Outcome Assessment Program for Security Police Agency.
Research Design Paper
The purpose of this assignment is to achieve three of our major learning objectives in this course:
• Describing Assessment research within the context of identifying evidence-based practices in criminology and criminal justice and
• Demonstrating the ability to locate scholarly, peer-reviewed studies in academic journal and synthesize information
• Demonstrating the ability to simultaneously evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of research methods across all three major validity areas: measurement validity, generalizability, and causal validity
Fictitious Scenario
For this writing assignment, I am providing you with a fictitious scenario. We are pretending that you are a researcher who has been approached by a fictitious police agency (state, county, or city) to design a research plan. This fictitious police agency is implementing an evidence-based “hot spots” policing program, and they need a researcher to plan the outcome Assessment.
The Real Program
Hot spots policing is part of a crime-reduction policing strategy (https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=208 ) in which police agencies employ the SARA model (http://www.ncjp.org/index.php?q=strategic-planning/justice-applications/sara-problem-solving-model ) to target high crime areas. Police respond by aggressively policing disorder through methods such as increasing misdemeanor arrests. The goal of hot-spot policing is to reduce all types of crime and improve physical and social disorder in high-crime areas.
Paper Instructions
A fictitious police agency needs your research expertise to plan an outcome Assessment of their hot spot policing program. To Help them, you are write a 7-10 page Assessment plan which should follow this outline and includes the following:
1. Introduction (one paragraph)
a. The introductory paragraph should inform the reader of the purpose of the paper – to plan an Assessment of [insert fictitious agency’s name] new hot spot policing program
i. Inform the reader of the purpose for using hot spot policing and that it is a promising evidence-based program
1. Include information about the “Program Theory” at https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=208
a. Be sure to cite and reference the website source within the paragraph using correct APA style
i. Reference:
1. Office of Justice Programs. (2011, December). Program Profile: Hot Spots Policing (Lowell, Mass.). Retrieved [month, date, year profile was accessed], from CrimeSolutions.gov https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=208
ii. Parenthetical in-text citation:
1. …(Office of Justice Programs, 2011).
2. Office of Justice Programs (2011)….
ii. End the paragraph with an outline the rest of the paper for your reader. You will be:
1. Describing the program
2. Providing a brief (non-exhaustive) review of prior research regarding the program
3. Describing the research design plan for the agency’s outcome Assessment of the program
4. Concluding with a description of the strengths and limitations of the research design plan
2. Describe the Program (no more than one page long)
a. The second part of the paper should describe hot spot policing for the reader (See https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=208 )
i. Be sure to use an introductory sentence
ii. Be sure to clearly define the outcome(s) hot spots policing is designed to achieve
1. See “Program Goals” on the website
iii. Be sure to describe the processes used by agencies for hot spots policing
1. See “Target Sites, Program Components, Key Personnel, and Program Theory” on the website
iv. Be sure to cite and reference the website source within the paragraph using correct APA style
1. Reference:
a. Office of Justice Programs. (2011, December). Program Profile: Hot Spots Policing (Lowell, Mass.). Retrieved [month, date, year profile was accessed], from CrimeSolutions.gov https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=208
2. Parenthetical in-text citation:
a. …(Office of Justice Programs, 2011).
b. Office of Justice Programs (2011)….
3. Describe the Prior Research
a. The third section of the paper should provide a brief, non-exhaustive review of the existing research using at least 3 scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles
i. Be sure to use an introductory sentence
1. Use transitions to guide your reader, as needed
ii. The first source should be that of Braga and Bond (2008) who described and evaluated this program in Lowell, Massachusetts at https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=208
1. You can find the scholarly article published by Braga and Bond (2008) by searching the UCF Library ProQuest Criminal Justice database (http://guides.ucf.edu/criminaljusticedatabases )
2. Once you have the Braga and Bond (2008) article, you can cite and reference the original article, rather than the crimesolutions.gov website, using APA style
iii. Find two additional scholarly, peer-reviewed sources on the topic of hot spots policing using the same UCF Library database. Outcome/impact Assessments are recommended.
iv. Remember, if the article is empirical (i.e., data was collected and analyzed), do NOT write about the article’s literature review. You should only discuss and cite the empirical study’s:
1. Purpose
2. Methods
a. Sample
b. Design
c. Measures
i. To ensure construct validity in your Assessment plan, be sure to clearly identify how the researchers measured/operationalized their outcome variable(s) and independent variable(s)
d. Results/Findings
3. Any differences in the methods or findings of Assessments of hot spots policing, if you include more than one outcome Assessment in your review
v. Be sure to cite and reference your sources using correct APA style
1. See “Article Citations” and “Parenthetical Citations” at http://guides.ucf.edu/APA for APA style citations
4. Describe Your Design Plan for the Outcome Assessment
a. This is the major focus of the assignment/paper; therefore, it should take the majority of space
b. Be sure to use an introductory sentence at the beginning of each paragraph to inform the reader of the paragraph’s main topic
i. Use transitions to guide your reader, as needed
c. You can follow the methods of Braga and Bond (2008) or other outcome Assessments of hot spot policing.
i. Just be sure to inform the reader that you are following the work of [insert proper citation of source]
ii. Following the work of another lends credibility and validity to your plan, but you must give the source credit!!
d. Be sure to include the following:
i. A research question
1. The program goals should be written in operationalized form (i.e., a research question) – This means you need to be sure to clearly identify the dependent/outcome variable and independent variable within the research question
2. (For example, are you trying to determine whether hot spot policing reduces crime within [insert agency’s name] jurisdiction?)
ii. Sampling strategy
1. What sampling strategy will be used? – Identify both the method and describe the process.
2. What jurisdiction are you trying to infer the results to?
3. Note the strengths and limitations of this strategy so you can include this information in the conclusion
iii. Well-defined (conceptualized) and operationalized variables
1. Identify the dependent variable:
a. How will it be measured?
b. What is the level of measurement?
2. Identify the independent variable:
a. How will it be measured?
b. What is the level of measurement?
3. Other study variables, if applicable:
a. How will they be measured?
iv. Design
1. What type of design will be used? – Identify both the design and describe the process.
2. Why did you choose this design?
3. What can the design tell you about the program’s effectiveness?
4. Note the strengths and limitations that are inherent in this design so you can include this information in the conclusion
e. Original thoughts of the writer do not need to be cited or referenced, but if you refer to another’s work or the text, be sure to cite and reference it using APA style
f. Remember to give enough information so the reader (e.g., the police agency) can perform the Assessment without asking you questions
5. Conclusion of the study’s strengths and limitations (no more than one page long)
a. Be sure to use an introductory sentence
i. What are the strengths and limitations of your proposed sample, measures, and design?
ii. What methods were used reduce the limitations and increase generalizability, construct validity, and internal validity?
iii. What are some potential issues that might need to be considered in this outcome Assessment?
b. Original thoughts of the writer do not need to be cited or referenced, but if you refer to another’s work or the text, be sure to cite and reference it using APA style
Additional information on paper project:
• Use standard 12-point font with one-inch margins (all around), and double spacing
• The paper length does not include title or reference pages
• Be sure to include in-text citations and full references using proper APA formatting
• In addition to the Instructions, review the Grading Rubric(s)
• If you need writing Helpance, make a consultation with the University Writing Center at https://uwc.cah.ucf.edu/schedule-a-consultation/ . You should schedule an appointment three or more weeks in advance.
• See the Webcourse for additional Helpance in finding articles and citing and summarizing an article.
Grading Rubric for Research Design Paper
Description of the Program (10 points)
• 10 points
o The program is described and is easily understood in a single reading, and
o Outcome(s) for the program are clearly defined
• 0 points
o The program is not easily understood in a single reading, or
o Outcome(s) for the program are not clearly defined
Literature Review (15 points)
• 15 points
o The program and variables used to evaluate the program in prior research are clearly defined and described, and
o Three relevant scholarly articles are used
• 0 points
o The program or variables used to evaluate the program in prior research are not clearly defined or described, or
o Fewer than three relevant scholarly articles are used
Research Design (50 points total)
Research Question
• 10 points
o Program goals are written in operationalized form –
Research question clearly identifies dependent/outcome variable and independent variable
• 0 points
o Programs goals are not written in operationalized form –
Research question does not clearly identify the dependent variable or independent variable
Measurement
• 15 points
o Dependent variable –
Is clearly identified;
How it will be measured is clearly described; and
Its level of measurement is clearly described
o Independent variable –
Is clearly identified;
How it will be measured is clearly described; and
Its level of measurement is clearly described
o Other study variables –
Are identified and clearly described as to their measure and level of measurement, if applicable
• 0 points
o Dependent variable –
Is not clearly identified;
How it will be measured is not clearly described; or
Its level of measurement is not clearly described
o Independent variable –
Is not clearly identified;
How it will be measured is not clearly described; or
Its level of measurement is not clearly described
o Other study variables –
Are not identified or not clearly described as to their measure and level of measurement, if applicable
Design
• 10 points
o Design that will be used is clearly identified,
o The reason for the design and its ability to inform effectiveness is clearly described, and
o The inherent limitations of the design are identified
• 0 points
o The design is not clearly identified,
o No reason is given for the design or its ability to inform, or
o The limitations of the design are not clearly identified
Sampling Strategy
• 10 points
o The sampling strategy is clearly identified and described, and
o The strengths and limitations of the sampling strategy are identified
• 0 points
o The sampling strategy is not clearly identified or described, or
o Neither the strengths nor limitations of the sampling strategy are identified
Potential Issues
• 5 points
o Potential issues with the Assessment are discussed
• 0 points
o Potential issues with the Assessment are not discussed
Organization (5 points)
• 5 points
o Method of organization is well suited to topic
• 0 points
o A better method of organization is necessary
APA Style (10 points)
• 10 points
o Correct APA style is used correctly most of the time
• 0 points
o APA style is used correctly part or none of the time
Mechanics: Punctuation, Grammar & Spelling (10 points)
• 10 points
o Writing is clear and easy to understand at a high school reading level,
o Paragraphs support solid topic sentences; transitions used when needed,
o Quotes are use minimally and well
o Proper punctuation and grammar are used consistently, and
o Correct spelling is used
• 0 points
o Writing is not easy to understand,
o Topic sentences are not used throughout; transitions are weak or not used when appropriate,
o Quotes are poorly integrated, over-used, or “plopped in” improperly,
o There are 3 or more errors in punctuation or grammar, or
o Two or more words are misspelled
Note: Instructor reserves discretion regarding any issues not detailed in this rubric, such as plagiarism and page length.
Outcome Assessment Program for Security Police Agency.
Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to plan an Assessment of Security Police Agency new hot spot policing program. This strategy of fighting crime heavily relies on the broken windows theory of crime. The theory states that crime is more likely to be prevalent in areas that experience high levels of social and physical disorder. The broken windows policing program or the disorder policing solves crime by putting an order in areas with problems. Consequently, the program’s idea is if the disorder was to be reduced, the environmental conditions would improve and ultimately this would see a reduction in crime. This is by using a policing approach that lays emphasis on solving problems and hence see a reduction in nuisance crime by high-crime areas (Office of Justice Programs, 2011). The rest of this paper covers the program of hot policing, followed by a review of previous research of the program which will help in the research design plan that will be important in coming up with the agency’s outcome Assessment and finally a conclusion that describes the strengths and limitations of design plan used in research.
Program Description
Hotspot policing was a crime reduction policing program that relied on a disorder policing approach to curb crimes in Lowell, Mass and therefore instil social and physical order. The program was effective in its objective since it alleviated disorder as well as reduced service calls that were displaced to the surrounding treatment areas.
This program is designed to achieve improved physical and social order in areas where high crime was prevalent. As a result of this, lead to a reduction in disorder-related acts of crime. Which ultimately means there is improved order in the areas that would lead to reduced crime rates in the areas where they are applied.
In hot spot policing, agencies utilize program components whose focus is reduction of disorder in areas that are rated as areas of high-level acts of crime. The program components are techniques are approaches that seek to reduce acts of crime by relying on a policing disorder methodology.
The first strategy is to use aggressive policing techniques by increasing the number of arrests for order violations by the public. Examples of these order violations include arresting individuals dealing in drugs, increasing the rate of patrols in areas perceived to be facing high rates of crime and carrying out random frisks on individual suspected individuals. The objective of this strategy is to take these individuals off the streets which will ultimately see a reduction in crime.
The second strategy is to improve social and physical disorder in an area perceived to be high-risk areas (Office of Justice Programs, 2011).This method adopts prevention strategies to fight crime. Examples of strategies adopted include installation of street lighting, installation of surveillance cameras, carrying out code inspections, dispersing loiterers, evicting residents who are problematic and destroying abandoned buildings. These strategies create a sense of order in high crime areas. For this strategy to succeed there is need for various players to work together. They include police agencies, business owners as well as tenant associations.
The final strategy is seeking help from social service players to aid police in increasing social order. Such activities include collaborating with local authorities to provide housing for the homeless, creating recreational facilities for the youth and linking mentally ill individuals with mental health facilities. These strategies create opportunities that are perceived as high risk thus promoting social order.
For the program to succeed all players need to be involved. They include community agencies, business people as well as technocrats such as geospatial analysts who are involved in mapping out hot spots in these crime-prone areas.
Review of Existing Research
The research by Braga and Bond, Policing Crime and Disorder Hot Spots: A Randomized Controlled Trial, evaluates policing disorder and their effects. This is based on a problem-based framework of disorder and crime hotspots in Lowell, Massachusetts.
The research utilised thirty-four hot spots that were paired resulting in 17 groups. Each of the pairs was then treated to conditions of block field experiment that was random. The method utilised the SARA assessment method whose steps of scanning, analysis, response and assessment. Ranking procedure was used to identify crime hot spots based on the consistency of reported crime cases as well as calls of disorder.
Qualitative data on the areas, Lowell Police Department perception of crime as well as local dynamics was used to map out the boundaries of these hot spot areas. These spots were expected to have a two block catchment area. This is how the research ended up with 34 discreet areas that high crime areas. This sample accounted for about 2.7 percent of Lowell’s area which is 14.5 square miles.
The 17 blocks that resulted in one member of each pair being subjected to control conditions while the other was used as a control. This aimed at increasing the ability of the experimental design to analyse the null hypothesis that is removing the error term while ensuring that the analyses were free of block effects.
The method used statistical method that looked at exhaustive and isolated causative agents that had a strong bearing on compromising citizen calls in control areas. The methodology, therefore, utilised arrests, situational based crime prevention methods as well as social service strategies in the control and treatment areas. In the study, the dependent variables were assault, robbery, burglary, theft, disorder and nuisance.
The results of the study checked the effects of the methodology adopted on citizen calls. The incident rate ratio showed a decrease in calls by 19.8 percent in the areas that were treated as compared to the control places. Which indicates a reduction in crime. This reduction also applies to other types of crime such as robbery, assault, burglary and theft.
The second review is based on the works of Anthony A. Braga, The Effects of Hot Spots Policing on Crime. This is a review that focuses on evidence on the activities of agencies in curbing high activity crime which is followed by an assessment that focuses on crime prevention at hotspots. The interventions analysed were primarily based on police enforcement efforts such as patrols, aggressive law enforcement and policing that limited utilization of the public (Braga, 2007).
The possible outcomes were to measure the effects of police intervention on recorded crime levels in various jurisdictions. The consequent measurements include arrest data, calls by the public for service, crime reports, measurement of disorder such as through interviews, observations and through surveys.
A qualitative method of analytical methods was used to analyse this data. This was a systematic analysis of the hotspots that assessed the effects of the intervention on fighting crime. The Assessments were carried out in cities in the US as well as a suburb in Australia the findings which totalled to 9 hotspots. 5 utilized random experimental designs while the other four used non-equivalent control group designs.
Hot spots were mapped based on official police data which were based on the volume of street addresses, the number of calls received from these areas as well as depending on police and other researcher’s observation to set out hot spot boundaries.
The results of the review showed that police efforts in focussing at areas prone to crime can be effective in preventing crime. This is because seven of all nine Assessments recorded reduction in crime.
The third review was a review by David Hureau, Andrew Papachristos, and Anthony Braga, Hot spots policing effects on crime. The review’s objective was to assess the impact of crime prevention by police at crime hot spots. The review also analysed whether police activity in any area resulted in crime displacement or crime reduction (Braga et al, 2012).
The study was carried out on 19 hotspots that had faced policing intervention. Ten of which used randomized experimental designs while nine used quasi-experimental designs(Braga et al, 2012). Later a meta-analysis was done to determine the effects of crime prevention and later mean effects calculated. About 25 tests were done and 20 of 25 hot spots resulted in reduction in crime and disorder.
The design plan for the Outcome Assessment
This outcome Assessment is heavily dependent on the works of Braga and Bond (2008). This due to the relative success rate of the method that they propose.
The research question for the outcome Assessment is; what are the effects of Security Police Agency new hot spot policing program? Will it lead to increased levels of crime, diffusion of crime or relocation of areas where criminal activities are committed?
The sampling strategy would be used would involve selecting areas that are hot spots of crime. Such data needs to be backed up by police data so that the results are effective and are highly reliable. As a result of this, the data would rely on Anthony A Braga, the effects of Hot spots policing on crime. The result would be to measure the outcome of the measures of police intervention and the crime levels in the various jurisdictions.
Outcomes were to measure the effects of police intervention on recorded crime levels in various jurisdictions.
The strengths of this strategy is that police data from agencies would enable analysis to be carried out on areas rated to be areas experiencing high levels of crime. This would ensure that the results of the Assessment are accurate and can be highly relied on. The limitations of the strategy include methodological problems that may arise in research of these crime hot spots and the actual Assessment design that is likely to have an effect on the lack of crime prevention gains in certain hotspots.
The dependent variable in this study is the various form of crimes which are assault, robbery, nuisance, theft and burglary. The measurement of these variables would be based on the use of statistical software to find out the likelihood of each crime, probability levels of each crime in each location, the incident rate ratios of these forms of crime. Furthermore, linear regression models were used to calculate variances of these acts of crime (Braga & Bond, 2008).
Independent variables in this study are those that cause the dependent variables. The independent variables refer to social welfares of residents in the hot spots, economic level of residents and availability of recreational facilities. The measurement of these variables would have to rely on research of the hotspots. Statics would be important in determining the number of facilities in the area as well as the accessibility of these residents to them so that they could keep of crime.
The design process for this Assessment would involve picking crime hot spots in the area of jurisdiction. Possible areas for this Assessment should be streets, subway stations, buildings and residential areas. This would enable analysis of the crime scenes and thus reduce instances of disproportionate levels of crime that are likely to affect the studies substantially. The police interventions to be implemented would also focus on these areas. These areas that are chosen would be studied further. This is because different types of hotspots respond to fight crime in various ways (Braga & Bond, 2008).
The types of interventions are also important in this form of analyses. For this design, it would be important to limit these interventions to law enforcement agencies. This is because other methods are likely to offer solutions that might affect the Assessment method these include intervention by the community or business owners. Moreover, the method needs to engage primary traditional policing methods so that the analysis is reliable.
Conclusion
The Assessment through this method has certain strengths. This is because they contribute to the growing levels of analyses in field of policing. Results from this method show that the method that is proposed is more likely to curb crime levels. This is due to a mean statistically significant measurement method. The weakness of this Assessment is that the methodology adopted may account for lack of crime prevention gains in certain locations for the analyses of Security Police Agency.
References
Office of Justice Programs. (2011, December). Hot Spots Policing (Lowell, Mass.). Retrieved March 9, 2018, from https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=208
Braga, A. A. (2007). Policing Crime Hot Spots. Preventing Crime, 179-192. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-69169-5_12
BRAGA, A. A., & BOND, B. J. (2008). POLICING CRIME AND DISORDER HOT SPOTS: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL*. Criminology, 46(3), 577-607. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00124.x
Braga, A. A., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2012). The Effects of Hot Spots Policing on Crime: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Justice Quarterly, 31(4), 633-663. doi:10.1080/07418825.2012.673632
