate is composed of diverse and often divergent subgroup trends when one disaggregates by considerations such as age of perpetrators, weapons used, and city size. Thus, the overall change in homicide cannot be seen as being driven by a single cause but by various interacting, and sometimes countervailing influences, and particular ones may be more important at different times and in different places. A key influence involves the sharply different trends in homicide by age. All of the increase in the level of homicide in the United States during the growth period of the late 1980s and early 1990s was due to the trends related to younger ages; homicide rates for older adults have been flat or declining for nearly two decades. These changes for the growth period 1985 to 1993 (the year when youth rates peaked) and for the decline period 1993 to 1996 are presented in exhibit 1, which depicts for each age the ratio of the age-specific arrest rates for murder in 1993 and 1996 to the rates that prevailed in 1985. Points above the horizontal line depicting the ratio of 1.0 represent an increase in the rates compared with those in 1985; points below that line represent a decrease. The upper line portrays the ratio reached in the peak year, 1993, and the lower part portrays the degree to which the ratio had declined by 1996. The arrest rates for younger people in 1993 were two to three times the 1985 rates. In contrast, the 1993 rates for people age 30 and older were actually about 20 percent lower than the 1985 rates, and the 1996 rates were about 40 percent lower. The line representing the 1996 to 1985 ratio is below that comparing 1993 to 1985 for all ages, and the greatest decline occurred for those in their teenage years. But it is also important to note that the teenager rates are still 60-80 percent above the 1985 rates (which had prevailed since 1970), and so there is still considerable room for improvement to bring them back down to the 1985 levels. Thus, there was a steady decline in the homicide rates for older people, whereas the younger group showed a very different pattern: a rapid rise followed by a rapid decline. This difference in patterns suggests that different factors are driving the rates in the two groups. The evident importance of the rise in homicides by young offenders had spurred warnings of a demographic crime disaster that would beset the Nation during the 1990s as a result of the growth in the size of the youthful age cohorts. However, that growth (about 1 percent per year) is minor in the face of much larger alterations in the age-specific homicide rates, which were up as much as 10-20 percent in the late 1980s and down similarly in the 1990s. Clearly, the factors associated with changes in the age-specific rates must be at the center of explanations of the recent swings in the aggregate homicide rate or forecasts of trends into the next century. Perhaps the single most important factor is the changing role of weaponry in young people's hands. During the last decade, the weapons involved in settling young people's disputes have shifted dramatically from fists or knives to handguns, which are much more lethal. The growth in homicides by young people, which accounted for the entire growth in homicides in the post-1985 period, was all due to handguns. And the largest contribution to the decline has also come from the reduction in use of handguns by young people. The downturn in handgun homicides occurred earlier and has been sharper in the largest cities. This is shown in exhibit 2, which illustrates both the importance of handgun homicides and the prominent role of the large cities in national homicide trends during the rise from 1986 through 1991 and during the decline in 1994 and 1995. The number of handgun homicides in the largest cities nearly doubled between 1985 and 1991. The smaller cities experienced a comparable percentage rise, but it started later, in about 1988. The lag between the large and small cities could be associated with crack markets, which generally emerged first in the largest cities and diffused to smaller cities at a later time. We also note that the decline in the largest cities is quite sharp after the flat 1991-1993 peak. To the extent that both the homicide increase and decline in the largest cities are associated with corresponding changes in crack markets, homicide rates in the smaller cities should begin to drop after the decline started in the largest cities. Exhibit 2 indicates that lag, with the decline in the smaller cities just starting in 1994 and 1995. Explanations of recent homicide trends that emphasize the role of changes in drug markets are promising for several reasons. First, they are causally symmetrical: They account for both the increase and the decline in violence. Rates of serious violence, including homicide, went up during the rise of the crack epidemic and have been dropping during the decline. As the crack epidemic spread in the mid- to late 1980s, so did the danger around inner-city drug markets, driving up the incentive for more youths to arm themselves in an increasingly threatening environment and leading to a general diffusion of guns among young people. As the crack epidemic began to abate in the early 1990s and as police became more aggressive about confiscating youths' guns, firearms violence fell as well, although some lag should be expected due to the self-sustaining quality of the arms race. The hypothesis regarding the diffusion of firearms, then, suggests an epidemic-like process, in both the increase and the subsidence of handgun homicide. Some of the recent decline in homicide rates also appears to be related to the economic expansion of the past 6 years, which has resulted in employment opportunities for racial minorities, teenagers, and high school dropouts--groups that participated disproportionately in the rise of crack markets and criminal violence during the growth period. The conventional view of the connection between employment and crime portrays individuals, especially teenagers and youths, as turning to criminal activity when their legitimate employment opportunities are restricted. The evidence suggests that the relationship also operates in the other direction: Young people turn to legitimate jobs in response to dwindling opportunities and rewards for illegitimate work. With the decline of employment in crack markets in large cities in recent years, the availability of legitimate employment for even low-skilled teenagers provided a reasonable substitute for the diminished opportunities from drug selling. That effect is inherently short run, however, largely because of the cyclical nature of legitimate employment opportunities. Purely cyclical forces as a means of preventing youth crime and violence cannot be relied on; and neither can their propitious interaction with changes in illegitimate income opportunities. Long-term reductions in youth violence will require education and training programs that capitalize on youths' participation in the labor market during a period of expansion to prepare them with the work habits, discipline, and skills that they will need as adults and that will persist through periods of economic decline. Nor can a massive increase in incarceration be seen as an effective approach to curbing youth violence. A sizable component of the homicide decline can be attributed to incapacitation effects associated with the doubling of the incarceration rate since 1985, but that effect is restricted largely to older adults. Juveniles and youths are rarely candidates for imprisonment, largely because few have yet had the opportunity to accumulate a sufficiently extensive criminal history to identify the most serious career criminals who warrant long-term incarceration. Incapacitation is by no means the only factor affecting the decline in homicide by older people; for example, there has been a two-decade reduction in intimate-partner homicide, which probably has little to do with incapacitation. No one can be certain when the next upturn in homicide will occur, but the present reductions cannot continue indefinitely. They offer researchers and practitioners an important opportunity to experiment with innovative antiviolence initiatives that are directly responsive to the factors implicated in the recent homicide trends. NIJ's Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program can help identify the resurgence of active drug markets. Partnerships between communities and the police can carry out targeted efforts to confiscate firearms from young people to contain the contagious diffusion of firearms violence that may emanate from those drug markets or ongoing gang disputes. Local initiatives that seek to reduce juveniles' access to firearms are likely to be more effective in addressing the complex connections between illicit drug markets and violence than simply cracking down on the participants through longer prison sentences. Incarceration will remain an important part of any antiviolence strategy, but it must be supplemented with community-based employment, education, and enforcement policies that will help sustain the momentum of the current decline. ------------------------------ Declining Homicide in New York City: A Tale of Two Trends by Jeffrey Fagan, Franklin E. Zimring, and June Kim* *Jeffrey Fagan is Director of the Center for Violence Research and Prevention in the Joseph L. Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University. Franklin E. Zimring is William G. Simon Professor of Law and Director of the Earl Warren Legal Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law. June Kim is a research assistant at the Earl Warren Legal Institute. New York City's homicide decline has captured national attention. Since 1991, the city's homicide rate fell 52 percent in 5 years, the largest homicide decline in its post-World War II history. The number of lives involved is even more impressive, with more than 1,100 fewer homicide victims in 1996 than in 1992. This reduction in homicide far exceeded the total number of homicides the city experienced each year in the 1950s and early 1960s. In the national context, the decline in homicide in New York, the Nation's largest city, is a higher percentage drop than 12 of the Nation's 15 largest cities have experienced in any 5-year span in the postwar period. Declines of this size may not be unprecedented, but they are not common either. The large difference between the 1996 homicide rate in New York City and its homicide rate in the previous 15 years makes a strong case against statistical regression[1] as a major explanation for the 5-year decline. That is, the decline is large by historical standards. However, none of this goes directly to the question of what may have caused the New York City drop. The most significant change in New York City homicides occurred between gunshot deaths and all others. The patterns for gun and nongun killings are sharply different. Exhibit 1 shows the pattern by weapon using the 675 nongun killings and the 834 gun killings in 1985 as a base of 100 to track trends over time. Nongun killings drift downward from the beginning.[2] By 1992, nongun deaths had dropped by 35 percent, and this trend continues through to 1996. Gun deaths, meanwhile, double between 1985 and 1991 and do not fall back to the 1985 level until 1995. What the gun trends obscure is the steadiest long-term trend in New York City--a downward movement in homicides by all means other than guns that begins after 1986 and gathers momentum steadily throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s. By 1992, 70 percent of the total decline in nongun killings in the entire 1985-1996 period had already occurred. The declines after 1992 in nongun killings appear to have been a continuation of the 8 years of previous decreases. An objection might be raised that the major finding of this study--the two separate trends in nongun and gun homicides--is an artificial division of a unitary trend in violence over the period. The patterns for gun assaults and gun robberies mirror the pattern for gun homicides. Many forms of interpersonal violence were declining in New York by the late 1980s. The identification of two separate types of homicide with two discrete time trends is a major complication to theories that wish to identify discrete causes of reduced violence and crime in New York City. The more difficult question is whether changes in demography, concomitant social behaviors such as drug selling, or the expansion in police resources and strategies were major causes for the decline in New York City's gun homicide. There is no rigorous method available to parse causal responsibility between law enforcement, social trends, and regression for the city's gun homicide record. All contributed to the decline; all were probably significant. These colliding forces produced a decline of unprecedented proportions that continued through 1996 and beyond. Related to the problem of apportioning responsibility among regression, demography, and policing for the decline in gun homicide, a substantial variety of changes in policing are competing to claim credit for positive trends in New York's gun homicide prevalence: "broken windows" aggressive enforcement, gun interventions, general increases in police enforcement resources, strategic targeting of police efforts through computer mapping, and precinct-level management accountability for crime trends. Was the police share in this happy story graffiti control, squeegee control, gun control, or simply more police? The pattern of declines in gun crimes is much more consistent with gun-oriented policing than with indiscriminate quality-of-life interventions as a cause of decline. The nongun declines are unlikely to be consequences of policing changes or any other shift that took place in the 1990s. If the origins of the nongun decline were better understood, perhaps we could be more confident about the explanations of the later gun homicide decline. But with this major reduction in nongun homicide unexplained, there is no good reason to guess about the specific causes of the decline in gun killings. The trend in nongun homicide for more than a decade remains a pleasant mystery that shrouds the whole explanation of variations in New York City homicide in fog. Even the best statistical data on incidence will not yield easy answers on causation. ------------------------------ Notes 1. "Statistical regression" occurs when, for example, a trend line returns to its average from its peak and does so through the normal course of events--in contrast to having been "caused" to do so. 2. We have combined into one nongun homicide incident the 86 deaths that resulted from a single arson in 1990. ------------------------------ Alcohol and Homicide in the United States, 1934- 1995, or One Reason Why U.S. Rates of Violence May Be Going Down by Robert Nash Parker* *Robert Nash Parker is Professor of Sociology and Director of the Presley Center for Crime and Justice Studies, University of California, Riverside. A significant set of research findings has shown that alcohol and homicide are related in the United States. Many researchers have noted the recent and significant downturn in homicide and violence in general--could declining alcohol consumption play some part in this decline in rates of violence? Exhibit 1 shows this relationship over the 62 years since repeal of Prohibition. These data show that for most of the 62-year period, there has been a remarkable correspondence in both ups and downs of alcohol consumption and homicide rates, suggestive of a connection between these two factors that may have been overlooked in earlier research. Further, changes in the consumption rate are followed by same-direction changes in the homicide rate. Why would there be a connection between alcohol consumption and violence? Two general approaches have been suggested to explain the relationship, one involving the impact of alcohol on those who consume it, the other concerned with the impact of alcohol availability on neighborhoods and communities. Alcohol has well-established physiological, psychological, and sociological effects on those who consume it, but for the most part alcohol is used in social interactions without violence. However, in some cases social practices that limit violence can occasionally be overcome in a selective disinhibition, depending on the situation and the people involved; this happens infrequently, but often enough to influence the rate of homicide and other types of violence. At the community or neighborhood level, locations with large concentrations of alcohol outlets (e.g., an intersection with two bars and three liquor stores) are often hot spots of crime, attracting all kinds of people for a wide variety of leisure activities--many of which, like drug use and gang activity, are illegal or are likely to result in illegal activities. The only reason these illegal activities occur in these spots is that the concentration of alcohol outlets creates an atmosphere of "time out," anything goes, the usual rules do not apply here. In addition, people who live in and around higher concentrations of outlets drink more alcohol on average. Because of both higher alcohol consumption and its effects on social interaction and the context that greater availability of alcohol creates in neighborhoods, alcohol is linked to the rates of violence and homicide. Research has shown this link, holding other factors associated with violence constant, among individuals, among neighborhoods, among cities, and among States. The research reported here tested this idea at the national level (exhibit 1). Holding poverty, income, and the proportion of males ages 15-24 constant, homicide rates for both whites and nonwhites were found to be related to alcohol consumption over this 62-year period. Further, the results show that in each case alcohol consumption led the homicide rate, further underscoring the idea that declining alcohol consumption has played a role in the decline in homicide and other types of violence in the United States. What lessons can communities and law enforcement take from this research? Alcohol is a regulated commodity in our society, and because of that we may be able to make policies and develop practices that result in fewer homicides and other violent incidents in our communities. Purchase enforcement against underage drinking is one potentially effective area in which a small investment in extra enforcement may result in a significant drop in youth violence. In addition, cities might wish to consider following the lead of Atlanta, Georgia, which recently passed regulations making it illegal to have two alcohol outlets closer than 1,000 feet from each other. Planning and zoning rules already in existence in most communities can help to regulate the density of alcohol outlets and their placement in neighborhoods. Higher taxation on alcohol might be another way that consumption can be curtailed, resulting in less violence. ------------------------------ The Improbable Transformation of Inner-City Neighborhoods: Crime, Violence, Drugs, and Youths in the 1990s by Richard Curtis* *Richard Curtis is Associate Professor of Anthropology, John Jay College of Criminal Justice. At the peak of the crack epidemic in many American cities--when people seemed ready to write off inner cities as hopelessly lost--a remarkable transformation began to take place. In a global economy where the gap between the haves and have-nots continued to increase at an alarming rate, inner-city neighborhoods defied nearly all expectations and, with minimal outside intervention, mounted an improbable comeback.[1] The most visible and trumpeted manifestation of this rebirth was a plummeting crime rate that, in the latter half of the 1990s, fell to lows not seen in more than 30 years.[2] This paper, based on 10 years (1987-1997) of ethnographic fieldwork spanning nine different research projects,[3] focuses on two Brooklyn, New York, neighborhoods (Bushwick and Williamsburg) and examines local-level processes that contributed to their remarkable transformation in the 1990s. Neighborhoods and communities are important to examine because they are, in addition to family contexts, where people learn to be human. They form the crucible where orientations, outlooks, behaviors, and lifestyles are forged.[4] To understand neighborhood variation, behavior must be situated in a community setting that renders it intelligible. By examining the lives of different groups of young people--a household sample, gang members, and drug dealers--this research demonstrates that the urge to invest explanatory power in structural (e.g., demographic, economic) or institutional (e.g., police, courts) factors with regard to the turnaround witnessed in inner-city neighborhoods, especially plummeting crime rates, is tempered by a close examination of the lives of people who live there, the very people who have agency and must ultimately decide whether or not to use a drug, pick a fight, or commit a crime. In the early 1990s, much evidence seemed to suggest that the dominant models of urban decay and worsening youth violence were correct. Many youths had grown up in dysfunctional, multiproblem families, without positive role models, and left unchecked by the informal controls that had defined and protected previous generations. The lack of order and structure worsened as youths turned into adolescents and neighborhood violence seemed to be spiraling out of control. Where there was typically a diffusion of responsibility for social control--shifting away from parents and onto societal institutions, especially schools-- these societal checks had been largely missing, and young adults had to forge their own solutions to problems. But by the mid-1990s, far from becoming "superpredators" as an outcome of this exposure, many youths began to withdraw from social life, afraid of lingering in public spaces for fear of violence. The impact of drug misuse by parents and/or older siblings on family life was also deeply felt by many young residents, often narrowing the parameters of their own drug use, and they made a conscious attempt to avoid similar fates. Not all youths were scared into avoiding public spaces and hiding behind closed doors, and as an unintended consequence of the war on drugs, gang life of a type never encountered before arose among a population of convicted drug distributors and users. Following massive police initiatives in the early 1990s in which hundreds of neighborhood youths were jailed, sizable chapters of the Latin Kings and ¥etas formed and asserted their control over some blocks, especially those where there had been large street-level drug markets and unchecked violence. Predominantly of Puerto Rican descent, these gang members reported that they had experienced a genuine rebirth, and in attempting to reconstitute their lives, their new goal was to "uplift the Latino community." The corporate-style drug businesses that had dominated the neighborhoods also responded to policing initiatives. Many disbanded during this period, while the remainder downsized and moved off the street. The new cadre of distributors who were soon challenging them were not simply smaller, more discreet versions of the drug supermarket vendors, they were qualitatively different. Because transactions were dependent on familiarity and trust between participants, undercover police were less able to make drug buys and were forced into tedious surveillance of suspected street-level drug markets. The reconfiguration of drug markets in the mid-1990s appreciably reduced the level of neighborhood violence. As distribution retired indoors, turf battles were eliminated, and because organizers of drug businesses hired a few trusted friends rather than easily replaceable workers, there was less conflict between them. Distributors were robbed by users less frequently because they were more protected selling indoors to known customers. The residents of inner-city neighborhoods did not share equally in the fruits of the economic revitalization of the 1990s that created new (although less secure and rewarding) jobs and low unemployment and led to an optimism not seen since the post-World War II economy of the 1950s. In spite of their marginalized status and bleak prospects, many inner-city residents not only forestalled their expected slide into economic ruin and social disintegration, they confounded the schools of economic, cultural, and genetic determinism and showed a new vitality, graphically illustrated by precipitous drops in crime and violence. In altering their own lives, they shattered the myth that they were powerless against a "criminogenic" environment that was said to mass-produce superpredators and threw into question the canon that violence must beget violence. ------------------------------ Notes 1. Johnson, K., "Washington Steps Back, and Cities Recover," New York Times, November 16, 1997, 7. 2. Butterfield, F., "Numbers of Victims of Crime Fell Again in '96, Study Says: Lowest Level Since Reports Began in 1973," New York Times, November 16, 1997; and Krauss, C., "New York Crime Rate Plummets to Levels Not Seen in 30 Years," New York Times, December 20, 1996, A1. 3. The nine projects are: "Community AIDS Prevention Outreach Demonstration" (National Institute on Drug Abuse [NIDA] #DA06723), "The Community Effects of Street-Level Narcotics Enforcement: A Study of the New York City Police Department's Tactical Narcotics Teams" (National Institute of Justice), "The Ecology of Crime and Drug Use in American Cities: Social Structure and Neighborhood Dynamics" (Social Science Research Council), "Social Factors and HIV Risk" (NIDA #DA06723), "HIV Risk Among Youth" (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases #A134723), "Latin Kings and Gang Violence" (Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation), "The Natural History of Crack Distribution" (NIDA #DA05126-05), "Drug Use and HIV Risk Among Youth" (NIDA #DA10411), and "Heroin in the 21st Century" (NIDA #DA10105-02). 4. Arensberg, C., and S.T. Kimball, Culture and Community, Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1965; and Sullivan, M., Getting Paid: Youth Crime and Work in the Inner City, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989. ------------------------------ The Role of Institutions in Explaining American Crime Trends by Gary LaFree* *Gary LaFree is Professor of Sociology and Director of the Institute for Social Research, University of New Mexico. From the end of World War II until 1991, total street crime rates in the United States increased more than eightfold.[1] Much of the explosion took place during scarcely more than a decade, beginning in the early 1960s. From 1963 to 1974 alone, murder and burglary rates more than doubled and robbery rates more than tripled. In contrast, declines in street crime rates that began in the early 1990s are already the most important crime "bust" of the past 50 years. The 1990s have witnessed the greatest recorded percentage drop of the post-World War II period for rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and motor vehicle theft and the second greatest recorded drop in murder, burglary, and larceny rates (the largest drop occurred in the 1980s). The pace and timing of these trends can tell us much about crime and its control. Explanations of crime based on biological impulses, psychological drives, or slow-moving social indicators are ill-suited to explaining the speed of these crime changes. Moreover, the fact that all types of street crime were at low levels in the 1940s and 1950s, skyrocketed in the 1960s and 1970s, and have finally leveled off in the 1980s and 1990s suggests that these abrupt changes in crime are historically contingent. Social institutions--mutually shared and reinforced patterns of norms, rules, and laws-- provide a promising explanation for postwar American crime trends.[2] They are capable of changing rapidly, and few would deny that the strength of social institutions has fluctuated greatly during the past half century. The low-crime decades of the 1940s and 1950s must be regarded as a period of extremely strong social institutions in the United States. Following World War II, trust in political, economic, and family institutions were all at record highs. But major challenges to traditional American institutions multiplied in the 1960s and 1970s. Beginning with the civil rights movement and continuing with protests against the Vietnam war, public trust in political institutions plummeted. Economic inequality, inflation, the decline of labor unions, and an increasingly global economy fundamentally challenged confidence in economic institutions. And the traditional family of the 1950s, with husband working outside the home and wife serving as household manager, was severely weakened (see exhibit 1). American society fought back against the widening institutional crisis of the 1960s by investing heavily in newer institutions, especially criminal justice, education, and welfare. Although the link between these three institutions and crime trends varies greatly, there is evidence that all three put downward pressure on crime rates. Evidence is strongest for a connection between declining crime rates in the 1990s and increased support for criminal justice institutions, the strong recent performance of economic institutions, and the growing importance of educational institutions. Although levels of trust in political institutions are far lower than they were in the 1950s, there are currently no political movements in the United States with anything close to the level of intensity or commitment achieved by the collective social actions of the 1960s and 1970s. Similarly, while there are few signs that family institutions are returning to their 1950s form, there are clear indications of growing tolerance for nontraditional family arrangements. Recent changes in welfare support may prove to be consequential, but their effects on crime rates can reasonably be expected to occur later, when new program limitations are actually encountered. ------------------------------ Notes 1. Based on annual reports for seven index crimes (murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft) from the Uniform Crime Reports, Federal Bureau of Investigation. 2. See LaFree, Gary, Losing Legitimacy: Street Crime and the Decline of Social Institutions in America, Boulder, CO: Westview, 1998. ------------------------------ Asymmetrical Causation and Criminal Desistance by Christopher Uggen and Irving Piliavin* *Christopher Uggen is Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Minnesota. Irving Piliavin is Emeritus Professor of Social Work/Sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. More than 400,000 U.S. prisoners will reenter civil society in 1998 alone. Some will resume offending and others will desist from crime. We argue that greater research attention to the desistance process will advance both policy and science. For policy, the State has a more legitimate and broader license to intervene among convicted offenders than among youths in prevention programs. For science, desistance research aids in isolating the causal effects of manipulable treatments. We support this argument with a statistical model of causation and make three propositions contrasting desistance research with etiological studies: (1) that the causes of desistance likely differ from the initial causes of crime, (2) that the causes of desistance will be easier to identify than the initial causes of crime, and (3) that scientific knowledge of the causes of desistance better translates into policy than scientific knowledge of the initial causes of crime. Although etiological studies may yield elegant tests of theory, they often suggest unworkable policy interventions. The primary problem is one of isolating the effects of factors that cannot be manipulated by the researcher. First, it is difficult, if not impossible, to account for how individuals are selected into initial levels of the factors thought to cause crime. Second, even when such causes can be identified, they rarely can be effectively manipulated. For example, neither the researcher nor the State has the ethical or constitutional license to alter the personality, parents, or peers of predelinquent or at-risk youths who have yet to violate the law. Third, the process generating crime does not appear to be symmetrical or reversible. That is, factors causing crime in childhood are likely to differ from factors causing crime in later life, and, therefore, manipulation of the childhood factors is unlikely to reduce offending in adulthood. Desistance analysis, in contrast, seeks to intervene in the lives of offenders and to trace the effects of these interventions on their criminal conduct. Desistance research therefore works in concert with time rather than against it. Second, desistance researchers have a more legitimate and expansive license to intervene: they can provide or deny truly exogenous treatments, such as work, supervision, or transitional assistance. Third, desistance programs have greater target efficiency, concentrating resources on those likely to benefit from them. Studies of desistance from crime, substance use, welfare receipt, and other phenomena may therefore prove a useful policy guide. Since manipulating the conditions that caused a phenomenon is unlikely to curb that phenomenon, theories of initial causation must also be modified to explain desistance. Devising theoretically informed interventions and ensuring external validity or generalizability are among the challenges to future desistance analysis.[1] ------------------------------ Note 1. The paper also discusses early desistance models, recent advances in developmental and life-course conceptions of crime, the debate over criminal careers and the age-crime curve, and suggestions for potentially promising new directions in experimental and cross-national desistance research. ------------------------------ The IDENT System: Putting "Structure to the Chaos of the Border" by Thomas V. Brady* *Thomas V. Brady is a Washington, D.C.-based writer and editor specializing in criminal and civil justice matters. One of the objectives of the National Institute of Justice's Office of Science and Technology (OS&T) is to support and facilitate adaptation of certain U.S. Department of Defense technologies to criminal justice uses. This article indicates the relevance and value to criminal justice agencies of such adaptations, although OS&T was not involved in the particular technology described below. The speed with which a technology can ricochet from one purpose to another with new consequences is remarkable. In 1992, the U.S. Navy conceived of a technology to help process a flood of Haitian refugees. In 1994, the Border Patrol adapted it, and the technology became pivotal in efforts to stem the tide of illegal immigration along the Nation's westernmost border. (See "IDENT's Origins.") One consequence: A computer in Washington, D.C., stores the prints of the two index fingers and a digital photo of the face of more than 2 million apprehended illegal aliens.[1] The international border between San Diego, California, and Tijuana, Mexico, has had conflicting distinctions. The San Ysidro Port of Entry, which serves the two cities, is this Nation's busiest legal crossing point. But the adjoining border area also has been by far the Nation's busiest illegal crossing zone. Well into the 1990s, the first 14 miles of U.S.-Mexican border east of the Pacific Ocean accounted for nearly half of all illegal immigration along the 2,000-mile border. Almost 25 percent of all apprehensions of illegal entrants along the entire border took place in a 5-mile stretch from Imperial Beach at the ocean to the San Ysidro entry point. "For decades, this area was the preferred corridor for illegal immigration because of the heavily populated neighborhoods north and south of the border and the easy access to buses, trains, and other transportation to the rest of the United States."[2] In 1997, the local newspaper called the border "lawless, dark, and violent."[3] By its own accounting, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) described the situation as out of control: "For too long, the Government stood by as illegal immigration swelled. There was an understaffed and overwhelmed corps of agents and port inspectors, inadequate infrastructure and equipment, and no coherent strategy to control illegal immigration in the San Diego area."[4] A sense of futility marked control efforts. Every year, Border Patrol agents in the San Diego area caught hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants crossing the border and dutifully recorded the names the immigrants gave them on 3" x 5" index cards that went into shoe boxes and were rarely retrieved. Operation Gatekeeper In the fall of 1994, the Clinton administration decided that the border area had to be reclaimed, starting at Imperial Beach and eventually moving eastward along the length of the California-Mexico border. In October 1994, Attorney General Janet Reno launched Operation Gatekeeper to achieve this purpose. Operation Gatekeeper is a continuing Federal effort to reverse and deter the tide of illegal entry. For example, in 4 years, Gatekeeper has more than doubled the number of Border Patrol agents in the San Diego sector, from 980 to 2,240. To lower bureaucratic hurdles and underscore the importance of Gatekeeper, in 1995 Attorney General Reno named Alan D. Bersin, then the U.S. Attorney for San Diego, as her "border czar" responsible for coordinating all Justice Department agencies on the border.[5] Finally, INS turned loose the following cornucopia of technology and equipment for the Border Patrol, all of which has helped to capture and deter illegal entrants. --Underground sensors detecting the movements of illegal immigrants almost tripled to more than 1,200. A system allowing the computerized response of agents to sensor hits was installed. --Infrared scopes removing the cover of darkness for illegal entrants almost quadrupled to 45. --Reinforced fencing to deter illegal crossings doubled in length to 38 miles. INS continues to build a triple fence along a crucial 14-mile section of the border. --Almost 5 miles of newly installed high-intensity lighting and 98 portable lighting platforms illuminate the most frequently trafficked border areas. --The number of aircraft for border surveillance and support of agents went from 6 to 11. --The number of patrol vehicles--many of them sturdy sport utility vehicles--increased from 700 to almost 2,000. The IDENT system The most important technology for Gatekeeper, however, has been IDENT, an automated identification system that INS first installed at Border Patrol stations in the San Diego area. IDENT captures a digital print from the index finger of each hand and a digital photograph of each illegal entrant over 14 who is caught by Border Patrol agents or apprehended by INS agents at ports of entry. IDENT data from the field are stored in a computer in Washington, D.C. IDENT was "the best tool ever delivered to us period," according to Johnny Williams, former Border Patrol chief for the San Diego region. IDENT "really put structure to the chaos of the border."[6] Bersin similarly cites IDENT's crucial importance.[7] IDENT-generated information helped Bersin's office establish a new strategy for prosecuting offenders under immigration law.8 "We knew that the aliens who were coming in knew that we were so busy with the everyday job that they could be John in the morning and Bill at night and we would never be the wiser" unless someone with Border Patrol recognized them, said Williams, who is now the western regional director for INS. "We had to take this away--we had to be able to recognize and find out who these people are so we know how to raise the consequences. Thus, IDENT." Before IDENT, the names of apprehended illegal entrants ended up on the 3" x 5" index cards. With IDENT, Border Patrol agents established a digitally based identity for each apprehended alien and started making distinctions among those who were new entrants, recidivist entrants, and convicted felons on special lookout lists. "For the first time, we could see who was really infiltrating our border," Williams said, whether it was "1 person coming in 20 times or 20 persons coming in at once." IDENT also gave the Border Patrol the capacity to trace recidivist entrants as they tried new entry areas to the east when deterrence pressure increased starting at Imperial Beach. It "gave managers a way to know where to be next," said Williams. Another benefit of IDENT was its capability to help agents identify "coyotes," the often predatory alien smugglers who operate along the border. For example, by linking one frequently captured entrant to the identities of more than 400 other entrants who were caught one or a few times, the system helped to identify the frequent entrant as a coyote. IDENT was used to build the Border Patrol's 10 most wanted list of coyotes, according to Williams. Yet another benefit of IDENT was that it provided the data for the Border Patrol to devise an efficient transportation system for returning illegal entrants across the border. Exhibit 1 shows how the Border Patrol collected and sorted IDENT-generated data for all its installations along the California-Mexico border for 1 year starting March 1, 1997. The system is able to distinguish among all enrollees, recidivists, and felons on special lookout lists. Checkpoints are located along major interstate highways well into California. IDENT and a new prosecutorial strategy IDENT gave Bersin's office "an ability to identify with certainty those illegal entrants who pose the greatest threat to our community. We have used this technology to forge a new prosecutorial strategy. Our prosecution guidelines target only those who commit aggravated felonies or whose criminal history is substantial. Economic migrants, who formed the bulk of our prior misdemeanor prosecutions, are returned to their homeland."[9] Thus, alien smuggling cases initiated by Bersin's office rose from 25 in 1994 to 75 in 1995, 233 in 1996, and 329 in 1997. Similarly, prosecution of criminal aliens went from 240 in 1994 to 1,334 in 1995, 1,297 in 1996, and 1,606 in 1997.[10] IDENT also serves INS agents at ports of entry in the San Diego area. A total of 22 lanes of northward traffic approach the San Ysidro entry point, where IDENT helps to identify two categories of illegal entrants. One category is made up of impostors who, bearing fraudulent documents, falsely claim to be U.S. citizens. The other category is that of criminal aliens. Every year, the California prison system releases more than 8,000 criminal aliens across the border into Mexico, and many of them seek to reenter the United States through San Ysidro. Persons thought to be in either category are checked through the IDENT system.[11] Gatekeeper's achievements Four years into Operation Gatekeeper, crime rates along the border near the Pacific have decreased significantly.[12] Overall declining apprehension figures for illegal entrants in the Border Patrol's San Diego sector further indicate Gatekeeper's accomplishments. A total of 531,000 illegal immigrants were caught in 1993, 450,000 in 1994, 524,000 in 1995, 463,000 in 1996, and 283,000 in 1997. INS officials say the apprehension rate to date for 1998 is running about 30 percent less than the rate for 1997. Another indicator of Gatekeeper's success is the growing apprehension rate in the Border Patrol's El Centro sector along the easternmost California-Mexico border. As prospective illegal immigrants are deterred from entering the United States in the immediate San Diego area, they seek to cross in rugged mountain and desert areas to the east. Thus, the El Centro sector's apprehension rate has increased in each of the past 4 years, from 27,000 in 1994 to 37,000 in 1995, 66,000 in 1996, and 104,000 in 1997. IDENT's growth In all of Gatekeeper's achievements, the IDENT system has played a valuable part. In fact, the IDENT experiment in the San Diego area has been such a success for INS that about 500 IDENT systems have been installed at Border Patrol stations and ports of entry along the entire swath of the Nation's southern border, from Imperial Beach to Miami. INS currently is starting to place IDENT systems at its installations on the U.S.-Canada border. Further, the Washington, D.C., database of fingerprints and photos of more than 2 million illegal entrants is expanding rapidly. ------------------------------ Notes 1. Information provided by INS's Washington, D.C., staff. 2. U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Operation Gatekeeper: Three Years of Results, Washington, DC: U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, October 1997. 3. Caldwell, Robert J., "Grading Gatekeeper: Tougher Border Enforcement Shows Promise But Remains Incomplete," The San Diego Union-Tribune, August 10, 1997. 4. U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Operation Gatekeeper: Three Years of Results. 5. Bersin's formal title was Special Representative on Southwest Border Issues. In July 1998, he left his post as U.S. Attorney to become San Diego's superintendent of schools. 6. Interview with Johnny Williams, March 27, 1998. 7. Interview with Alan D. Bersin, March 25, 1998. 8. United States Attorney, Southern District of California, Annual Report 1995, San Diego: United States Attorney for the Southern District of California. 9. Ibid. 10. Data supplied by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of California, San Diego. 11. Interview with Virginia Black, an INS attorney assigned to Bersin's office, March 26, 1998. 12. Data supplied by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of California, San Diego. ------------------------------ IDENT's Origins The IDENT system is an adaptation of a system originally conceived by the U.S. Navy as a way of processing Haitian refugees who were arriving in great number at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in 1992. The U.S. Atlantic Command ordered development of what it called the Deployable Mass-Population Identification & Tracking System (DMPITS) in late 1992. The original DMPITS with fingerprinting capability was completed in February 1993. The capability to produce photo identification cards was added in early 1994.[1] "From the Navy's point of view, the principal functions of the DMPITS are support of the refugee interview and medical examination process, and the management, reporting, and communications of the large amount of resultant information."[2] On July 1, 1994, the Navy began using DMPITS to process Haitians at Guantanamo. Six weeks later, the Immigration and Naturalization Service ordered an adaptation of DMPITS to its own specifications in anticipation of an influx of Cuban refugees. It christened its version of the system IDENT and began installing the system at Border Patrol stations in support of Operation Gatekeeper. Meanwhile, the U.S. Army ordered two DMPITSs for a safe-haven camp for Cuban refugees in Panama.[3] Following are technical details of DMPITS: The DMPITS is based on high-performance computer workstations, configured in a local area network architecture, running specially designed software. The DMPITS application is a complex UNIX-based software system. The application includes the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS). All system hardware devices are standard commercial components, including RF-ID scanners for inputting ID numbers from identity cards or bracelets, single-finger scanners for fingerprint input, and video cameras for capture of live photographic images. The modular LAN-based workstation architecture of the DMPITS provides parallel processing for enrollment, ID and database maintenance, and provides flexible configuration options to handle the load requirements of a range of applications. DMPITS utilizes current technology: a Hewlett-Packard 715 UNIX workstation with 2-gigabyte internal hard drive; a 19-inch color monitor, keyboard, and mouse; an Identix TY-555 Touchview Fingerprint Scanner, and a Panasonic CCD color video camera. The system server configuration includes an HP-735 workstation with 80M [megabytes] of RAM and 525-GB [gigabyte] external hard drive, a 9.6-KBPS [kilobytes per second] analog communications modem, a flatbed scanner, an HP Laserjet printer with 6M [megabytes] of memory, and a V42 modem.[4] ------------------------------ Notes 1. Unpublished Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) research memo, April 30, 1998. 2. From a case study prepared by the system vendor, FingerPrint USA, and available on its Web site (www.fpusa.com). 3. Unpublished ONI research memo, April 30, 1998. 4. Ibid. ------------------------------ Reducing Crime by Harnessing International Best Practice by Irvin Waller and Brandon C. Welsh* *Irvin Waller, Ph.D., is the Director General of the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Brandon C. Welsh is a consultant to the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime and a Ph.D. candidate at the Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom. A great deal is now known about what works to prevent crime. Landmark reviews of scientific evidence by Sherman and his colleagues for the National Institute of Justice[1] and by Loeber and Farrington for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention[2] demonstrate that a great deal does indeed work and much more is promising. Since 1994, the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime (ICPC),[3] based in Montreal, Canada, has been harnessing this U.S.-based knowledge and the evidence on what works from other countries to help solve local crime problems. Making crime prevention knowledge available and tailoring preventive actions to local conditions in cities and countries is a powerful tool in the effort to fight crime. Failure to use the best know-how to reduce crime slows human and economic development, particularly in fast-growing cities, which are the economic motors of most countries. ICPC assists cities and countries in reducing delinquency, violence, and insecurity by investing in people and communities in more affordable and sustainable ways. As the central pillar of its efforts to harness crime prevention best practice globally, ICPC supports a Best Practice Bureau to systematically identify, compile, and disseminate information on successful crime prevention practice. It has designed a best practice program to encourage concrete implementation and has launched its "Towards the Use of Best Practice World Wide" Internet site and report.[4] As well, the Centre operates a comparative crime prevention research program to assess the successes, benefits, and directions of crime prevention cross-nationally. This article summarizes the work program of ICPC to assist cities and countries in reducing delinquency, violence, and insecurity. It reports on the Centre's approach to the prevention of crime, describes a number of proven and promising crime prevention practices around the world, and presents some of the evidence on the comparative economic advantages of investing in crime prevention. Crime prevention as a process Successful crime prevention at the community level begins with a rigorous planning model--a process. It is characterized by a systematic analysis of the crime problem and the conditions that generate it, a review of the services and activities in place to tackle those conditions and ways to improve them, rigorous implementation of the program, and evaluation of the impact of the program on crime and its implementation so that improvements can be made. We view prevention activities that adhere to this model as "problem-solving partnerships"--measures developed as a result of a careful effort to identify causal factors while mobilizing the agencies able to influence those factors. There is a need for this planning model to include efforts to forecast developments in crime, policing, and the social demography in which these occur. It is also important that these exercises are themselves collaborative so that the agencies that can influence the undesirable trends are involved from the beginning of the process. Many models exist to help guide these efforts, and some are tailored to specific circumstances, such as high-crime neighborhoods. The European Forum for Urban Security, created by the Council of Europe in 1987 to act as the permanent crime prevention structure for Europe, has articulated the following guidelines for effective crime prevention policy and practice: --The use of a central coalition to define problems and provide needed resources to address them, prepare action programs and the required staffing needs, and tailor local policy to changing conditions. --The need for a technical coordinator to oversee and maintain the coalition's problem-solving partnership approach. --Ongoing surveys of victimization, citizens' views of crime problems, and actions taken to keep the preventive practices up-to-date and targeted at local priorities and needs.[5] There is also a need for strategies by central-government agencies to foster crime prevention at the local level. Research by ICPC[6] has identified the following core elements as important for the success of a central strategy that will foster effective local crime prevention: --A central secretariat, with these characteristics: -Staff, reporting to a senior official, with a budget for development. -Capacity to mobilize key partners. -Ability to propose strategies based on an analysis of crime problems and preventive practices. --Delivery of preventive practices made possible through: -Collaboration with other government departments. -Development of local problem-solving partnerships. -Involvement of citizens. Best practice in crime prevention Many different types of crime prevention projects in various countries have reduced levels of delinquency and violent crime by tackling the causes--those that are conducive to victimization as well as those that generate criminal behavior-- and by forming real partnerships at the local level. For ICPC, crime prevention involves a range of strategies successfully pioneered in Europe, North America, and elsewhere. They involve initiatives by central and local governments as well as activities of the private sector, city management, urban planning, policing, the judiciary, schools, housing, social services, youth services, women's affairs, public health, universities, and the media. Exhibit 1 illustrates the impact of several examples of successful programs drawn from the three crime prevention strategies described below. Projects selected for discussion are not limited to those where scientific evaluations have demonstrated a reduction in crime "beyond a reasonable doubt." Instead, we also have included projects where the "balance of probabilities" is that they reduced crime.[7] Fostering better design Fostering better design is about the improvement of buildings, products, and communities to make it harder, more risky, or less rewarding for offenders to commit crime. This strategy is better known as situational crime prevention.[8] Two projects described below illustrate the extent to which residential burglary can be reduced through situational crime prevention techniques. Each of these projects evolved from an analysis of the causes of crime in which public and private agencies with the solutions were involved. No significant displacement of the crimes to the surrounding areas was found. However, some diffusion of benefits--unanticipated reductions in nontargeted crimes--occurred in adjacent areas. In the late 1980s, a project team of city officials, police, social workers, and university researchers undertook to tackle repeat victimization in the Kirkholt housing project in Rochdale, England. Burglary victims were offered assistance in removing coin-operated electric and gas meters; in target hardening by upgrading home security with improved locks and bolts; and in establishing a "cocoon" neighborhood watch program in which six or more residents surrounding a victimized dwelling were asked to participate by watching and reporting anything suspicious. Before-after measures showed a 58-percent reduction in burglaries in the first year and a 75-percent reduction by the end of the third.[9] In 1991, the Dutch safe housing label was initiated by police in the Rotterdam-Leiden-The Hague triangle. The label was introduced nationally in 1996. When housing project developers or housing associations apply for a police secured label, their project and its environment must be approved by the police as meeting standards relating to residents' participation and responsibility, neighborhood management, home watch, and building design. In Rotterdam, a 70-percent reduction in burglaries was observed following the program's first year in a comparison of participating and nonparticipating households.[10] Mobilizing agencies Poverty experienced during formative years, inconsistent and uncaring childrearing techniques, and parental conflict are some of the problems that place young people at increased risk for involvement in delinquency. Efforts to address these key risk factors and prevent child victimization in the home and at school at an early age can produce important short- and long-term downstream benefits in the form of reduced delinquency, later offending, and other related social problems. The crime prevention strategy of mobilizing agencies is about bringing together stakeholders, such as schools, housing, and social services, that have a role to play in addressing these risk factors and enhancing protective factors to improve the lives of children, young people, and their families. The following three programs demonstrate the value of this strategy in preventing delinquency and criminal behavior. In the late 1970s, a program was initiated in Elmira, New York, to test the efficacy of nurse home visits on mothers' life course development and parental care of children. At the onset of the program, 400 pregnant women who possessed one or more high-risk characteristics (e.g., low socioeconomic status) were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatment conditions. The experimental group, which received postnatal home visits up to the child's second birthday, compared with the control group, which did not, showed impressive results across a range of prosocial outcomes, including more than a 75-percent reduction in child abuse and neglect (4 percent versus 19 percent).[11] A 13-year followup postintervention, when the children were 15 years old, confirmed a significant sustained reduction in child abuse and neglect.[12] In 1983, a comprehensive antibullying program was initiated in 42 elementary schools across Norway. Key components of the program included a booklet for school personnel describing bully/victim problems and how to intervene effectively, information and advice for parents on how to deal with their child if a bully or a victim, and access to an informational video on bullying and its impact for the public. After 2 years, the project had reduced the prevalence of bullying by 50 percent.[13] The Quantum Opportunities Program, which operated in five U.S. cities (San Antonio, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Saginaw [Michigan], and Oklahoma City) from 1989 to 1993, offered disadvantaged teenagers afterschool activities for which they received small hourly stipends and a matching amount of funds in a college-fund account. The youths were encouraged to complete school through activities such as computer-assisted instruction, peer tutoring, homework assistance, community service and public event project activities, and development activities such as curriculum on life/family skills and college and job planning. In each city, 50 youths were randomly assigned to either a program group that received the intervention or a control group that did not. After 4 years, the program group achieved a 71-percent reduction in self-reported arrests compared with the control group. Program group members also were less likely to have dropped out of school (23 percent versus 50 percent) and were more likely to have graduated from high school (63 percent versus 42 percent).[14] Facilitating partnerships The crime prevention strategy of facilitating partnerships is about bringing together police, justice services, and those concerned with social development to solve crime problems and promote effective and intelligent sanctions for offenders. In many cases, promoting responsibility is a central feature of programs adopting this strategy. The active ingredient is a focus on increasing the responsibility one holds for one's actions to the victim and the wider society. Two of the three projects reviewed below illustrate the potential crime reductions that can be achieved by this strategy. In the Netherlands, the HALT Program was created to respond to the problem of youth vandalism. It involves collaboration between police, prosecutors, municipal authorities, victims, and the community to ensure that young offenders repair vandalism damage they have caused and to assist young people in resolving employment, housing, and education problems. After 1 year, the program group, compared with a matched control group, was more likely to have ceased involvement in vandalism (63 percent versus 25 percent)--a 60-percent overall reduction.[15] As a result of the program's success, it has been expanded to more than 40 sites across the country. In the early 1990s in Scotland, a reeducation program for men convicted of violence against their female partners was started as a condition of a probation order. The program involved weekly group sessions over a period of 6 to 7 months. A quasi-experimental design was used to assess the effectiveness of the program compared with other criminal sanctions (e.g., prison, probation, fines). One year after intervention, female partners of men in the reeducation program (n=27) reported a much lower prevalence (occurrence of at least one incident), 33 percent versus 75 percent, and lower frequency (five or more incidents), 7 percent versus 37 percent, of violence perpetrated by their male partners compared with female partners of men who did not receive the intervention (n=59). This translates into a 56-percent decrease in the prevalence of violence and an 81-percent decrease in frequency.[16] Throughout France, neighborhood justice "houses" and "offices" have been set up by the Ministry of Justice and local associations to address minor crimes and other legal problems through alternative justice approaches. Staff are trained to provide victim-offender mediation and are legally empowered to deal with cases. It is reported, although not proved, that everywhere they have been set up, they have relieved the courts and settled cases faster. Cost-effectiveness of crime prevention In Europe, North America, and other regions of the world, governments have been forced to find ways to reduce expenditures, restructure departments, and identify investments that will best meet the needs of their citizens. Major reforms have been implemented in areas such as health and education that are vital to citizens. For crime control, the strategic issues are only just beginning to be faced through efforts such as the Comprehensive Spending Review in the United Kingdom, which has reviewed effectiveness arguments in crime reduction and examined the comparative monetary advantages of spending on prisons vis-...-vis family-based intervention programs, for example.[17] A recent study by The RAND Corporation[18] compared the estimated number of crimes that would be prevented by a $1 million investment in various strategies of intervening at different developmental stages in the lives of at-risk children with the number averted by California's three-strikes law. The study found that more monetary benefits from reduced crime were achieved from spending on parent training and graduation incentive strategies (see Quantum Opportunities Program above) than on the combined strategy of home visits and day care or probation or the three-strikes law. In 1994, the newly elected government of the Netherlands dedicated an annual budget of 160 million guilders ($100 million) for local crime prevention efforts to tackle the early risk factors for delinquency and later criminal offending. This decision was based largely on scientific research carried out by the Dutch Ministry of Justice.[19] A simulation model using historical crime and crime control trends was developed to forecast the effects of four hypothetical scenarios on government spending on public safety (see exhibit 2): --Adding 1,000 extra police officers to a force of 27,620 officers. --Extrapolating current trends (doing the same). --Strengthening network criminality prevention-- for example, police working with social agencies to address youth crime--to achieve a 10-percent decrease in crime. --Increasing investment in situational crime prevention by 30 percent. The situational prevention scenario was predicted to have the strongest effect on reducing criminal justice spending over time and was the most cost-effective. Network criminality prevention was predicted to be the next most effective strategy. The police scenario had the most undesirable impact. Its poor showing had to do with the direct contribution it made to criminal justice spending and its ineffectiveness in dealing with an hypothesized increase in violent crimes--the most expensive category of offenses. Furthermore, after 7 years--by the year 2000--adding more police was estimated to cost the government 100 million guilders (approximately $60 million) more had they done nothing. Moving from rhetoric to effective action In the last decade, prevention has achieved a prominent position in crime reduction thinking and practice around the world. Efforts to foster better design, mobilize agencies, and facilitate partnerships have become synonymous with best practice in crime reduction. In many crime-ridden cities and communities where these strategies have been employed, substantial and lasting reductions in delinquency, violence, and insecurity have been achieved; a greater quality of life has been realized; and community and economic growth has flourished. However, crime prevention remains more rhetoric than action. Governmental investment in crime prevention is extremely low in most industrialized countries--between 2 and 3 percent of criminal justice spending--and is nonexistent in most developing countries and countries in transition.[20] The traditional, reactive approaches to dealing with crime--police, courts, and corrections--continue to dominate national crime policies. Little attention has been paid to the scientific conclusions and the international consensus on what works most effectively to reduce crime. The International Centre for the Prevention of Crime was set up to help overcome this inaction through its central mission of harnessing international best practice from around the world to solve crime problems. It engages in the exchange of international expertise to promote, for example, the efforts of its U.S.-based partners--the National Crime Prevention Council and the U.S. Conference of Mayors--in working with cities and communities through such well-known and successful projects as the Texas City Action Plan to Prevent Crime and the Comprehensive Communities Program. It offers technical assistance--strategic action-oriented analyses--at the national, local, and political levels to reduce crime more effectively and is a member of the White Paper team for the Minister of Safety and Security in South Africa. ICPC also harnesses best practice in crime prevention by providing tools to raise awareness of crime prevention's impact. Such tools stress the importance of leadership, the affordability and cost-benefit of crime prevention, and the contribution of prevention strategies and programs to the sustainable development of cities and countries. With these efforts, ICPC is hopeful that effective action in reducing crime will replace the rhetoric that stands in the way of building safer communities and societies. ------------------------------ Notes 1. Sherman, L.W., D. Gottfredson, D. MacKenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter, and S. Bushway, Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, Office of Justice Programs Research Report, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1997, NCJ 165366. 2. Loeber, R., and D.P. Farrington, eds., Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 1998. 3. ICPC is a not-for-profit, nongovernmental organization. It is governed by a board of directors, combining the competencies of cities, prevention experts, the private sector, and specialized institutes from around the world, including the U.S. National Crime Prevention Council and the U.S. Conference of Mayors. It receives support from the governments of Belgium, Canada, France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the Province of Quebec, which make up an advisory and policy committee. 4. International Centre for the Prevention of Crime, Towards the Use of Best Practice World Wide, Montreal, Canada: International Centre for the Prevention of Crime, 1997. The key sections of this report are also available on the Internet at http://www.crime-prevention-intl.org. 5. European Forum for Urban Security, Urban Security Practices, Paris, France: European Forum for Urban Security, 1996. 6. Waller, I., B.C. Welsh, and D. Sansfa‡on, Crime Prevention Digest 1997: Successes, Benefits and Directions from Seven Countries, Montreal, Canada: International Centre for the Prevention of Crime, 1997. This report is also available on the Internet at http://www.crime-prevention-intl.org. On the basis of an ICPC analysis of crime prevention strategies by central governments in seven industrialized countries, including the United States, ICPC regarded the listed elements as core because, among other reasons, government agencies using those elements have shown proven and promising results in preventing crime. 7. To meet the "balance of probabilities" criterion, a project or program must (1) use a problem-solving partnership approach (as defined in this article's section entitled "Crime prevention as a process") and (2) yield results based on at least one of the following: (a) a temporal sequence between the program and the crime or risk outcome clearly observed, or (b) a comparison group present without demonstrated comparability with the treatment group. 8. See Clarke, R.V., ed., Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, 2d ed., Guilderland, NY: Harrow and Heston, 1997. 9. Forrester, D., S. Frenz, M. O'Connell, and K. Pease, The Kirkholt Burglary Prevention Project: Phase II, Crime Prevention Unit Paper, No. 23, London, England: Home Office, 1990. 10. Scherpenisse, R., "The Police Label for Secured Housing: Initial Results in the Netherlands," paper presented at the European Union Conference, "Crime Prevention: Towards A European Level," May 11-14, 1997, Noordwijk, Netherlands, 1997. 11. Olds, D.L., C.R. Henderson, R. Chamberlin, and R. Tatelbaum, "Preventing Child Abuse and Neglect: A Randomized Trial of Nurse Home Visitation," Pediatrics 78 (1986): 65-78. 12. Olds, D.L., J. Eckenrode, C.R. Henderson, H. Kitzman, J. Powers, R. Cole, K. Sidora, P. Morris, L.M. Pettitt, and D. Luckey, "Long-Term Effects of Home Visitation on Maternal Life Course and Child Abuse and Neglect: Fifteen-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Trial," Journal of the American Medical Association 278 (1997): 637-643. 13. Olweus, D., "Bully/Victim Problems Among School Children: Basic Facts and Effects of a School Based Intervention Program," in The Development and Treatment of Childhood Aggression, ed. D.J. Pepler and K.H. Rubin, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1991: 411-448. 14. Hahn, A., Evaluation of the Quantum Opportunities Program (QOP): Did the Program Work?, Waltham, MA: Brandeis University, 1994. 15. Kruissink, M., The HALT Program: Diversion of Juvenile Vandals, Dutch Penal Law and Policy, The Hague, Netherlands: Research and Documentation Centre, Ministry of Justice, 1990. The control group numbered 90, the program group 179. 16. Dobash, R., R. Dobash, K. Cavanagh, and R. Lewis, Research Evaluation of Programmes for Violent Men, Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish Office Central Research Unit, 1996. 17. Goldblatt, P., and C. Lewis, eds., Reducing Offending: An Assessment of Research Evidence on Ways of Dealing With Offending Behaviour, London, England: Home Office Research and Statistics Directorate, 1998. 18. Greenwood, P.W., K.E. Model, C.P. Rydell, and J. Chiesa, Diverting Children from a Life of Crime: Measuring Costs and Benefits, Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation, 1996. 19. van Dijk, J.J.M., "Towards a Research-based Crime Reduction Policy: Crime Prevention as a Cost-effective Policy Option," European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 5 (1997): 13-27. 20. Waller, Welsh, and Sansfa‡on, Crime Prevention Digest 1997. ------------------------------ Using City-Level Surveys to Better Understand Community Policing by Steven K. Smith and David W. Hayeslip* *Steven K. Smith, Ph.D., is Chief of Adjudication, Law Enforcement, and Federal Statistics, Bureau of Justice Statistics. David W. Hayeslip formerly was Assistant Director for Program/Policy Support and Evaluation with the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Increasingly, police departments around the Nation have expressed interest in conducting citywide surveys to gather information on criminal victimizations, attitudes of citizens toward police, the willingness of the public to report crimes to police, and the impact of different community policing strategies and tactics on crime and neighborhood conditions.[1] Two critical components of a successful community policing philosophy are obtaining citizen feedback and conducting periodic evaluations of police agency outreach efforts. Through the use of survey research, police and sheriffs' departments can collect important neighborhood-level data to assist in their assessment of crime prevention tactics. To help foster such local-level research, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)[2] recently completed a joint project that involved conducting crime victimization surveys in 12 cities. The BJS-cops project developed software enabling local jurisdictions to conduct their own surveys of this type. It will be available soon, as discussed later. The survey project used the standard National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) questionnaire as the core data collection instrument (see "National Crime Victimization Survey") to gather local data on victimization. City-level victimization surveys modeled after NCVS allow local jurisdictions to use the identical NCVS questionnaire and assess how local results compare with the national pattern. The survey project also collected data on citizen perceptions of community policing and neighborhood issues. Community policing COPS supports such data collection and encourages law enforcement agencies to consider using citizen surveys for planning and evaluating their community policing and problem-solving efforts. Community policing--a fundamental shift from traditional, reactive policing--stresses stopping crime before it occurs. Community policing is an integral part of combating crime and improving the quality of life in the Nation's cities, towns, and rural areas. Community policing entails a policing philosophy that promotes and supports organizational strategies to address the causes, and reduce the fear, of crime and social disorder through innovative, problem-solving tactics and community-police partnerships. Other core components of community policing include decentralizing command and transforming policing agencies to support and empower frontline officers. City-level survey data on victimization and community policing Because NCVS is designed to produce national estimates, a special sample was required to collect information within a specific local jurisdiction. The city-level survey was designed to capture reliable estimates for the amount of violent crime, which includes robbery, rape, sexual assault, and aggravated and simple assault experienced by household members age 12 or older.[3] In addition to victimization estimates, data from the local area survey provided a better understanding of the impact of different community policing strategies. The city-level survey collected information on how residents learn about crimes in their neighborhoods, how they perceive law enforcement's role in preventing and responding to crime, and the nature of the public's interaction with the police. This survey was designed to provide a unique, city-based dataset to examine attitudes toward community policing activities, perceptions of crime, police-public contact, and characteristics of victimizations by crime. In developing the community-oriented policing component of the questionnaire, BJS and COPS worked with a number of community policing survey experts around the Nation. Questions were also gleaned from selected police departments that have conducted community surveys. The data collected provide a wealth of information for criminal justice researchers and law enforcement professionals interested in examining how community policing works. The data are scheduled for release to researchers and law enforcement in early 1999. The data will be available at no charge and will be made accessible over the Internet. Participating cities Twelve cities were selected to participate in the local area survey: Chicago, Kansas City (Missouri), Knoxville, Los Angeles, Madison (Wisconsin), New York City, San Diego, Savannah, Spokane, Springfield (Massachusetts), Tucson, and Washington, D.C.4 Field work for the city surveys was conducted February through May 1998. Approximately 800 households were interviewed in each city. Police departments in the 12 sampled cities represent varying stages in the development of community policing. The jurisdictions were chosen because of their initiative and commitment toward incorporating the community policing philosophy into their organizational tasks, goals, and future plans. Priority was given to cities in which the police department was the recipient of a COPS hiring grant and had a population of at least 100,000. The agencies fell into three general categories: partially incorporated community policing, fully incorporated community policing, and advanced community policing. The level of community policing was assessed using the degree to which police departments had demonstrated the following characteristics: --Experience with community policing. --Departmentwide philosophy embracing community policing. --Decentralized organizational structure. --Problem-solving orientation. --Community outreach and mobilization efforts. --Training for officers. The project was designed to allow for comparative and case study analyses. It will be useful to assess citizen attitudes and victimization rates in cities with extended experience in community policing compared with those in earlier stages. (See "Implementation Highlights of the City-Level Surveys.") Selected community policing questions on city-level surveys Among the surveys' many community policing questions asked of household respondents were the following: --How satisfied are you with the quality of life in your neighborhood? --How fearful are you about crime in your neighborhood? --In the past 12 months, have you observed any increases or decreases in police officer presence in your neighborhood? --In general, how satisfied are you with the police who serve your neighborhood? The sample tables depicted by exhibits 1 and 2 illustrate other types of survey-generated information and how it might be formatted for presentation. Software for local surveys To meet the needs of local law enforcement agencies, BJS and COPS developed a Crime Victimization Survey (CVS) software program using Visual Basic and Microsoft Access (a database program for personal computers). Using this software, localities can conduct their own telephone surveys of residents on crime victimization, attitudes toward policing, and other community-related issues. (See exhibit 3 for an illustration of a data-entry screen.) With this user-friendly, Windows 95-based version of the National Crime Victimization Survey, localities can quickly develop a questionnaire tailored to local interests and needs while maintaining a standard core of National Crime Victimization Survey questions. The CVS software will be available at no charge to the criminal justice community. During the summer of 1998, the Survey Research Center at the University of Maryland, College Park, field tested the software in a random digit dialing (RDD) telephone survey of city households in Baltimore. The Center evaluated the software and provided BJS with suggestions for modifications that were incorporated into the release version.[5] For more information on the software and its availability, please contact Steven K. Smith, BJS, at 202-616-3485; Meg Townsend, COPS Office, at 202-633-1322; or ASKBJS@ojp.usdoj.gov. ------------------------------ Notes 1."Crime in the neighborhood" has been found to be the community problem that bothers people the most, particularly in urban areas, according to data collected by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. See DeFrances, C.J., and S.K. Smith, Perceptions of Neighborhood Crime, 1995, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1998, NCJ 165811. 2. Attorney General Janet Reno created the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services in 1994. COPS administers a variety of grant programs to accomplish four primary goals: (1) to increase the number of community policing officers on the beat by 100,000; (2) to promote community policing across the country; (3) to help develop an infrastructure to support and sustain community policing after Federal funding has ended; and (4) to demonstrate and evaluate the ability of agencies practicing community policing to significantly reduce the levels of violence, crime, and disorder in their communities. COPS is directed by Joseph E. Brann. Further information on COPS programs is available through the Department of Justice Response Center at 800-421- 6770, or at http://www.usdoj.gov/cops. A component of the Office of Justice Programs in the U.S. Department of Justice, BJS is the primary source for justice statistics in the United States. Directed by Dr. Jan Chaiken, BJS collects, analyzes, publishes, and disseminates information on crime, criminal offenders, victims of crime, and the operations of justice systems at all levels of government. These data are critical to Federal, State, and local policymakers in combating crime and ensuring that justice is both efficient and evenhanded. The BJS site on the World Wide Web is located at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs. 3. Unlike NCVS, the city-level survey used a 12-month reference period. 4. After the first 11 sites were chosen, the National Institute of Justice sponsored the city survey in Washington, D.C., as part of its research support of the D.C. Revitalization Initiative. 5. The minimum system requirements to run the city-level survey software include a personal computer with a 486 processor, 16 megabytes of memory, Windows 95 or Windows NT, a VGA video adapter, and 40 megabytes of free disk space. Also required is a TAPI-compliant modem or other dialing device so calls can be heard as they are dialed, and a telephony device (a standard phone, speakerphone, or hands-free headset) to conduct interviews after calls are dialed by the system. ------------------------------ National Crime Victimization Survey Administered by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is the Nation's primary source of data about crime victimization and victims of crime. NCVS provides the only national crime measure that includes both those crimes that people experience but do not report to law enforcement authorities and those they do report. The Nation's second-largest ongoing household survey, NCVS provides data on the number of rapes, sexual assaults, robberies, assaults, thefts, household burglaries, and motor vehicle thefts experienced each year by U.S. residents age 12 or older and their households. NCVS also enables BJS to estimate the likelihood of victimization for those crimes for segments of the population, such as the elderly or city dwellers. NCVS yields data on the characteristics of violent offenders as well as on the impact, frequency, and consequences of criminal victimization in the United States. During a collection year, data are obtained in 6-month intervals from a nationally representative sample of about 50,000 households, encompassing more than 100,000 persons. NCVS was initiated in 1972 and redesigned in 1992. -------------------------- Implementation Highlights of the City-Level Surveys The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) notified the police chief in each of the 12 sampled jurisdictions about the city-level survey project. Police departments were informed that the U.S. Bureau of the Census, which collects the survey data, would provide the respondent with a toll-free number to call to confirm the legitimacy of the project. Police departments were also asked to provide a contact number if further authentication was needed to satisfy an inquiring potential respondent. This project represents the first time BJS has used the random digit dialing (RDD) telephone methodology to administer the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) questionnaire. RDD allows surveys to be conducted at a much lower cost than personal interview methods and, generally, more quickly. This project rigorously tested the RDD methodology. Results from the use of RDD methods will be compared to the response rates and victimization rates found in urban areas using the regular procedures for NCVS. At the beginning of the interview, respondents were told that the survey was voluntary. As with the regular NCVS data collection, the confidentiality of individual and household level data obtained by telephone is protected by law. ------------------------------ Events ASC meeting "Developing a Research Agenda in a Policy Context" will be the theme of NIJ Director Jeremy Travis' address to the 50th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology (ASC), November 11-14, 1998, in Washington, D.C. (See related event noted in "NIJ to Host International Gathering.") ASC's 1998 program consists of five areas of interest: --Explanations and approaches. --Research methods. --Institutions of social control and criminal processing. --Lawmaking, policy, and the public. --Criminality and deviance. Numerous papers based on NIJ-supported research will be presented. For more information about the conference, point your Web browser to http://www.asc41.com, or contact the American Society of Criminology at 1314 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212-1156; voice: 614-292-9207; fax: 614-292-6767; or e-mail: asc41@compuserve.com. Annual research and evaluation conference focused on collaboration and partnerships This year's research and evaluation conference, held July 26-29, 1998, and sponsored by NIJ and other components of the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), attracted more than 750 participants. The theme was "Collaboration and Partnership"-- involving researchers, practitioners, and Federal, State, and local agencies. (See "Collaboration Improves Policy and Practice" for details about NIJ's partnership activities.) This year's event was marked by a higher proportion of attendees who are practitioners and recently graduated researchers. New this year was a well-visited cyber caf‚, which featured live demonstrations and tutorials on OJP Web sites, databases, and intriguing new electronic products and resources. Keynote speakers included David Kennedy, Senior Researcher at Harvard University, and J. Phillip Thompson, Associate Professor at Columbia University, who spoke about the challenges of collaborations at the local level. Lisbeth Schorr, Director of the Harvard Project on Effective Interventions, spoke about the characteristics of successful collaborations. The second day's plenary session featured a frank and provocative discussion about practitioner-researcher collaborations on domestic violence issues. Jeffrey Edleson of the University of Minnesota delivered a paper titled "Forced Bonding or Community Collaboration." Respondents were Deputy City Attorney Alana Bowman of the Los Angeles City Attorney's Office; Barbara Hart, Legal Director of the Battered Women's Justice Project; Detective Howard Black of the Colorado Springs Police Department; and Judge Lawrence Hauser of the Bridgeport (Connecticut) Superior Court. More than 40 panels and workshops featured more than 125 prominent evaluators, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers and encompassed community policing, juvenile and violent crime, sentencing and adjudication issues, community restorative justice, crime mapping, evaluation methods, and many other topics. Next year's conference will be held in Washington, D.C., July 18-21. Summer institute helps NIJ transfer technology NIJ Director Jeremy Travis welcomed the 28 State and local law enforcement professionals who attended the annual Technology Institute for Law Enforcement (July 26-31, 1998) hosted by NIJ's Office of Science and Technology. The program brings a select group of practitioners to Washington, D.C., each year to share technology information. Participants received briefings by NIJ program and technology staff as well as from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the FBI Crime Laboratory, and the FBI/DEA Training Center at Quantico. Kevin Jackson, NIJ's program manager for the Technology Institute, explained, "The goal is twofold: First, to show State and local agencies what is available to them in the area of technology, and second, to help agencies figure out how technology can be used to solve their community's problems." Participants were selected from a pool of applicants who responded to announcements on NIJ's technology-oriented World Wide Web site (http://www.nlectc.org), in the newsletter "Tech Beat," and through the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers around the country. In their evaluations, participants reported that the event enhanced their understanding of what NIJ and others are doing in the area of technology, provided valuable information on how to spend resources more effectively, and offered the chance to share ideas and participate in problem solving with agencies that face similar issues. Methamphetamine task force developing recommendations Abuse of methamphetamine is a serious problem in several regions of the country. To support greater understanding of the drug and problems associated with it, Congress created the Methamphetamine Interagency Task Force and charged it with evaluating education, prevention, and treatment practices and strategies related to methamphetamine and other synthetic stimulants. Attorney General Janet Reno and Office of National Drug Control Policy Director Barry McCaffrey cochair the task force. In addition to NIJ Director Jeremy Travis, other members include representatives of the secretaries of the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services and Education; members of the judicial and research communities; and representatives of law enforcement, substance abuse prevention, and public health agencies. One of the task force's first steps has been determining where gaps exist in the literature about methamphetamine and suggesting future actions for the task force. The members are currently developing recommendations to propose to the President and Congress. The task force's interim status report is scheduled for release in early 1999, with recommendations slated to appear in a final report later in 1999. Community policing: What works? Policing professionals and researchers will share their perspectives, data, and firsthand knowledge of what works in community policing at a conference cosponsored by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and NIJ, to be held November 8-10, 1998, in Arlington, Virginia. Attendees will discuss community policing's accomplishments and the mechanisms used to gain those achievements. Specifically, the conference aims to: --Determine which of many activities and philosophies have had an impact on crime and disorder. --Move a step closer to a shared understanding of the principles of community policing. --Establish a research agenda for the future that meets the needs of police practitioners who are implementing community policing. Online registration is available at http://www.nijpcs.org. Click on "Upcoming Conferences," or call the Institute for Law and Justice at 703-684-5300. Inquiries also may be faxed to 703-739-5533 or sent via e-mail to nijpcs@ilj.org. The registration fee is $75. Sentencing and corrections workshop To facilitate a dialogue about sentencing and corrections issues, the Office of Justice Programs, NIJ, and the Corrections Program Office cosponsored a summer workshop in St. Petersburg, Florida, that drew more than 250 delegates from all 50 States, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. Governors, State budget officers, legislators, and adult and juvenile corrections officers spent most of their time in facilitated small group discussions, expressing the challenges they face and sharing with colleagues the various approaches and solutions they have tried. The conference stressed the need for collaboration in developing policies and assigning resources and the value of communications within and across States. A legislator from Colorado said, "This conference gave me an opportunity to converse with others in Colorado. . . . We don't take time to do that at home." A judge from Delaware remarked, "Sentencing policy doesn't just affect judges. This conference helps us see the impact of decisions on others in parts of the system." NIJ Director Jeremy Travis promised on behalf of OJP agencies to follow the conference with broad-based technical assistance and pledged that OJP agencies would work together to find appropriate responses to each request. The resulting requests for technical assistance have varied. A number of OJP components have formed a working group that meets biweekly to devise responses to these requests. A substantial number of requests are for help to improve State planning capabilities through, for example, statistical models that project prison populations. Other requests seek assistance to develop specific programs or develop policies around broad subject areas such as restorative justice or intermediate sanctions. A third category of requests involves policy development support for a wide range of sentencing issues such as sentencing guidelines, juvenile sentencing options, and more collaborative policy formulation. The collaboration among Federal and State agencies that has resulted has given States a broader view of what others are doing and a different perspective of what they, too, can accomplish. Restorative justice for juveniles The second annual International Conference on Restorative Justice for Juveniles will be held November 7-9, 1998, in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The conference will be hosted by the Community Justice Institute and Florida Atlantic University, in conjunction with the International Network for Research on Restorative Justice for Juveniles. For further information, point your Web browser to http://www.fau.edu/divdept/cupa/conf98.htm, or contact the Community Justice Institute, Florida Atlantic University, 220 SE 2d Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301; 954-762-5668; or e-mail: ICORJJ@fau.edu. ------------------------------ NIJ to Host International Gathering Nations around the world share similar concerns about criminal justice research; for example, how to translate findings into policy, how to ensure independence for the research process, and how to secure financial support for research. To open what is expected to become an ongoing dialogue on these shared concerns, NIJ will host a small, informal gathering the day before the American Society of Criminology's annual meeting in November. The gathering will give representatives of criminal justice research institutes based in ministries of justice or affiliated with national governments a chance to share ideas on topics of mutual interest in an open-ended setting. The discussion is expected to lead to further intellectual endeavors and strengthen the network of international criminal justice professionals working with research institutes, such as the United Nations Crime Research Network, the World Criminal Justice Library Network, and the International Document Exchange. Those who are interested in but unable to attend the gathering should contact Marvene O'Rourke, Deputy Director of the International Center of the National Institute of Justice, for a postmeeting report that will summarize the discussion as well as present future plans (voice: 202-514-9802; fax: 202-307-6256; e-mail: orourke@ojp.usdoj.gov; 810 Seventh Street N.W., Washington, DC 20531, USA). ------------------------------ Collaboration Improves Policy and Practice Since its inception, NIJ has consulted with organizations, individuals, and others to identify and discuss the pressing and emerging issues surrounding the struggle to make communities safe. Such partnerships yield insights and help ensure that research, evaluation, and demonstration efforts are directed toward meeting the needs of State and local agencies. This discussion is the first in a series exploring the nature of collaboration and partnerships. No single agency or organization has the answer to reducing and preventing crime; but when government agencies, community organizations, and researchers consolidate their knowledge, they increase their chances of solving problems and creating effective solutions. The infusion of funds from the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Crime Act) induced NIJ to expand three types of collaborations: --Researcher-practitioner collaborations. In this type of partnership, researchers and practitioners work hand-in-hand to bring empirical skills and methodologies to bear on the issues of greatest interest to State and local agencies. These partnerships extend each activity's reach and yield interactions ensuring that research skills and findings are precisely targeted to the problems confronting practitioners, such as police officers, corrections professionals, probation officers, prosecutors, and judges. For example, with the Corrections Program Office, NIJ is funding collaborations among researchers, corrections officials, and program administrators to evaluate drug treatment programs funded through the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment program, which provides treatment for drug abusers under criminal justice supervision. Partnerships between researchers and State sentencing commissions to examine the impact of changes in sentencing policies are now in place; others bring researchers together with departments of correction to evaluate program impacts. --Collaborations between Federal agencies. These collaborations usually involve Federal funding for research or program development. Community issues do not fit neatly within the jurisdiction of a single Federal agency; drug abuse, for example, is both a public health and a criminal justice issue. NIJ is currently working with other Federal agencies to conduct research or test innovative programs in a number of areas: For example, NIJ is funding significant research with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health to understand the causes and consequences of violence against women. NIJ also is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to explore ways to assess the effects of drug elimination programs in public housing. With the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, NIJ is supporting efforts to examine the effects of a systems approach to drug testing and treatment. --Collaboration involving multiple Federal, State, and community agencies. In these types of partnerships, an array of government and community agencies and organizations are assembled and deployed to achieve a well-defined goal. The July 1998 National Institute of Justice Journal contained an article by David Kennedy, "Pulling Levers: Getting Deterrence Right," that discussed a multilevel collaboration in Boston to reduce gang violence. The Boston collaboration involved the police, the departments of probation and parole, Federal and local prosecutors, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, school police, youth corrections, gang outreach organizations, the local clergy, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and the Drug Enforcement Administration. Upcoming features in the National Institute of Justice Journal will describe activities surrounding various partnerships. The December issue will contain an article examining researcher-practitioner partnerships focusing on law enforcement. Jointly funded by NIJ and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, these collaborations--known as Locally Initiated Research Partnerships--are evaluating community policing efforts, exploring ways to enhance the community's access to police services, measuring patrol activities, and analyzing citizen perceptions of fear, among other topics. ------------------------------ NIJ's Second Annual Crime Mapping Research Conference Mapping Out Crime December 10-12, 1998 Marriott Crystal City Gateway Hotel Arlington, Virginia NIJ's Second Annual Crime Mapping Research Conference will feature: --Workshops on GIS, cartography, and spatial and temporal analysis. --Plenary sessions featuring cutting edge crime-mapping demonstrations. --Panels on the use of GIS in community policing, forging partnerships between agencies and universities, and crime mapping in several criminal justice settings. More than 40 leading experts--police managers, crime analysts, geographers, and researchers--will lead panels. More than 600 attendees from all criminal justice fields are expected. One of the highlights of the conference will be the Electronic Poster Session, which will give attendees an opportunity to display their crime-mapping systems on laptops. Online registration is available. Point your browser to http://www.nijpcs.org and click on "Upcoming Conferences," or call the Institute for Law and Justice at 703-684-5300. Inquiries also may be faxed to 703-739-5533 or sent via e-mail to nijpcs@ilj.org. The registration fee is $75, and special hotel rates apply until November 18. ------------------------------ New & Noteworthy Celebrating Criminal Justice 2000 NIJ plans to use the occasion of the millenium for reflection on where criminal justice has been and where it is going. To sum up what is known and to welcome the new millenium, NIJ is assembling a four-volume compendium of monographs and an accompanying video presentation designed to identify and reflect on the current state of knowledge and emerging trends in criminal justice practice. The volumes will be organized around four themes: --The nature of crime: continuity and change. --Boundary changes in criminal justice organizations. --Changes in decisionmaking and discretion in the criminal justice system. --Measurement and analysis of crime and justice. The volumes and video will be the centerpiece of the annual Research and Evaluation Conference to be held in July 2000 in Washington, D.C. A distinguished editorial board guides the development of the project. The members are: Robert Bursik, University of Missouri; Robert Crutchfield, University of Washington; David Duffee, the University at Albany; Charles Friel, Sam Houston State University; Julie Horney, University of Nebraska at Omaha; James Jacobs, New York University School of Law; Susan Keilitz, National Center for State Courts; Gary LaFree, University of New Mexico; Doris MacKenzie, University of Maryland; John Martin, Policy Studies, Inc.; Stephen D. Mastrofski, Michigan State University; Lorraine Green Mazerolle, University of Cincinnati; David McDowall, the University at Albany; Brian Ostrom, National Center for State Courts; Ruth Peterson, Ohio State University; Chase Riveland, Deer Harbor, Washington; Dennis Rosenbaum, University of Illinois-Chicago; Robert Sampson, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences; James Short, Washington State University; Ralph Taylor, Temple University; and Charles Wellford, University of Maryland. Collecting drug abuse information globally An international component for the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program (ADAM)--formerly the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program--is under way at NIJ. International ADAM (I-ADAM) will examine the prevalence of drug abuse and crime within and across national boundaries. Existing drug surveillance systems across the globe are incompatible in many cases, and comparisons are difficult to make. I-ADAM will provide a basis for nations to coordinate drug control policies and resources resulting in improved multilateral cooperation. The use of identical data collection vehicles allows nations to compare and contrast their drug abuse problems (for example, see exhibit 1) and share common solutions. The first I-ADAM strategic planning meeting took place in Miami on April 8 and 9, 1998; representatives from eight nations (Australia, Chile, England, the Netherlands, Panama, Scotland, South Africa, and Uruguay) and two international drug-control organizations attended in addition to experts in the field of drug surveillance systems and NIJ staff and representatives of other Federal agencies. Countries participating or intending to participate in I-ADAM are at various stages of program development. Some countries already collect ADAM-like data (England and Chile); some are determining how to fund pilot or feasibility studies; and some are only beginning to learn what ADAM offers (Uruguay and Panama). NIJ offers technical assistance. NIJ is providing technical assistance to initiate and operate I- ADAM sites, including at least one visit to each site. Technical assistance includes: --Translating the interview instrument. --Assisting in training of interview staff. --Developing the data set. --Advising on data analysis strategies. --Reconciling urinalysis results when countries use different testing methodologies. For drug test results to be consistent and comparable, a single testing laboratory in the United States will be available for use by all I- ADAM sites. Next steps. Plans are proceeding for an I-ADAM infrastructure--creating a common survey, developing a unified mergeable database and data entry system, developing training guidelines, conducting feasibility/pilot studies in all I-ADAM countries, and conducting technical assistance site visits. England, Wales, Scotland, Australia, and Chile are proceeding with implementation of their ADAM programs. NIJ anticipates a busy fall and winter as technical assistance efforts intensify in these sites. ------------------------------ Innovative Government Programs Eligible for National Recognition Each year, the Innovations in American Government program recognizes government programs that take creative, effective approaches to specific problems. The programs selected as winners and finalists receive a monetary award in addition to national recognition. Criminal justice programs have figured prominently among the award winners in past years. The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University administers the competition in partnership with the Council for Excellence in Government. In 1999, the Ford Foundation will award $100,000 grants to 10 programs and $20,000 grants to 10 additional programs. Applications are now being accepted for the 1999 competition. All units of government--Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial--within the United States are eligible. Application forms can be obtained by visiting the Innovations in American Government Web site (www.ksg.harvard.edu/innovations/99app.htm) or by calling the program at 800-722-0074. Applications are due no later than 5 p.m., January 8, 1999. ------------------------------ Recent NIJ Publications The following recent and forthcoming NIJ publications are available in both online and hardcopy formats. To order hard copy, call NCJRS at 800-851-3420; or send an e-mail to askncjrs@ncjrs.org. Electronic copies can be downloaded from the NIJ Web site: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach, Research in Progress Preview, by Dennis Kenney, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, August 1998, 4 pp., FS 000224. This research centered on student-level problem solving incorporated into the social studies class curriculum at a test high school. A second high school with similar characteristics was selected as a control site. Among the findings: fear levels and crime incidents decreased at the test school over the project year, while they remained steady or increased slightly at the control school. ADAM: 1997 Annual Report on Adult and Juvenile Arrestees, Research Report, by K. Jack Riley, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998, 73 pp., NCJ 171672. This report presents results of both drug urinalyses and self-report information from adult male and female arrestees and juvenile male arrestees/detainees at selected U.S. sites in 1997. At first glance, overall drug use appears to have changed little between 1996 and 1997. However, when test sites are reviewed individually and age-specific and gender-specific differences are examined, some cities are showing sizeable increases or decreases. Data collected under NIJ's ADAM (Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring) program highlight the complex nature of the drug abuse problem and the need for communities to target law enforcement and treatment interventions appropriately. Police Overtime: An Examination of Key Issues, Research in Brief, by David H. Bayley and Robert E. Worden, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, May 1998, 8 pp., NCJ 167572. Are police overtime payments being spent wisely? This report suggests that police departments would benefit from more analysis and documentation of overtime payments and compensation (comp) time. Researchers discovered enormous differences among local police departments in the attention given to overtime, the capacity to produce information about it, and the policies and procedures for managing it. The report concludes that overtime should be viewed, within limits, as an unavoidable cost of policing. The study also found that Federal funds account for 5 to 10 percent of local police overtime outlays--less than 6 percent of departments' total budgets. Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Research in Progress Preview, by Stephen D. Mastrofski, Roger B. Parks, Albert J. Reiss, Jr., and Robert E. Worden, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998, 4 pp., FS 000223. This summary provides a snapshot of how police and the public relate to one another and the consequences of that relationship for neighborhood quality of life in Indianapolis. For example, researchers found that about 25 percent of officer time was spent in encounters with the public, and the majority of police contacts were not with suspects but with citizens who sought assistance or social interaction. Most police and citizen encounters show high levels of cooperation. Other findings related to citizens' satisfaction with police service and their perceptions of safety. The Bureau of Justice Assistance Comprehensive Communities Program: A Preliminary Report, Research in Brief, by George L. Kelling, Mona R. Hochberg, Sandra Lee Kaminska, Ann Marie Rocheleau, Dennis P. Rosenbaum, Jeffrey A. Roth, and Wesley G. Skogan, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1998, 12 pp., NCJ 171132. Partnerships developed among citizens, criminal justice agencies, government agencies, and private-sector institutions are proving to be an effective way to reduce crime in targeted neighborhoods, according to preliminary analysis of the Comprehensive Communities Program. Responding to record levels of violence fueled by the crack epidemic and generally deteriorating urban conditions, the Comprehensive Communities Program was one of several national programs to introduce cooperation among agencies and community involvement into crime reduction efforts. Legal Interventions in Family Violence: Research Findings and Policy Implications, Research Report, a project of the American Bar Association's Criminal Justice Section, Commission on Domestic Violence, Center on Children and the Law, and Commission on Legal Programs of the Elderly, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998, 78 pp., NCJ 171666. Sorting out and understanding violent behavior among family members presents complex challenges. This publication contains "bottom line" information from articles written by researchers about their own or other researchers' work on subjects of immediate concern to practitioners: collaborative efforts between police and protection agencies, arrest policies, protection orders, defense strategies for battered women, sentencing, batterer treatment, child sexual abuse, and children's testimony. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, Research in Brief, by Lawrence W. Sherman, Denise C. Gottfredson, Doris L. MacKenzie, John Eck, Peter Reuter, and Shawn D. Bushway, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998, 20 pp., NCJ 171676. This report describes findings from a congressionally mandated evaluation of State and local crime prevention programs funded by the U.S. Department of Justice. Based on a review of more than 500 prevention program evaluations meeting minimum scientific standards, the report concludes that there is minimally adequate evidence to establish a provisional list of what works, what doesn't, and what's promising. Findings are current as of late 1996. Public Health/Corrections Collaborations: Prevention and Treatment of HIV/AIDS, STDs, and TB, Research in Brief, by Theodore M. Hammett, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998, 20 pp., NCJ 169590. Public health agencies working in corrections environments not only service the needs of inmates but also help to protect the population from the spread of infectious diseases by recently released offenders. NIJ, in partnership with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has released this report to highlight research findings on the benefits of comprehensive collaborations between corrections and public health agencies. Findings based on a national survey and several site visits indicate that most existing collaborations involve public health departments providing funds, staff, or direct services in correctional facilities. Women Offenders: Programming Needs and Promising Approaches, Research in Brief, by Merry Morash, Timothy S. Bynum, and Barbara A. Koons, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, August 1998, 12 pp., NCJ 171668. Women in prisons have needs quite different from men's, in part because they are more often victims of sexual or physical abuse and in part because they bear greater responsibility for children. Women offenders also are more likely than men to be addicted to drugs, have mental illnesses, and have been unemployed before incarceration. These are among the results presented in this report of an NIJ-sponsored survey of State-level correctional administrators, prison and jail administrators, and program administrators to determine the special needs of incarcerated women in the areas of management, screening, assessment, and programming. Awards in Fiscal Year 1997, Research in Brief, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1998, 28 pp., NCJ 167576. This list presents the grants, interagency and cooperative agreements, contracts, and fellowships awarded by NIJ during fiscal year 1997. The awards reflect research, evaluation, training, dissemination, and technical support projects. 1997 Research Portfolio, Research Report, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, August 1998, 64 pp., NCJ 171670. This listing contains all ongoing research, evaluation, and program development activities supported by NIJ through May 1998. The projects listed include currently active and open grants, interagency and cooperative agreements, contracts, and fellowships. ------------------------------ NIJ in the Journals The following articles are based on studies sponsored by NIJ. Copies are available on loan from NCJRS; in some cases, photocopies may be obtained. For information on availability, call NCJRS at 800-851-3420; or send an Internet e-mail to askncjrs@ncjrs.org. Please cite the accession (ACCN) number. "Criminal Activity and Assault-Type Handguns: A Study of Young Adults," Annals of Emergency Medicine 32:1 (July 1998): 44-50, by G.J. Wintemute, M.A. Wright, C.A. Parham, C.M. Drake, and J.J. Beaumont, ACCN 173397. This article presents data from a longitudinal study of 5,360 young adults who legally purchased handguns in California in 1988 to determine whether an association exists between the purchase of an assault-type handgun and prior or subsequent criminal activity. Few of the young adults who legally purchased handguns after passing a criminal-records background check purchased an assault-type handgun. However, young adults with a criminal history were more likely to purchase assault-type handguns. New criminal activity was common among handgun purchasers with a criminal history, regardless of the type of handgun they purchased. Assault-type handgun purchasers were significantly more likely to be charged with new offenses. "Female Gang Involvement," Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 35 (1) (February 1998): 100- 118, by G.D. Curry, grant number 93-IJ-CX-0051, ACCN 170555. The author reviews the literature on the involvement of young women in gangs, identifies themes relating to their involvement, and proposes an agenda for future research. The article suggests that research about female gang involvement needs to make the transition from simply describing gang behavior to developing and testing theories about such behavior. "High-Speed Pursuit: The Offenders' Perspective," Criminal Justice and Behavior 25 (1) (March 1998): 30-45, by R.G. Dunham, G.P. Alpert, D.J. Kenny, and P. Cromwell, grant number 93-IJ-CX-0061, ACCN 170754. Interviews conducted with individuals who admitted they fled from the police within the past year revealed several features about those situations: The average age of suspects is 26, and 94 percent are men. Of 146 vehicular chases, 30 percent were terminated when suspects stopped and either ran or gave up. About 57 percent of apprehended suspects said police had beaten them at the conclusion of the case. Interviews with suspects show the number of police pursuits may have been greater than the number reported in official police records. Those who escaped a police pursuit were not more desperate or more involved in serious offenses than those who were arrested, nor were they more likely to have thought about punishment during the chase. In addition, those who escaped were no more likely to do so than those with chase experience. "Homicide and Drugs," Homicide Studies 2 (2) (May 1998): 176-205, by K.J. Riley, ACCN 173138. Changes in drug market activity, including reductions in crack cocaine use, have been offered as contributing factors to the recent declines in homicide rates in many U.S. cities. Combining data from structured interviews with policymakers and community representatives and from existing data programs (especially NIJ's Drug Use Forecasting program), this article investigates the relationship of changing drug use and drug market patterns to homicide trends in six cities. Findings include a low awareness of specific local drug use trends, strong perceptions of links between drugs (particularly crack cocaine) and violence, and a correlation between trends in cocaine use among arrestees and homicide rates. "In Search of Hopeful Glimpses: A Critique of Research Strategies in Current Boot Camp Evaluations," Crime and Delinquency 44 (2) (April 1998): 314-334, by S.X. Zhang, grant number 96-SC- VX-0003, ACCN 170527. This article presents a comprehensive review of research strategies used to evaluate the effectiveness of boot camp programs and calls for wider use of self-report data and sample matching techniques to augment current measures. The author emphasizes the importance of including reintegration of the offender into the community and the involvement of an offender's social networks during and after treatment. The article does not claim that boot camp outcomes will drastically change if alternative strategies are implemented; rather, it calls attention to measurement aspects that have been largely neglected in boot camp research and claims that informed conclusions about the effectiveness of boot camp programs can best be made by taking a more holistic approach to evaluation research designs. "National Survey of Pursuits and the Use of Police Force: Data From Law Enforcement Agencies," Journal of Criminal Justice 25 (4) (1997): 315- 323, by D.J. Kenny and G.P. Alpert, grant number 93-IJ-CX-0061, ACCN 170274. This article presents results of a national survey of police agencies to ascertain pursuit and use-of-force policies and practices. Nearly all 737 responding agencies reported having written policies governing pursuit situations. Municipal agencies were significantly more likely than county agencies to restrict pursuits to felony incidents, to restrict pursuits to marked vehicles, and to impose supervisory responsibility more often. Nearly 16 percent of police agencies indicated they had been involved in litigation resulting from pursuits; 25 percent said pursuits resulted in officers using force to apprehend the suspect. "Pursuing the Psychopath: Capturing the Fledgling Psychopath in a Nomological Net," Journal of Abnormal Psychology 106 (34) (1998): 001-0013, by Donald R. Lynam, ACCN 169877. This article presents the results of an assessment of child psychopathy in 430 boys ages 12 and 13. A systematic construct validation approach revealed that childhood psychopathy fits into the nomological network surrounding adult psychopathy. Children with psychopathic personalities, like their adult counterparts, were serious and stable offenders, impulsive, and more prone to externalizing than internalizing disorders. The results suggest that psychopathy has a childhood manifestation that can be measured reliably. The author also discusses the implications of the findings and makes recommendations about future research, including that research about adult psychopaths is likely to be confounded by the effects of years of drug and alcohol abuse, physical fighting, and multiple incarcerations. "The Relationship Between Firearm Design and Firearm Violence: Handguns in the 1990s," Journal of the American Medical Association 275 (June 12, 1996): 1749-1753, by G.J. Wintemute, ACCN 169680. Firearms now rank a close second to motor vehicles as a leading cause of traumatic death nationwide. The convergence results not so much from an increase in the firearms-related death rate, which has remained relatively stable for the past 15 years, but from a steady decrease in the death rate from motor vehicle injuries. That decrease in large part stems from improved design and marketing of motor vehicles themselves. This article extends the product-oriented focus related to motor vehicles to the prevention of firearms-related injuries and violence by identifying trends in the design and marketing of firearms that affect rates of firearms-related injury and violence. As with other consumer products, the design of handguns is evolving in response to changing consumer demand and the opportunities and limitations created by statute. The author discusses how this evolution will affect rates of firearm violence. "Trajectories of Change in Criminal Offending: Good Marriages and the Desistance Process," American Sociological Review 63 (2) (April 1998): 225-238, by J.H. Laub, D.S. Nagin, and R.J. Sampson, ACCN 173396. The authors examine changes in criminal offending that can be spurred by the formation of social bonds; as an individual's investment in social bonds grows, his incentive for avoiding crime increases. Using a statistical model, the authors test their hypothesis and show that desistance from crime is facilitated by the development of quality marital bonds. The authors suggest that many of the classic predictors of the onset and frequency of delinquency (being a difficult child, low IQ, living in poverty, poor parental supervision) may not explain desistance. They further suggest that early marriages characterized by social cohesiveness lead to a growing preventive effect. "Treatment for Drug Abusing Offenders During Correctional Supervision: A Nationwide Overview," Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 26 (3/4) (1998): 1-45, by D.S. Lipton, ACCN 171015. Treating drug offenders during their custody in correctional institutions is likely to be successful when used in conjunction with research-tested technologies such as urine screening. The author discusses previous studies that demonstrate substantial reductions in recidivism for offenders who receive treatment during incarceration. He describes efforts in a number of States by highlighting successful programs in California, Florida, Texas, New York, Oregon, and Delaware. "Up It Up: Gender and the Accomplishment of Street Robbery," Criminology 36 (1) (February 1998): 37- 66, by J. Miller, grant number 94-IJ-CX-0030, ACCN 170530. Findings from interviews with street robbers--23 men and 14 women--in St. Louis show that although men and women express similar motives for robbery, their enactment of the crime is strikingly different. The men used a confrontational manner that included physical violence, a gun, or both, and they tended to rob other men involved in street life. Women, in contrast, used three main methods: they targeted females in physically confrontational robberies, they targeted males by appearing sexually available, and they teamed with men in street robberies of other men. ------------------------------ U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street N.W. Washington, DC 20531 Janet Reno Attorney General Raymond C. Fisher Associate Attorney General Laurie Robinson Assistant Attorney General No‰l Brennan Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jeremy Travis Director, National Institute of Justice ------------------------------ Office of Justice Programs World Wide Web Site http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov National Institute of Justice World Wide Web Site http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij