Crime Reduction - Helping to Reduce Crime in Your Area

Are repeat calls for service and repeat crimes routinely scanned?

Are efforts to identify and analyse past and emerging problems routine?

Are simple emerging problems allocated to individuals for their response, either on their own or in conjunction with other agencies?

Are more complex emerging problems identified/prioritised in routine discussion amongst partners?

Do partnerships routinely try to anticipate and forestall future problems?

Causal analysis/Analysis

Are adequate data collection and sharing arrangements in place to be used in problem identification and analysis?

Are local analysts available who are familiar with relevant theory, crime reduction literature, and analytic techniques to identify and analyse problems?

Do analysts have the hardware and software they need to do their job?

Do analysts have a competent source of advice and supervision for their analytic work?

Do analysts work in partnership with same agency colleagues responsible for dealing with problems, and with those in other agencies and their analysts?

Do staff in supervisory positions have training and experience in analysis?

Tactic or treatment/Response

Do partnerships addressing agreed problems have sources of informed advice on possible promising responses?

Do members of partnerships have a joint budget to implement or pump prime responses to agreed problems?

Are members of partnerships adaptable in their service delivery patterns where doing so may comprise a promising response to a problem?

Do those allocated problems have sources of informed advice on possible promising responses?

Are external sources of advice in problem-solving being drawn on when needed?

Output monitoring/Assessment

Are all problem-solving efforts within the BCU/authority area systematically monitored?

Are initiatives adjusted in the light of monitoring?

Is an evaluation strategy in place?

Are reputable independent evaluators used where significant resource allocation decisions turn on evaluation findings?

Is care taken not to give unqualified support to extending initiatives that have not been subject to independent competent evaluation?

Are provisions in place to conduct ‘light’ in-house or student evaluations where only suggestive findings are needed?

Incentivisation/enablement

Do members of partnerships encourage their staff routinely to participate in problem-solving?

Are individuals allocated problems given training in their analysis and in forms of response?

Are individuals allocated problems given reasonable time to address them?

Are specialist skills being drawn on and used in problem-solving?

Does the partnership provide a forum for mutual leverage in problem-solving?

Does the partnership have agreed ways of applying leverage where necessary to third parties in implementing responses to problems?

Is the work of the partnership monitored regularly and members held to account for their problem-solving?

Are individual agencies being performance measured for their local problem-solving work as well as their attention to national priorities?

Do supervisors help subordinates with problem-solving and monitor their problem-solving work?

Are staff oriented to problem-solving, with selection, training and rewards to encourage and enable them?

Do senior members of agencies know of and understand the problems being addressed?

Problem-communication to and from other levels

Is day to day problem-solving monitored and are efforts made to identify broader problems?

Are problems identified within the area that may reflect broader problems passed ‘up’ for analysis and attention at ‘higher’ levels?