Preventing Repeat Residential Burglary:

A meta-evaluation of two Australian demonstration projects

Contents | Acknowledgements | Executive Summary | Chapter 1: About repeat victimisation | Chapter 2: The demonstration projects | Chapter 3: Meta-Evaluation | Chapter 4: Programme guide and resource tools | Appendix 1: Summary of research study outcomes | Appendix 2: Process evatuation framework | References

CHAPTER 4

Programme guide and resource tools

This chapter provides a programme guide and selection of resource tools, taking into account the experiences of the two demonstration projects and other crime prevention research and practice literature. It also includes information on other sources of advice and resource material relevant to designing and evaluating prevention programs for repeat victimisation. Because the programme guide is designed to be able to be used independently of the meta-evaluation report, there will be some repetition of content between sections of the guide and the previous chapters.

The word 'burglary' is used consistently in this chapter, even where the reference is to information taken from jurisdictional evaluation reports that have used the term 'break and enter'. The word 'burglary', as used in this programme guide, relates to the unlawful entry of a residence (whether by means of forced entry or other method) with the intention of committing a theft from the property.

Purpose

This programme guide is designed to inform those considering or developing a repeat residential burglary prevention programme. It is based on the lessons learned from the two Australian demonstration projects and takes into account the wider research and practice literature. It is not intended to be a prescriptive manual of steps to be taken, but to present some good practice suggestions on key issues.

Issues and strategies

The planning stage

Defining repeat victimisation

Repeat victimisation is generally defined as occurring when the same victim or place experiences more than one incident over a specified time. Repeat burglary victimisation occurs when there have been at least two such incidents at the same address over the selected period of time.

Some issues to consider in determining the definition to be used include the most appropriate time period for determining whether an incident constitutes a repeat, whether to include attempts, and whether only incidents reported to police will be considered or if unreported incidents will be identified and taken into account. These issues are discussed in more detail below.

Time period

There is no standard definition in the literature as to what time period constitutes repeat victimisation. An overview of repeat victimisation strategies by one of the leading researchers in the field⁶⁸ identifies a number of difficulties in determining criteria for defining repeat victimisation. Although he draws no definitive conclusions about the appropriate length of time, he does suggest a six-month or one-year period over which repeat victimisation histories should be collected.

Most interventions use the previous 12 months as the defining period, although shorter or longer timeframes may be appropriate in particular circumstances (for example, in a holiday resort location where there are strong seasonal trends in crimes committed, a longer timeframe therefore may be more appropriate).

Attempts

Some interventions include burglary attempts while others only include completed incidents. Including attempts provides a more complete picture of risk relevant to intervention.

Ideally, completed burglaries and attempts should be considered separately for evaluation purposes. There are crime prevention benefits in preventing the completion of the incident (and the associated loss of property and victim distress) even though the security measures taken did not completely deter the offender from attempting to commit a crime at that location. A reduction in completed burglaries and a corresponding rise in attempts could be considered as a positive outcome of prevention strategies that would be overlooked if both types of incidents were combined. The manner in which crime statistics are recorded has implications for whether attempts can be separately identified and considered from police records.

Unreported incidents

Most interventions rely on police records to identify repeats, which means that repeat victimisation is based on only those incidents reported to police. Victim surveys show 25 per cent of Australian burglaries and 68 per cent of attempts are not reported⁶⁹. Including unreported incidents would improve the accuracy of identifying repeat victims and of evaluating intervention programs.

However, including unreported incidents to identify repeat addresses is a more resource intensive process. It is also vulnerable to various respondent errors. These include 'telescoping' (placing incidents earlier or later in time than when they actually occurred), recall delay, lack of knowledge (because the interviewed victim may not have lived at that address over the whole time in question), and the possibility of confusing incidents occurring at the present address when incidents actually occurred elsewhere.

Relying on police records overcomes these victim-reporting issues, but raises other difficulties. Police crime recording systems have high potential for incorrect recording because of missing details, incorrect address spelling, or inconsistent recording practices.

Establishing processes for verifying information used to identify repeats, regardless of which source is used, is important to avoid under-reporting or over-reporting.

Selecting intervention locations

As with any crime prevention programme, the choice of whether and where to introduce repeat victimisation interventions will depend on issues such as the extent of the problem to be addressed and the capacity of the location to introduce and sustain effective prevention responses. In the case of repeat victimisation, adequacy of police record systems to support a repeat victimisation focus is an additional concern.

If the aim of a repeat victimisation strategy is to reduce the overall burglary rate, then repeats need to make up a significant proportion of total offences in order to have any discernible effect. For example, if the target is to reduce total burglaries by 10 per cent, and repeats constitute one-fifth of offences, then the repeat victimisation strategy would need to reduce repeats by half to meet this overall target. However, if repeats constitute only 10 per cent of all burglaries, then the strategy would have to prevent every repeat in order to meet the overall target. In effect, a repeat victimisation strategy that aims to reduce overall burglary rates, should be focused on locations with relatively high repeat rates in order for the intervention to lead to a reduction in those overall rates.

Alternatively, if the reason for targeting repeats is to reduce the extent and effects of repeat victimisation specifically, independent of an overall burglary reduction strategy, then selecting intervention sites solely on the basis of high repeat rates becomes less of an issue. For example, there may be widespread community concern about repeat burglaries or the issue may be given priority for social policy reasons such as the disproportionate effects on repeat victims.

Determining the strategic approach

Several strategic issues need to be considered in determining the most appropriate approach before developing specific strategies, including the scope and focus of the proposed intervention, the objectives, and whether the intervention responses will be standardised or tailored and graded to provide a different level of intensity according to prior history of repeats. These issues are discussed in more detail below.

Intervention scope

Whether the intervention will be limited to victimised households only or will also extend to non-victimised households in the vicinity has implications for the most appropriate type of strategies to be applied. Effective repeat victimisation interventions have been reported that target only the victimised addresses (for example, by improving security at the victimised household). Others include adjacent addresses in the intervention strategy (for example, by raising security awareness among neighbours or introducing Cocoon Neighbourhood Watch schemes in which immediate neighbours rather than a larger geographic area is the basis for the scheme). Some interventions include a wider geographic area, such as several streets or neighbourhood areas within the scope of the intervention (for example, the hot spot responses in the Queensland demonstration project).

No particular approach has been consistently demonstrated to be more effective than others, and many of the more recent intervention studies have combined the different approaches.

Prevention/detection focus

Many interventions have focused on prevention strategies only, for example, improving household security or increased police patrols to deter offenders. However, the international literature⁷⁰ concludes that there are greater benefits if prevention and detection strategies are combined to address repeat burglary.

For example, an Australian intervention⁷¹ introduced an approach to repeat burglary aimed at both increasing offender detection and resident home security awareness. Strategies included: security assessment at initial police investigation; a follow-up victim support package providing crime prevention information and property marking material; advising near neighbours; target hardening victim residences; increasing the rates of fingerprint sampling at victimised premises; operations targeting property crime in identified hot spots; targeting recidivist offenders; increased attention by police to second hand dealer shops; and a public crime prevention awareness campaign.

Intervention objective

Whether the intervention is targeting repeat victimisation specifically or is part of an overall crime reduction strategy needs to be considered. Specifically targeting repeats provides a more concentrated focus on that issue, and could therefore produce a reduction of repeat rates. However, there is the potential for target displacement, which could increase the number of first-time incidents, unless the repeat strategy is part of a wider burglary reduction response. International research suggests that an integrated strategy would be most effective⁷².

Graded or base level response

Whether to apply a structured approach that takes into account the prior history of repeats needs to be considered. Some of the more effective strategies against repeat victimisation have involved different levels of intervention depending upon the number of prior incidents. For example, a household with a more extensive repeat history is considered a higher risk of further victimisation and would receive a more intense level of intervention than a household with only a single prior incident. This is a potentially resource effective approach, as it ensures more effort is directed to where there is higher risk.

There is no conclusive evidence that this sort of graded response is more effective in preventing further incidents than an intervention that applies the same strategic approach regardless of the number of prior incidents. The recent research evidence supports a problem-solving approach that tailors the selected intervention to the particular circumstances, rather than a more standardised approach that predetermines the nature of intervention according to prior repeat history.

Standard or tailored response

The extent to which the programme delivers a standardised intervention package versus an individualised approach to each victimised location needs to be considered. Some intervention programs use a pre-determined set of responses. For example, all victims receive an information package of household security advice brochures. Other interventions apply a problem-solving approach, where the response is tailored to individual circumstances. Locations receive different types or combinations of measures according to what is assessed to be the most appropriate response in each individual situation.

For example, a portable silent alarm could be installed for a specific time at a residence where the strategy includes offender detection and there is a perception that a recidivist offender is operating in the local area. There may be a concerted effort on the part of local residents and the relevant council to improve lighting and visibility of dwellings in a particular neighbourhood where the physical features of the local environment, such as parks and laneways, make it difficult to detect an offence taking place.

Unique features of the proposed intervention sites may also need to be taken into account in tailoring an appropriate response. For example, it may be useful to provide some resource support (for example, subsidising the cost of upgrading dwelling security) to promote the implementation of security recommendations of programs operating in socio-economically disadvantaged locations. Areas with high proportions of public rental accommodation may call for different strategies that take into consideration both wider public housing-related policies as well as specific household crime prevention advice.

The research and practice literature⁷³ indicates that a problem-solving approach, where the response is tailored to individual circumstances, is particularly effective. However, the approach is more resource intensive and requires a much higher level of expertise on the part of the staff or volunteers providing the service to victims.

Leadership responsibility

Whether the intervention is to be delivered and managed by police or a criminal justice related department, or through community-based structural arrangements using volunteers as service deliverers, or by some combination of the two, is an issue that needs to be determined early in the planning process. The experience of the Australian demonstration projects is that similar interventions can be effectively applied under different management structures and appropriately delivered by either police officers or volunteers. However, the different approaches have different benefits and challenges, and need careful consideration and planning to address the potential difficulties associated with either approach (these are discussed under other sections of this programme guide).

Based on the experience of the demonstration projects, critical factors that should be considered in selecting the particular model are:

• capacity of the organisational or community-based infrastructure to deliver appropriate management, coordination, training, quality monitoring, and other professional support necessary for staff or volunteers to deliver a high and consistent standard of intervention services
  
• ability of the programmes management structure to assure both key stakeholders and the community that victim confidentiality and security will be maintained by the programmes and the individuals providing services directly to victims
  
• project management and ongoing programme management capacity, particularly in establishing effective procedures and processes for notification and referral, plus coordination arrangements for service delivery once the programme has been implemented
  
• credibility with the public and relevant stakeholders, in terms of being either a criminal justice agency or an agency that has the support of the criminal justice system.

Principles for service delivery

The research and practice literature⁷⁴ identifies several principles for service delivery relevant to repeat victimisation and burglary prevention programs. These should be considered at the planning stage, before specific strategies are developed. They include:

• the importance of early intervention ? because the aim is to prevent repeats, intervention should begin after the first crime, not after the first repeat
  
• the need for immediate response ? the majority of repeat burglaries occur within a very short time, many within the first week, so crime prevention measures should be in place within 24 hours for maximum effect.

In practice, it may be neither feasible nor practicable to intervene immediately after the first incident in each case or to do so within this timeframe. Timing of a programmes commencement relevant to first victimisation; issues associated with the need to obtain victim consent; difficulties in arranging mutually convenient times for the first visit between the victim and the officer or volunteer providing the intervention; and resource availability all can operate to limit the extent to which these service delivery principles could be applied in practice.

Initial service standards could be established on the basis of an analysis of historical repeat victimisation data relevant to the intervention area and adjusted in the light of experience during the operation of the programme. For example, the South Australian demonstration project aimed for an intervention target within seven days.

Planning

The most consistently documented good practice feature of crime prevention programs is the adoption of a problem-solving and strategic planning approach, in which a systematic process identifies local community concerns, sets priorities for action, develops strategies, and reviews outcomes⁷⁵. Good planning involves:

• clearly defining and setting priorities for the problem(s) to be addressed
  
• setting realistic and achievable targets
  
• developing effective and flexible strategies to address these problems
  
• establishing appropriate and workable processes to achieve these strategies
  
• identifying and efficiently allocating resources
  
• introducing monitoring processes to adapt action in the light of experience
  
• appropriately evaluating outcomes and contributing to practice knowledge
  
• building in sustainability (discussed further below).

A range of tools has been developed to assist groups in developing plans to address crime issues (see final section of this guide). The same processes and principles apply equally to the development of plans to respond to repeat burglary.

Some useful guidelines for adopting a problem-solving approach to crime reduction have been outlined in the international literature⁷⁶ as:

• detailed analysis is needed to help define problems in ways that open them to creative responses (traditional police definitions of problems are not always helpful)
  
• detailed analysis needs to be directed at 'pinch points', that is, at the weakest necessary conditions for the problems to persist
  
• site specific analysis of problems is needed to select responses that are relevant to local circumstances
  
• in selecting responses it is crucial to work out in detail how they are expected to produce their intended effects
  
• community consultation and involvement are important to identify interventions that will elicit the cooperation and involvement of residents that are often needed if measures are to be effective
  
• problem-solving, especially for large-scale issues, is facilitated by establishing multi-disciplinary/multi-agency teams.

Planning for sustainability

A crime prevention programme needs to be both effective and durable to make a useful long-term contribution to crime reduction. Planning for sustainability as part of programme development means that successful programs are more likely to last. The research and practice literature⁷⁷ has shown that programs are more likely to be sustained if:

• they stimulate local community enthusiasm and encourage communities to care about the success of the programme
  
• there is a long-term view taken by those responsible for the programme and ongoing commitment by all key players
  
• there is support from top political leaders and widespread acceptance for the approach among stakeholders, including the community
  
• they are flexible to evolving needs
  
• there has been sustainability planning, that is, strategies and targets for promoting long-term durability of the programme are identified, implemented, and reviewed alongside the development and operation of the prevention programme.

Where the programme is police led and delivered, sustainability planning should include strategies for 'mainstreaming' the approach (if evaluated as successful) as part of ongoing operational activity. Where the programme is community-based and managed, sustainability planning also needs to consider options for continued funding beyond any externally funded pilot programme stage. Where the programme is based on a partnership approach, the continuity of management, coordination and resource-sharing structures need to be assessed for sustainability.

The programme development stage

Setting up programme management structures

An effective programme requires some form of sound infrastructure or set of organisational arrangements, although the structure may vary in its level of formality. Informal structures allow for quick response but tend to be less durable, less well adapted to policy coordination, more vulnerable to questions of accountability and confidentiality, and have more difficulty in monitoring and evaluating delivered measures than in the case of formal structures⁷⁸.

Good practice features for effective structural arrangements to manage crime prevention programs have been identified in the research and practice literature⁷⁹ and include:

• flexibility to tailor structures to local circumstances
  
• structures that harmonise strategic and day-to-day operational levels so that high level planning is backed by operational effectiveness
  
• a well-defined management structure with clearly defined and transparent roles and responsibilities
  
• balanced representation of key stakeholders, appropriate to the strategic approach adopted (for example, a community-based approach would be likely to involve a wider array of community groups than a programme delivered within a police operational context, although multi-agency and community input would still be relevant)
  
• appropriate members are selected to represent their organisation, taking into account issues such as: the member's authority to make decisions on behalf of their organisation or section in relation to programme strategic or operational issues as required; continuity and stability of attendance; capacity to instil commitment to, and ownership of, the programme in their own organisation or section; requisite skills and expertise; and capacity to meet time demands for effective participation
  
• effective leadership, able to coordinate and direct efforts, foster team building, motivate and inspire commitment to the programme, and help overcome stakeholder rivalry and conflict where necessary
  
• structural arrangements that generate a sense of identity and promote ownership of the programme among stakeholders.

In addition, the selected structure must have the capacity to deliver the infrastructure needs of the particular strategic approach adopted. For example, a community-based structure using volunteers to deliver the crime prevention response needs to be able to provide for appropriate training and quality monitoring, effective coordination between processes that identify a victimised location and volunteer tasking, assurances of confidentiality for victims, and other critical features important to delivering an effective and credible programme.

Particular issues in applying these features to repeat burglary prevention programs include:

• establishing effective inter- or intra-organisational links between the mechanisms that identify repeat victims (such as police crime reporting systems), arrangements for victim participation (for example designated officers or volunteers responsible for contacting victims in the first instance), and service delivery processes (for instance specialist crime prevention officers or trained volunteers providing security advice to residents)
  
• involving appropriate groups in developing and delivering prevention responses in accordance with the strategic approach adopted; for example, the relevant public housing authority if the programme includes target hardening in areas with high levels of public housing. Other examples are corrective services to assist with information about the release of local offenders with a burglary offence history if there is a strong detection focus within the approach adopted, or local government if an area-level situational crime prevention approach is adopted
  
• integrating and/or coordinating the repeat victimisation strategy with other programs operating in the local community that are relevant to burglary prevention, for example, Neighbourhood Watch, Home Assist or similar programs, Local Crime Prevention Committees or similar partnerships, and local safety audit programs.

Establishing an information base

Police crime recording systems usually are not set up in a format that readily identifies repeat incidents. The manner in which information is collected and recorded often creates difficulties for computerised address matching systems. Information systems needed to support a repeat victimisation prevention programme include the following critical features:

• capacity to readily and accurately identify current and historical address data
  
• minimum data items: address, prior incident history by offence type, and date of occurrence of previous incidents
  
• ability to be used with other applications, such as mapping programs, to identify and monitor hot spots
  
• a simple information retrieval function so that key information can be extracted without requiring expert specialist or technical knowledge
  
• support management information and performance indicators that allow monitoring and evaluation of performance in preventing repeat victimisation.

Computerised information collection and retrieval systems need to be supported by training and monitoring of operational officers to ensure the information recorded by officers on the computerised system is accurate, consistent, comprehensive, and accords with the data requirements needed to identify repeat incidents.

Assessing the local situation

One of the most consistently documented good practice features in community crime prevention is matching the programme to the needs and capacities of the target communities.

At this stage of programme development, there will generally have been a decision taken on the strategic approach to be adopted and where the programme is to be implemented. Assessing capacity of the local situation to support the proposed approach will assist in identifying and developing responses to potential implementation problems, and will help to shape the stages of programme development that follow.

For example, the extent and quality of existing local agency coordination and level of community engagement in crime prevention activities may suggest a less ambitious group (or set) of potential responses be introduced in the first instance, or may show that additional work in establishing infrastructure and local coordination mechanisms needs to occur before the measures are introduced.

Options for resource sharing should be explored. Practical examples include use of local government venues for public meetings or volunteer training, coordination with existing Home Assist or similar government programs or victim support services, or links to property marking or engraving services offered by Neighbourhood Watch.

Developing potential responses

The research and practice literature describes a variety of specific operational responses to repeat burglary. They include target hardening, security advice, additional police patrols, Neighbourhood Watch schemes, neighbourhood safety audits, loan of portable alarms, property marking, use of closed circuit television, targeting recidivist offenders, disrupting stolen goods distribution markets, and others. No particular action is demonstrably superior in all circumstances, and a package of measures is often applied within a problem-solving approach, which makes it difficult to assess the specific contribution of any single measure.

It is useful to develop a group of potential responses within the strategic approach decided upon in the earlier planning process. Appropriate measures would consider strategies in each of the categories described in the theoretical crime prevention literature80, specifically, prevention strategies that increase offender effort, increase perceived risk, reduce anticipated rewards, and offender-focused strategies. Each of these is discussed briefly below.

Increasing offender effort

Strategies to increase the effort required by offenders to commit crime include encouraging householders to enhance locks and bolts at the point of entry to prevent revictimisation using the same modus operandi. Other measures might include encouraging householders to improve security at other commonly identified vulnerable access points, such as sliding patio doors or bathroom windows. These sorts of measures have been shown to be effective in preventing burglaries81.

Increasing perceived risk

Strategies to increase the risk of offenders being detected when committing crime include, for example, loan of a portable burglar alarm where there is a heightened risk of immediate revictimisation, advising immediate neighbours to be more vigilant of their own and their neighbours' properties, encouraging councils to improve street lighting in relevant locations to allow better visibility for 'natural surveillance', and random police patrols during periods of heightened risk. These sorts of measures have been reported to be effective in reducing burglaries82.

Reducing anticipated rewards

Strategies that reduce the rewards to offenders include facilitating property marking so that offenders are less able to sell the stolen goods legally, encouraging householders to secure expensive items off the property when they will be away for some period of time, and making it more difficult for offenders to dispose of goods through legal but suspect distribution channels (such as some secondhand goods markets) by heightening police scrutiny of the activities of such dealers to ensure they comply with legal requirements. These sorts of measures also have been reported as effective responses to burglary83.

Offender focus

This includes enforcement strategies focusing on offenders, including targeting known offenders, increasing the attendance of fingerprint officers at victimised residences, enhancing police investigative responses, or similar. The research and practice literature reports these strategies as appropriate and effective in crime reduction including residential burglary84.

Common success factors

The international research and practice literature, and the experience of the Australian demonstration projects, indicate measures to prevent repeat burglary are more likely to be successful if they are:

• speedy: because there is heightened risk shortly after an incident, measures need to be implemented quickly at the victimised location, preferably within 24 hours
  
• triggered by the first incident: preventing a repeat means responding when the first incident occurs, rather than waiting for a second incident before the location is considered appropriate to receive a repeat intervention response
  
• simple: practical and simple measures are often more likely to work, according to international experience with a range of repeat victimisation programs85
  
• targeted: analysing the likely cause of the problem and designing an appropriate intervention to suit the particular circumstances of the victimised location is likely to produce a more effective, credible, and sustainable result
  
• integrated: combining prevention and detection strategies, and targeting both individual households and high incidence areas (or hot spots), to provide a more comprehensive response and minimise potential for crime displacement
  
• tailored to local conditions: designed within an overall strategy that takes account of the size and nature of the problem in the target area, available resources, the nature of the geographic area and local community, and the strengths and weaknesses of partnerships among stakeholders86
  
• evidence-based: adopting and/or adapting responses demonstrated to be effective on the basis of experience in other situations increases the likelihood of a successful outcome and promotes credibility and sustainability.

Assessing resource requirements and available assets

Effective repeat victimisation measures do not necessarily require high levels of additional resources, or even impose significant demands on existing resources, as shown in the Australian demonstration projects. For example, the Queensland evaluation reported that patrol officers were able to provide the first stage of the three-tier crime prevention programme without additional demands on their time above the average time for the standard police response.

An audit of resources needed by, and available to, the programme should include consideration of: staff and/ or volunteer time for delivery of programme elements; project management and coordination time; resources needed to identify repeat addresses (such as staff time, information system adaptation where required, additional address matching and manual screening requirements, etc); training and quality monitoring time and resources; materials and services (such as information brochures, audit and survey forms, property marking kits, portable alarms, transportation, etc); media and public awareness processes; and monitoring and evaluation time.

Some of these resources could be obtained from sources outside the programme budget. For example, printed material could be funded through corporate sponsorship. Volunteers could be recruited to deliver intervention services directly to victims and provide other project support. The business sector or local community groups could donate equipment, and so on.

Preparing programme material

The same principles apply to developing repeat victimisation material for the community as for any crime prevention or community development project. It needs to be simple to understand, clearly written, and presented in a format that engages the reader's interest.

Given that high levels of repeat victimisation have been identified among disadvantaged groups, crime prevention material should also be linguistically and culturally appropriate and sensitive, and ideally be available in different languages.

Determining roles and responsibilities

The importance of establishing a well-defined management structure with clear roles and responsibilities has already been discussed. The same applies to operational roles and responsibilities of staff and/or volunteers. For example, the South Australian demonstration project included a specific job description and role statement for volunteers, clearly setting out the functions to be performed. Training and quality monitoring processes reinforced these particular role requirements.

Agreeing on operational processes

Appropriate means of identifying locations to receive intervention, delivering the intervention elements, referrals for additional services, as required, and follow-up monitoring and evaluation need to be determined. Once those matters have been determined, participants need to know the details and adhere to the conditions.

Implementation lessons from the Australian demonstration projects are discussed in following sections.

Developing a communication and marketing strategy

Effective, timely and constant communication has been identified as a critical success factor in developing and managing crime prevention activities87 and is equally relevant to preventing repeat victimisation. An effective marketing and public relations strategy is commonly identified as a key aspect. Communicating even small successes is considered important to maintaining enthusiasm and commitment, expanding the programme or mainstream crime prevention into routine agency operations, recruiting new partners, developing a public profile and identity, and generating community ownership88.

Strategies include:

• routinely informing those involved in the programme and participating agencies of progress and outcomes through newsletters, verbal briefings, formal presentations, or other communication
  
• involving local media and generating publicity at key project milestones or to publicise programme outcomes
  
• initiating award schemes to generate widespread interest and encourage inter-agency and community participation. For example, the Queensland demonstration project initiated a poster contest and logo competition for local schoolchildren on the theme of crime prevention, sponsored by a local business group. Winning entries were incorporated in the crime prevention materials distributed to the community
  
• working with partners and sponsors to generate awareness through their routine activities. For example, insurance company sponsors disseminating information on repeat victimisation issues and prevention strategies
  
• encouraging volunteers to talk to others about their involvement with the project and its aims and outcomes
  
• entering the project for relevant award schemes to generate wider recognition of the programme, or nominating volunteers or staff for individual awards.

The implementation stage

Setting up operational systems

Based on the experience of the Australian demonstration projects, particular attention needs to be paid to setting up and monitoring:

• processes for informing the individual/section responsible for coordinating or delivering the programme response that a particular location has experienced an incident that fell within the parameters for triggering intervention
  
• procedures for contacting and allocating tasks to volunteers
  
• accurate recording of address details by police for address matching to identify repeat locations
  
• standards or benchmarks for timing of the intervention response
  
• systems for monitoring compliance with project administrative procedures, particularly those related to identifying and contacting relevant households, explaining the purpose of the project, what it will involve, and gaining consent
  
• coverage. All households meeting the parameters for intervention must have equal opportunity to participate in the programme in the first instance. This includes addressing issues of how to involve non-English speaking households, those without telephone access, or victims whose routine working or social arrangements mean they are unlikely to be at home during normal contact hours.
  
• consistent standard of quality of service, particularly ensuring all elements of the intervention are applied as intended.

Internal communication

Communication amongst programme participants and service deliverers is critical to ensure effective programme development and operation. Issues identified in the Australian demonstration projects include:

• the need to maintain ongoing communication with other participating agencies (for example, police, where the project is managed by another department or agency; victim support agencies, where referrals are part of the programme; local councils where the programmme is linked to other crime prevention services) to ensure all organisations are participating as intended and that any implementation issues are identified and addressed early in the programme
  
• the importance of formal procedures between project team members for recording and referring information regarding volunteers. This is necessary to ensure that all project team members know of the availability or non-availability of volunteers
  
• regular communication with operational police in relation to the programme and their roles and responsibilities, given high levels of turnover in many police operational areas
  
• regular briefings of police management on the project and project-related issues.

Training and professional development

Training and skills development is crucial for effective service delivery. Common elements in a repeat victimisation training programme, whether for police, other agency staff, or volunteers, include:

• why responding to repeat victimisation is important
  
• key characteristics of repeat victimisation that provide contextual information for the programmmes strategic approach and operational procedures, for example, the time course of repeats, risk profiles, and effectiveness of prevention measures
  
• roles and responsibilities of programme participants
  
• specific training in the tools to be used for the project, for example, the security audit or survey
  
• relevant administrative procedures established to support the requirements of the programme.

The South Australian demonstration project identified other matters particularly relevant to training volunteers to deliver crime prevention services to victims, including:

• a general understanding of crime prevention and criminal justice processes
  
• extra training in how to undertake home security assessments and provide security advice to victims on-site, rather than in classrooms
  
• volunteer rights and responsibilities, including the importance of remaining within the boundaries of the designated volunteer role
  
• the need to maintain victim confidentiality and privacy considerations
  
• expectations of professionalism that are not necessarily a core aspect of the traditional culture of volunteering, for example, quality monitoring processes, meeting strict timeframe demands, and reporting to the project team to advise of changes in hours and dates of availability
  
• interpersonal communication skills generally, but including relating to victims specifically.

Issues important to training for volunteers included:

• intensity and continuity of training: there was a perception that those training courses run over several full days were more successful than training conducted on consecutive evenings
  
• duration: the programs consisting of three full days or five evening sessions were considered too short to cover the amount of content required, particularly to provide security audit skills and familiarity with locks and bolts deemed necessary for provision of appropriate security advice and/or referral for lock services (four to five days of training was preferred)
  
• timing: training should occur only after programme procedural details are finalised, to improve trainees' confidence that they are adequately equipped to meet all the demands of the programme before beginning their role
  
• group size: this was considered important to effectively deliver the practical components of the training, such as how to undertake security assessments (a group of eight was considered to be ideal, while the largest group of 16 was considered to be too large)
  
• practical learning: experience gained through practical exercises, such as walking through a house to conduct a security audit under guidance of an instructor, was considered critical for both competency development and volunteer confidence.

The Queensland demonstration project identified other issues particularly relevant to the training of operational police officers, including:

• structuring training programs within the demands of operational requirements (for example, designing training in multiple blocks of several hours to occur during shift change-over rather than relying on operational officers to be available for full-day training sessions)
  
• building in ongoing training during the life of the programme, given the high turnover of staff experienced in many large police stations
  
• addressing competency development in problem-solving techniques specific to crime prevention strategies
  
• involving operational officers in designing the training package to take advantage of the insights of experienced officers.

Quality monitoring

Monitoring service delivery standards and processes is a critical issue regardless of the nature of the programme or its management structure. Lessons learned from Australian demonstration projects support the importance of immediate implementation of an ongoing process, actively supported by supervisors and managers of the organisation whose staff provide programme services, and built in as a programme requirement of volunteer participation. The objective should be to increase compliance with processes and promote skill development. These issues are discussed below.

Immediate implementation

Introducing a formal quality monitoring process immediately at the beginning of the programme has various benefits, including:

• ensuring administrative compliance problems are identified and rectified before they can cause major implementation difficulties affecting the outcomes or credibility of the programme
  
• continuity of training to build the skills and promote the confidence of officers and volunteers at the earliest point in service delivery
  
• capacity to identify and take action at the earliest opportunity in relation to individual staff or volunteers whose performance in providing services or interacting with victims is considered unsuitable, by either providing them with more intensive support, training, and supervision, or terminating their involvement
  
• potential to identify problems and adapt programme processes accordingly
  
• ensuring that volunteers understand that quality monitoring always has been an intrinsic part of the programme design and planning, and has not been introduced just to monitor their individual performance.

Ongoing monitoring

Continuous monitoring is critical to ensure that standards are maintained. The experience of the Australian demonstration projects has been that ongoing monitoring is important, should be intensive in the early stages, but that the level and resources allocated can be reduced over time.

Programme requirement for volunteer participation

The South Australian project reinforced the benefits of building in a compliance with quality monitoring requirement into the job description for volunteers. This ensures that these expectations are clearly understood beforehand, and that potential volunteers who may consider quality monitoring demands inappropriate to the volunteer culture are not brought into the programme.

Actively supported by management

The Queensland project underscored the importance of management support for any procedural compliance audit undertaken, and the benefits of integrating action taken in response to programme compliance failure into mainstream processes. For example, a 'risk management' process was introduced where the officer in charge of the station was made responsible for acting on instances where the project audit identified particular patrol officers were not providing the first-tier programme response. There were no incidents of officer non-compliance identified during the second half of the programme.

Targets procedural compliance and skills development

A well-designed quality-monitoring project ensures procedural requirements are met and provides continuing support for staff and volunteers to become competent in providing services. The South Australian demonstration project reported that most volunteers considered that, although the quality monitoring process was daunting, it was personally valuable and was welcomed as an opportunity to improve their skills.

Recruitment and selection of volunteers

Recruitment and careful selection of appropriate volunteers is critical for a programme that relies heavily on volunteers to deliver programme services, both to produce effective outcomes and maintain programme credibility. The South Australian demonstration project used various strategies for recruiting and selecting suitable volunteers, including targeted recruitment, predetermining suitable and unsuitable attributes, and an intensive screening process. Each of these is discussed in more detail below.

Targeted recruitment

A targeted approach to volunteer recruitment was introduced to maximise opportunities to attract people who would potentially have an interest and skills in this type of crime prevention. Volunteers were recruited specifically, through approaches to the Neighbourhood Watch Programme, Local Crime Prevention Committees, and Justices of the Peace, targeting people with suitable backgrounds, as well as a more general call for volunteers by advertising through Volunteer SA.

Predetermining suitable and unsuitable attributes

Given the South Australian programme included prevention and victim support components, desirable attributes identified were:

• good communication skills
  
• a calm, reassuring manner
  
• good time management skills
  
• reliability
  
• friendly personality
  
• ability to communicate effectively with people of different nationalities
  
• ability to work independently
  
• a clear understanding of the issue of confidentiality
  
• capacity to work within the guidelines of the project
  
• ability to learn new information
  
• strong professional ethics

Attributes considered unsuitable were:

• inability to work within project guidelines
  
• lack of flexibility/availability
  
• inability to work with residents who may display signs of trauma
  
• difficulty in respecting the confidential nature of the project

Selection

The South Australian demonstration project involved a multi-stage selection process. At each stage volunteers were assessed for suitability. The stages included:

• a preliminary information session about the project
  
• a structured interview discussing interest in the project, motivational reasons, potential obstacles to undertaking the role, time available for the project, and experience or related interest in other crime prevention projects
  
• police and other reference checks
  
• attendance at the training programme
  
• follow-up meetings as required.

Volunteers were not formally accepted into the project until the end of this process.

Involving victim support service representatives as part of the selection process was identified by the South Australian project team as a particularly important strategy to assist in screening for volunteer suitability in terms of attitudes and values relevant to dealing effectively with victims.

Managing and supporting volunteers

The South Australian demonstration project identified a number of important issues in managing and supporting volunteers in a crime prevention programme. The major issues related to volunteer availability and coverage; roles and boundaries; promoting inclusion and commitment; professional role expectations; safety and confidentiality; and infrastructure and resource support. These are discussed individually below. Other relevant issues, such as training, have been discussed in previous sections.

Availability and coverage

The ready availability of volunteers at the different times needed to deliver services to victims was a major issue for the South Australian programme. It was also identified in the more limited role played by volunteers assisting police in the delivery of some elements of the intervention in the Queensland demonstration project. These difficulties were exacerbated around the Christmas holiday period when volunteer availability was reduced. Strategies that may assist in addressing this issue include:

• recruiting and training adequate numbers of volunteers to allow for some redundancy (the South Australian project found 36 per cent of volunteers did not continue on for the full period between training and project conclusion, for a variety of reasons)
  
• considering both availability and a strong sense of professionalism in the selection process
  
• reinforcing the importance of meeting commitments to availability and providing early advice of changes if circumstances change, as part of a volunteer's roles and responsibilities
  
• implementing effective processes for monitoring the availability of volunteers and having procedures in place for calling on other resources at short notice when necessary
  
• limiting the role of volunteers to elements of the intervention that are not time critical. For example, the Queensland project used volunteers to assist in developing and implementing hot spot area responses rather than delivering security audits to victims, given difficulties encountered by volunteers in meeting the strict timeframe required by the latter intervention component.

Roles and boundaries

Ensuring volunteers understand, accept and act within the boundaries of their designated programme role is important for both programme outcomes and credibility. Strategies identified in the Queensland and South Australian evaluation reports include:

• establishing clear guidelines at the outset as to what volunteers should and should not do, supported by ongoing monitoring and feedback to ensure a consistent and appropriate quality of response
  
• standardising intervention elements to be delivered by volunteers so that there can be quality assurance of the advice given to victims by volunteers
  
• developing a comprehensive package and script for volunteers to follow so that there is a standardised response provided which can be replicated
  
• providing appropriate training in the deployment of those interventions for which volunteers are responsible
  
• providing appropriate orientation to the intervention strategy as a whole and what it is trying to achieve, so that volunteers have a context to work within
  
• providing appropriate feedback that reinforces the boundaries of the designated role without devaluing volunteer contributions or confidence
  
• including criteria in the selection process that consider capacity to understand, accept and work within a designated role.

Inclusion and commitment

Creating and maintaining an environment in which volunteers feel valued and included has clear benefits for ongoing commitment and motivation. The South Australian project focused on creating a culture of value and inclusion for volunteers in the establishment stage of the project, with priority on responding to their needs and building in opportunities at regular meetings for social interaction. In the second half of the project, emphasis was redirected towards project implementation issues, including tightening procedures and quality monitoring. A balanced approach involving both elements from the start of the programme is important to ensure that there are no false expectations about continuity of high levels of volunteer support that might not be able to be maintained within programme resources.

Many of the South Australian volunteers identified the appreciation expressed by victims for their efforts as an important motivator. Providing opportunities where this sort of feedback can be made, as well as ensuring victims are aware that the services they receive are made in a voluntary capacity, may be useful strategies to build into the design of a future programme.

South Australian volunteers also felt strongly that the programme needed to be connected with an agency or body with recognised authority and that this connection to status was critical. Therefore, there may be benefits in aligning such programs under the auspices of a body that has widely recognised authority and legitimacy, even where the programme is not directly managed by that organisation.

Professional role expectations

Often there is an implicit expectation that volunteers will function at the level expected of a paid professional, which is a marked shift from the traditional view of volunteering. Ensuring the expectations of volunteer and paid programme staff/project manager match is obviously important. Strategies adopted in the South Australian project include targeted recruitment, clearly setting out role expectations in the recruitment and selection process, and preparing a specific job description for volunteers. Expert advice was sought from Volunteer SA on volunteer roles, volunteer management, and appropriate job descriptions and person specifications.

Continuous quality monitoring is critical to maintaining expected standards. Despite a rigorous selection process before volunteers entered the programme, the South Australia project's quality monitoring process identified a small number of volunteers who were removed from the programme for displaying an inappropriate attitude and lack of ability to communicate or relate effectively to other volunteers.

Volunteer safety and confidentiality

Ensuring volunteer safety is a necessary feature of a crime prevention project where volunteers provide services directly to victims in their homes. Practices introduced in the South Australian project to protect volunteers included:

• a policy of using two volunteers on any visit to a victim's home
  
• carrying mobile phones, provided by the project (this was identified by volunteers early in the programme as a way of enhancing safety)
  
• training in safe practices, including recognising potentially dangerous situations
  
• never revealing personal details such as surnames, phone numbers or other information that would allow the victim to make further contact with the volunteers
  
• recording on task sheets, by the project team, the details of where and when the volunteers were visiting
  
• providing after hours phone numbers to the project manager and senior police on the Reference Group for use in difficult situations that do not require immediate police attention.

Victim confidentiality

Ensuring victim privacy is an important feature of a crime prevention project where the intervention occurs in the victim's home. Strategies introduced in the South Australian project to protect victim privacy included:

• victim confidentiality issues were continually reinforced in volunteer training and quality monitoring processes
  
• a confidentiality clause was included in the job and person specification for volunteers
  
• project procedures were established to ensure that transfer of information between police and the project maintained victim confidentiality, including provision of locked boxes at police stations in the intervention sites for volunteers to deposit victim-related material after completing a task
  
• documentation about victims that did not agree to take part in the project excluded any identifying information and was limited to the return of a blank but dated consent form so that participation rates could be calculated.

Infrastructure and resource support

Feedback from the South Australian project volunteers identified widely varying expectations and needs for support and structure. Flexibility and capacity to meet these different levels of need is important. Strategies used in the South Australian demonstration project included:

• providing volunteers with mobile phones and rostering a project team member to be on call during the days and evenings, including weekends, so that volunteers had access to support and assistance at all times that interventions were conducted
  
• establishing priority lists of volunteers in relation to the quality monitoring process according to perceived level of immediate need for support to operate within the expected standard
  
• pairing volunteers to provide victim services, and ensuring that one of the two partners had been assessed as competent in all aspects of the intervention through the quality monitoring process
  
• immediate initial support, whereby project staff accompanied all volunteers on their first intervention visit to provide support and allow immediate debriefing and feedback.

Overcoming organisational resistance

Introducing a trial project or new programme, or 'mainstreaming' a trial programme into routine agency operations, may face organisational resistance, especially if it involves non-traditional ways of operating or is perceived as imposing additional demands on existing staff and resources. Strategies identified in the Queensland evaluation report to address organisational resistance included:

• establishing and presenting a 'business case' on the need to address repeat victimisation to key stakeholders (key issues include its prevalence, its contribution to high crime rates, its disproportionate effects on a small number of victims, and its ability to be prevented through targeted and relatively low cost initiatives)
  
• making efforts to ensure operational police officers involved in service delivery of the prevention programme are as well briefed as senior management about the effects of repeat victimisation and the benefits of addressing it
  
• addressing concerns about potential effects on resources and other operational policing priorities as early as possible during the programme, preferably with locally relevant information. For example, an analysis of management information on the average time taken for police to attend calls may show negligible differences between the programme's operation and the period immediately before its introduction, as was found in the Queensland project
  
• seeking ongoing senior management commitment and support. For example, in the Queensland demonstration project, police senior management clearly articulated their expectations about the programme and that the programme components must be delivered in full to the standard expected, even if this meant adverse effects in other areas, so that an accurate and proper assessment could be made of the programme's outcomes
  
• establishing local management support and commitment, including processes for monitoring and addressing non-compliance by operational officers.

The need for police management support and continuing regular liaison with operational police was reinforced in the South Australian demonstration project. Commitment of police management to the project varied markedly, but those sections where there was regular contact and communication showed a sustained commitment to the project.

Engendering community commitment

As with any crime prevention programme, local community support and commitment is important to achieving successful outcomes. Methods for promoting community commitment include:

• public awareness raising strategies using a variety of avenues targeting the local community, such as shopping-centre displays, presentations to local schools and community groups, and local media articles
  
• involving the community directly in the development and design of elements of the intervention strategy (for example, the Queensland project's use of a poster contest for local schoolchildren on the theme of crime prevention sponsored by a local business group, with winning entries incorporated in the crime prevention materials distributed to the community)
  
• selecting different avenues for mobilising community involvement (for example, the Queensland project found a sausage sizzle to be a more effective vehicle for presenting hot spot burglary information to local residents than a formal workshop situation).

Celebrating successes and recognising contributions

Explicitly acknowledging contributions and celebrating successes promotes commitment and motivation among participants and generates external support and awareness. Volunteers in the South Australian demonstration project stated that positive feedback and encouragement and intra-volunteer networking were major reasons for maintaining their involvement in the project.

Relevant strategies have been discussed in early sections on communication and volunteer management. A much wider range of methods for recognising volunteers is available in the international literature89.

Implementing sustainability strategies

Planning for sustainability (refer previous section) will have identified opportunities and strategies for programme continuity relevant to the circumstances of the programme and local environment. The particular strategies will be unique to the nature of the programme and the circumstances of the target area and participants. Implementing and reviewing these strategies, and identifying and acting on new opportunities that may arise during the course of the programme, should be an integral part of programme implementation.

The evaluation stage

Monitoring progress

Review and evaluation should be a core element of any programme. Review relates to monitoring progress to ensure implementation is proceeding as planned and to resolve problems or fine-tune aspects of the programme as required. Evaluation of outcomes and formal process evaluation are discussed separately below.

The most appropriate review or monitoring methodology will be contingent on the nature of the programme and circumstances in which it is operating. Common issues to review would include:

• progress against action plan key tasks and timelines
  
• whether the structures, policies and procedures needed to support the programme are being implemented as planned (with particular reference to training, resources, information systems, quality assurance, and coordination)
  
• whether the elements of the intervention are being delivered in the intended manner, within the expected timeframe, and to the designated standard
  
• whether the target population is being reached by the programme, in particular, whether all households meeting the criteria for inclusion in the programme are actually receiving the intervention
  
• acceptance of the programme by those involved in its delivery and by the target population intended to benefit from the intervention
  
• continued relevance of the programme objectives and action plan in the light of early experience
  
• any major implementation difficulties encountered to date and the effectiveness of strategies put in place to address them
  
• any unintended consequences that need to be addressed.

Reviewing sustainability strategies

Specific attention should be given to reviewing sustainability strategies, especially where the programme is a pilot project or a trial programme. Issues to consider will be contingent on the nature and circumstances of the programme and any sustainability planning targets previously established. Common issues include agency mainstreaming opportunities, promoting community ownership, identifying and negotiating independent funding sources or alternative resourcing arrangements, and continuity of management and coordination structures.

Evaluating outcomes

The specific evaluation methodology will be contingent on the objectives of the programme, the circumstances in which it is operating, and the available resources and expertise. The evaluation design should have the capacity to answer or indicate likely answers to the following key questions:

• Has the intervention had an effect, that is, has there been a real change in the problem or issue targeted?
  
• What is the extent of the effect, that is, how much change has there been in the problem or issue being targeted?
  
• How has it been achieved, that is, has any change resulted directly from the programme or could some other factor/s have been responsible for the outcome?
  
• Have there been unintended consequences, that is, have there been side effects that weren't intended as part of the programme, such as displacement of the problem to another area, or diffusion of benefits that weren't planned for?
  
• Is it cost effective?
  
• Is it in more or less a standard form, that is, can it be replicated in other circumstances and contexts?
  
• Is change sustainable, that is, are the effects long-term or only transitory?

The most appropriate indicator(s) to assess change in repeat victimisation will also vary, depending upon the objectives of the programme. Examples of different measures include:

• prevalence, that is, the proportion of victims or households experiencing more than one incident over a designated time period
  
• incidence, that is, in the number of repeat incidents expressed per head of population or per dwelling
  
• concentration, that is, the average number of victimisations per victimised person or household
  
• interval, that is, the time between incidents occurring
  
• victimisation effects, for example, ratio of attempts to completed incidents, or value of property stolen or damaged.

Where repeat victimisation prevention is part of an overall crime reduction strategy in response to concerns about high burglary rates generally, incidence may be the most appropriate measure. However, if the objective is to reduce repeat victimisation independent of a broader crime reduction strategy, triggered by concerns about disproportionate effects on victims experiencing multiple incidents, then measures of concentration may be more relevant.

Process evaluation

Evaluation provides an opportunity to not only enhance the particular programme being delivered, but to provide the practice body with knowledge and provide guidance to others considering or implementing similar responses. As with outcome assessment, the type and level of process evaluation will be contingent on the circumstances of the programme and the available resources and expertise. An effective monitoring process can provide useful information even where a formal process evaluation is not conducted.

An example of a process evaluation framework developed for assessing repeat burglary prevention projects is provided in Appendix 2.

Tools and resources

Examples of tools

Specific measures used in the demonstration projects are available from the relevant jurisdiction. The core programme material used in the South Australian demonstration project is provided in appendices to the process evaluation report90. For information on the Queensland project instruments, refer to the National Crime Prevention website at http://www.crimeprevention.gov.au.

A process evaluation framework was developed by the meta-evaluation as a resource for use by jurisdictions in designing their own process evaluations. This framework is presented below.

Other resources

Other resources and tools are available in a range of reports and documents that can assist in developing and implementing repeat victimisation programs. Details for some of these sources are given below.

Planning worksheets

Some examples of action planning tools used in crime prevention are available in the following sources:

• the Home Office toolkit site at www.crimereduction.gov.uk/toolkits
  
• a workbook for community crime prevention planning by the Office of Justice Programs (1998) Youth in action: planning a successful crime prevention project US Department of Justice: Washington
  
• a resource manual by Crime Prevention Queensland (forthcoming) Partners in crime prevention: A resource manual for Queensland communities Department of the Premier and Cabinet: Brisbane

Calculating repeat victimisation

Some examples of performance measures and methods of calculating repeat victimisation, including worked examples, are set out in:

• Appendix A of Bridgeman, C. & Hobbs, L. (1997) Preventing repeat victimisation: The police officer's guide. Police Research Group: London
  
• Annex B of Tilley, N. (1995) Thinking about crime prevention performance indicators. Crime Detection and Prevention Series, 57. Home Office: London
  
• Annex A of Berry, G. & Carter, M. (1992) Assessing crime prevention initiatives: the first steps. Crime Prevention Unit paper no. 31, London: Home Office
  
• the Home Office repeat victimisation toolkit at www.crimereduction.gov.uk/toolkits/rv08-table3.htm

Identifying hot spots

The Home Office toolkits include an overview of different methods and techniques for identifying hot spots in its Focus Areas and Hot Spots toolkit at www.crimereduction.gov.uk/toolkits/fa020201.htm.

Evaluation

Some examples of the various evaluation tools used in crime prevention that vary in the level of detail and sophistication proposed are available in the following resources:

• White, R. & Coventry, G. (2000) Evaluating community safety: a guide. Darebin City Council, City of Booroonda, City of Frankston, Cardinia Shire Council, and Department of Justice, Victoria
  
• Berry, G. & Carter, M. (1992) Assessing crime prevention initiatives: the first steps. Crime Prevention Unit paper no. 31, London: Home Office
  
• Dhiri, S. & Brand, S. (1999) Analysis of costs and benefits: guidance for evaluators. Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate: London
  
• Office of Justice Programs (1998) Youth in action: planning a successful crime prevention project. US Department of Justice: Washington

Return to the top