Community Models
These models and simulations have been tagged “Community”.
Assignment Four - Big Data & Marketing Analytics MKT563
Student No : 94040609
Trish Anderson
The Maranguka Justice Reinvestment (JR) project is a community led program that demonstrates how the redirection of government funding into community programs can address underlying issues which lead to crime in the community (KPMG, 2018). This interactive model shows how the redirection of funding from the Justice System into Community Programs improves the rate of year 12 graduates, reduces the number of incidents of domestic violence whilst reducing the number of days spent in custody. This model also shows how investment in Community Programs leads to positive economic impacts for the Community as well as cost savings for the Justice System over time.
One of the key findings of the Maranguka JP project found that redirecting funding from the Justice system into the Community has multiple benefits. This model begins with NSW government funding on a scale from 0 to 1000 which can be adjusted using the sliders based on available funding, sliding the scale to the right increases the available funding. The % Community Funding and % Justice System Funding variables can then be adjusted in the sliders to determine how much of the funding goes to the community as a percentage and how much of the available funding gets allocated to the justice system.
Investment into Community Programs is made available by the investments into the Bourke community. Community Leaders in the Bourke Community develop programs and each program has shown to have a positive impact on the number of students graduating year 12 in the community, the number of domestic violence incidents and the number of days spent in custody.
Variables
The current number of Year 12 graduates, the current number of domestic violence incidents and the current number of days in Custody are input into the sliders on the hand panel and the model simulation will show how these figures are impacted through investment in the community over time. These variables also contribute to the growth of Youth Development, Family Strength and Adult Empowerment in the community. These factors result in reinvestment opportunities, which have positive economic impacts on the community. Savings are also passed back to the justice system as underlying issues in the community are addressed over time.
The slider scale on the right hand panel uses six adjustable variables to model how the rate of investment in the community can impact the rate of positive impacts in the community and the rate of reinvestment opportunities that can be achieved. Running the simulation will show the larger the % of Community Funding, the faster the results can be seen over time and the greater the economic impact and justice system savings will be. The smaller the % Community Funding will show how impacts are still positive but occur over a longer period of time.
% Community Funding and % Justice System are a percentage of funding whereas NSW Government Funding is represented in dollars ($). NSW Government Funding is on a scale from 0 to 1000 but the assumed scale is $000’s, where 1,000 equals $1,000,000.
Parameter Settings
With community funding, the amount of Year 12 graduates increases by 31% (KPMG, 2018)
With community funding, the number of Domestic Violence incidents decreases by 23% (KPMG, 2018) (KPMG, 2018)
With community funding, the number of days spent in custody decreases by 42% KPMG, 2018)
Reinvestment opportunities contribute to 1/3 of economic impacts back the community where 2/3 of the reinvestment opportunities contribute to savings within the Justice System KPMG, 2018).
Assumptions
The rate of impact on year 12 graduating students, Domestic Violence Incidents and Days spent in custody changes at the same rate of % Community Funding available to the community.
References
Backing Bourke: How a radical new approach is saving young people from a life of crime. (Thompson, G). abc.net.au.
KPMG. (2018). Maranguka Justice Reinvestment Project Impact Assessment. Retrieved from https://www.justreinvest.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Maranguka-Justice-Reinvestment-Project-KPMG-Impact-Assessment-FINAL-REPORT.pdf
HOW A NEW COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT INITATIVE MAY IMPACT YOUTH CRIME IN THE TOWN OF BOURKE, NSW
MKT563 Assessment 4: Kari Steele
Aim of Simulation:
Bourke is a town in which Youth are involved in high rates of criminal behaviour (Thompson, 2016). This simulation focuses on how implementation of a community engagement initiative may impact crime patterns of youths in Bourke. The specific aim is to assess whether the town should initiate a program such as the Big Brothers Big Sisters Community-Based Mentoring (CBM) (Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development, 2018) program to reduce crime and antisocial behaviour (National Institute of Justice, n.d). Big Brothers Big Sisters is a community mentoring program which matches a volunteer adult mentor to an at-risk child or adolescent to delay or reduce antisocial behaviours; improve academic success, attitudes and behaviours, peer and family relationships; strength self-concept; and provide social and cultural enrichment (Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development, 2018).
Model Explanation:
An InsightMaker model is used to simulate the influence of Big Brothers Big Sisters Initiative on Criminal Behaviour (leading to 60% juvenile detention rates) with variables including participation rate and also drug and alcohol use.
Assumptions:
1/ ‘Youth’ are defined, for statistical purposes, as those persons between the ages of 15 and 24 (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, n.d).
2/ Youth population (15 – 24 years) makes up 14.1% of the total population of LGA Bourke which according to the most up-to-date freely available Census data (2008) is 3091 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2010). Therefore, youth population has been calculated as 435 individuals.
3/ Big Brothers Big Sisters Program is assumed to impact LGA Bourke in a similar manner that has been shown in previous studies (Tierney, Grossman, and Resch, 2000) where initiative showed mentored youths in the program were 46% significantly less likely to initiate drug use and 27 percent less likely to initiate alcohol use, compared to control. They were 32 less likely to have struct someone during the previous 12 months. Compared to control group, the mentored youths earned higher grades, skipped fewer classes and fewer days of school and felt more competent about doing their schoolwork (non-significant). Research also found that mentored youths, compared with control counterparts, displayed significantly better relationships with parents. Emotional support among peers was higher than controls.
Initial Values:
Youth Population = 435
Criminal Behaviour = 100
40% of youth population who commit a crime are non-convicted
60% of youth population who commit a crime are convicted
20% of youth involved in the Big Brothers Big Sisters Initiative are non-engaged
80% of youth involved in the Big Brothers Big Sisters Initiative are engaged
Variables:
The variables include ‘Participation Rate’ and ‘Drug and Alcohol Usage’. These variables can be adjusted as these levels may be able to be impacted by other initiatives which the community can assess for introduction; these variables may also change in terms of rate over time.
Interesting Parameters
As can be seen by increasing the rate of participation to 90% we can see juvenile detention rate decreases with engagement (even with the 20% non-engagement of youths involved in program). By moving the slider to 10% participation however you can see the criminal behaviour increase.
Conclusion:
From the simulation, we can clearly see that the community of Bourke would benefit in terms of the Big Brothers Big Sisters Initiative decreasing criminal behaviour in youths (15 – 24 years of age) over a 5-year timeframe. Further investigation regarding expenditure and logistics to implement such a program is warranted based on the simulation of impact.
References:
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Census Data for Bourke LGA. Retrieved from www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/LGA11150Population/People12002-2006?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=LGA11150&issue=2002-2006
Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (2018). Big Brothers Big Sisters of America Blueprints Program Rating: Promising, viewed 26 May 2018, <www.blueprintsprograms.com/evaluation-abstract/big-brothers-big-sisters-of-america>
National Institute of Justice. (n.d.). Program Profile: Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) Community-Based Mentoring (CBM) Program, viewed 26th May 2018, <https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=112>
Tierney, J.P., Grossman, J.B., and
Resch, N.L. (2000). Making a Difference: An Impact Study of Big Brothers/Big Sisters.
Philadelphia, Pa.: Public/Private Ventures.
http://ppv.issuelab.org/resource/making_a_difference_an_impact_study_of_big_brothersbig_sisters_re_issue_of_1995_study
Thompson, G. (2016) Backing Bourke: How a radical new approach is saving young people from a life of crime. Retrieved from < www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-19/four-corners-bourkes-experiment-in-justice-reinvestment/7855114>
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA). (n.d.). Definition of Youth, viewed 24th May 2018, www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/youth/fact-sheets/youth-definition.pdf
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next ›