Assignment 3: Bourke Crime and Community Development​

Yu Mao's questionable and barely functional model on ​Bourke's crime landscape with consideration of community development and police. 

​Model Information 

ABOUT THE MODEL
This model simulates the possible rate of crime amongst youth in a small town called Bourke through the variable expenditures of community engagement and policing/punishment. The model shows how the youth population of Bourke have the choice to join in community activities

Model Explanation 

This is a model designed to ​demonstrate the effects of policing and community development/engagement programs on the youth of Bourke, by simulation the state of the community at different levels of both policing and the programs.

Variables:

There are 6 stocks and 2 variables.

The stocks are arranged to represent the different options for the youth in Bourke. Their options are; don't commit a crime; do commit a crime and risk being convicted; or take part in various community development/engagement programs available.

The 2 variables are Police and Community Development Fund, both are adjustable via the sliders to the right hand side, and represent 2 of the major forces acting on the youth's choices.

Suggestion:

The aim of the model is to emphasize the overall importance of community development/engagement programs for youths in Bourke.

To see the impact these programs can have adjust the sliders:
     . 100 Police and 0.1 Community Funds - This will show the negative effect of severe law enforcement as a larger number of youths end up in juvenile detention.

     . 100 Police and 100 Community Development Funds - This will show the improvement in the community compared to the last suggestion as more youths are in the programs helping them rather than juvenile detention.

     . 10 Police and 200 Community Development Funds - This will show that almost all youths end up in the programs helping them and very few in juvenile detention. This further illustrated the point made before about the importance of these programs in Bourke.

The following insight shows the level of crime in the town of Bourke in comparison to the levels of Police and Community Engagement

The following insight shows the level of crime in the town of Bourke in comparison to the levels of Police and Community Engagement

This Model showcases the interplay between the Youth and Crime in Bourke with a monopoly of contributing factors.

Yu Mao's questionable and barely functional model on ​Bourke's crime landscape with consideration of community development and police. 

This model displays the effects of youth crime and the influence of community expenditure, social support, and policing in the town of Bourke, NSW.

The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.

The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.

Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population

-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.

- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.

-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.

-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period

-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.

-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.

STOCKS

• Youth
  
• Crime – all offences committed by those under 18
  
• Punishment Facility – juvenile detention
  
• Probation – release from punishment
  
• Education system – various programs
  

VARIABLES

Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.

Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.

Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.

Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.

Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate

INTERESTING RESULTS

Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.

This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.

1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact

Press Simulate.

Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.

Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly.  More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.

This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..

2/ Social Support Unit impact

Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.

Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.

The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.

3/ Police Unit Impact

Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.

Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.

Conclusions

Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.

Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.

Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.

The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.

<!--EndFragment-->

This model simulated possible crime rates of youths in Bourke.

This is a model designed to ​demonstrate the effects of policing and community development/engagement programs on the youth of Bourke, by simulation the state of the community at different levels of both policing and the programs.

Variables:

There are 6 stocks and 2 variables.

The stocks are arranged to represent the different options for the youth in Bourke. Their options are; don't commit a crime; do commit a crime and risk being convicted; or take part in various community development/engagement programs available.

The 2 variables are Police and Community Development Fund, both are adjustable via the sliders to the right hand side, and represent 2 of the major forces acting on the youth's choices.

Suggestion:

The aim of the model is to emphasize the overall importance of community development/engagement programs for youths in Bourke.

To see the impact these programs can have adjust the sliders:
     . 100 Police and 0.1 Community Funds - This will show the negative effect of severe law enforcement as a larger number of youths end up in juvenile detention.

     . 100 Police and 100 Community Development Funds - This will show the improvement in the community compared to the last suggestion as more youths are in the programs helping them rather than juvenile detention.

     . 10 Police and 200 Community Development Funds - This will show that almost all youths end up in the programs helping them and very few in juvenile detention. This further illustrated the point made before about the importance of these programs in Bourke.

the insight shows how the officials of Brouke can help the youth by having them engaged in community programs. youth who are engaged in community programs are more likely to have a better social life compared to youth who are disengaged and into alienation. it shows the relation between social development of a youth vs the one who is disengaged.

This is a model designed to ​demonstrate the effects of policing and community development/engagement programs on the youth of Bourke, by simulation the state of the community at different levels of both policing and the programs.

Variables:

There are 6 stocks and 2 variables.

The stocks are arranged to represent the different options for the youth in Bourke. Their options are; don't commit a crime; do commit a crime and risk being convicted; or take part in various community development/engagement programs available.

The 2 variables are Police and Community Development Fund, both are adjustable via the sliders to the right hand side, and represent 2 of the major forces acting on the youth's choices.

Suggestion:

The aim of the model is to emphasize the overall importance of community development/engagement programs for youths in Bourke.

To see the impact these programs can have adjust the sliders:
     . 100 Police and 0.1 Community Funds - This will show the negative effect of severe law enforcement as a larger number of youths end up in juvenile detention.

     . 100 Police and 100 Community Development Funds - This will show the improvement in the community compared to the last suggestion as more youths are in the programs helping them rather than juvenile detention.

     . 10 Police and 200 Community Development Funds - This will show that almost all youths end up in the programs helping them and very few in juvenile detention. This further illustrated the point made before about the importance of these programs in Bourke.

Insight Maker was utilized to demonstrate the relationship between Alienated Youth, police and Community Development. And the affect of Counselling can have on such youth. The Influence of activities was also depicted that can led to Criminal activities and Drug Abuse among such Youth. The model was made considering the youth within Burke.  

Relationships 
As can be seen that, the police enforcement plays a vital role, in the shaping the lives of youth. Hence, with the Increase in police force and increase in such initiates, the crime is like to decrease. Hence, the youth shall also be kept away from all  of such interactions and such Acts.

Also, the Community Development shall also play a vital role, in two folds. First it shall play a part in shaping the very mindset of youth , to indulge in positive activities and refrain from illegal activities.
Second of all, it shall provide rehabilitation to youth that have been subjected to such crimes and such events.

Conclusion
 It can be Concluded that, with increase in Police enforcement and Community Development, the overall crime can be reduced. The Youth thereupon will only indulge in positive activities.

Variables

There are two Variables involved in the model

1.     Police Enforcement

It measures how effectively and efficiently police go about fulfilling its duties; Identifying potential criminals and stopping them from committing crime and punishing criminal who are guilty.

2.     Community Development

Community development intervenes by changing the mindset of alienated and rehabilitated youth and hence affecting the flow towards Social Interactive Activities.

Adjusting Variables

Police enforcement can be adjusted using the slider given below. There is no choice given to adjust community development as it is affected by various factors of the society; education, culture, morals etc.

Assumptions

Youth engaged in Social Interactive Activities can never become alienated and hence will not go to drugs. In other words, a socially interactive youth member will be engaged in sports, education, gaming or café rather than drugs.

Youth are defined as ages 15-24, comprising of a population of 80. (ABS, 2016)

References

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016). General Community Profile. (Cat. No. 2001.0). https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/communityprofile/LGA11150?opendocument

This model displays the effects of youth crime and the influence of community expenditure, social support, and policing in the town of Bourke, NSW.

The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.

The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.

Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population

-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.

- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.

-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.

-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period

-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.

-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.

STOCKS

• Youth
  
• Crime – all offences committed by those under 18
  
• Punishment Facility – juvenile detention
  
• Probation – release from punishment
  
• Education system – various programs
  

VARIABLES

Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.

Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.

Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.

Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.

Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate

INTERESTING RESULTS

Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.

This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.

1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact

Press Simulate.

Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.

Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly.  More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.

This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..

2/ Social Support Unit impact

Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.

Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.

The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.

3/ Police Unit Impact

Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.

Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.

Conclusions

Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.

Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.

Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.

The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.

<!--EndFragment-->

This model displays the effects of youth crime and the influence of community expenditure, social support, and policing in the town of Bourke, NSW.

The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.

The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.

Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population

-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.

- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.

-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.

-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period

-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.

-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.

STOCKS

• Youth
  
• Crime – all offences committed by those under 18
  
• Punishment Facility – juvenile detention
  
• Probation – release from punishment
  
• Education system – various programs
  

VARIABLES

Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.

Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.

Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.

Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.

Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate

INTERESTING RESULTS

Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.

This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.

1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact

Press Simulate.

Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.

Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly.  More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.

This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..

2/ Social Support Unit impact

Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.

Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.

The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.

3/ Police Unit Impact

Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.

Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.

Conclusions

Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.

Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.

Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.

The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.

<!--EndFragment-->

This model displays the effects of youth crime and the influence of community expenditure, social support, and policing in the town of Bourke, NSW.

The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.

The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.

Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population

-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.

- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.

-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.

-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period

-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.

-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.

STOCKS

• Youth
  
• Crime – all offences committed by those under 18
  
• Punishment Facility – juvenile detention
  
• Probation – release from punishment
  
• Education system – various programs
  

VARIABLES

Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.

Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.

Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.

Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.

Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate

INTERESTING RESULTS

Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.

This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.

1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact

Press Simulate.

Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.

Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly.  More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.

This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..

2/ Social Support Unit impact

Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.

Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.

The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.

3/ Police Unit Impact

Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.

Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.

Conclusions

Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.

Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.

Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.

The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.

<!--EndFragment-->

THE MODEL

Underlying assumptions:

•      Police Force has a negative relationship with committed crime (criminals) and has a positive relationship with Juvenile Detention.
  
•      Community Investment has a negative relationship with committed crime.
  
•      Family – Police relations is negatively related to domestic violence rate, which has positive relationship with committed crime.
  
•      Only the youth are law-breaking citizens (as this model mainly focuses on this population).   
  
•      Coefficients are chosen arbitrarily. We may need more real data and research to determine the appropriate ones.
  

Constants:  

• It took six months for Community Investment (which includes soccer team, trade-skills class and driving class) and Family – Police Relations to work.
  
• Juvenile detention length is also 6 months.
  

Things to note:

•      Youth in Bourke committed crime mainly because of the influence from high domestic violence rate, low police force rate (police investment), as well as low community investment rate. The figure was used to calculate the number of youth committing crime is the average of these three rates.
  
•      Those violent families were detected by the Police Force, but then supervised by the responsible team, therefore reduce bad effects on the youths who have been suffering from that and finally reduce the likelihood of committing crimes.
  
•      Community Investment in forming soccer team, trade-skills classes and driving classes moved a portion of returning criminals (the ones not got caught) to community engagement, therefore reduce the chances of committing crimes of these individuals.
  
•      Maximizing the Police Force rate is probably the best way to reduce crime in short-term, but not likely in long-term because detention facilities cost much of the budget and it is not going to benefit the community. Since it is assumed that the total budget for justice reinvestment campaign in Burke is 50 units, an initial setting of 10, 25 and 15 units for Police Force, Community Investment and Family-Police Relations respectively is recommended.
  

Initial values:

Youth in town: 1200.

Criminals: 100.

Juvenile Detention: 100.

Violent families: 300                      

Detected violent families: 100.

This model displays the effects of youth crime and the influence of community expenditure, social support, and policing in the town of Bourke, NSW.

The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.

The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.

Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population

-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.

- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.

-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.

-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period

-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.

-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.

STOCKS

• Youth
  
• Crime – all offences committed by those under 18
  
• Punishment Facility – juvenile detention
  
• Probation – release from punishment
  
• Education system – various programs
  

VARIABLES

Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.

Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.

Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.

Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.

Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate

INTERESTING RESULTS

Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.

This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.

1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact

Press Simulate.

Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.

Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly.  More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.

This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..

2/ Social Support Unit impact

Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.

Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.

The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.

3/ Police Unit Impact

Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.

Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.

Conclusions

Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.

Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.

Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.

The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.

<!--EndFragment-->

This model displays the effects of youth crime and the influence of community expenditure, social support, and policing in the town of Bourke, NSW.

The traditional lifestyle for youth in this town involves either a chosen path of committing crimes, or, that of community activity and various forms of education.

The model has been designed to mimic a system where community expenditure and support services are adopted in order to inject a positive lifestyle for the youth population. The phenomena studied in this simulation is the balance between policing, community support and social influence versus not using them.

Assumptions
-1000 Youth Population

-Youth are either influenced by criminal activity or by productive educational activities.

- Adoption rate of community activities is influenced by personality, relating to current personal skill level of youth and willingness.

-If youth you do not become involved in community activity or some form of Education, then they turn to the path of crime.

-Punishment facility time is up to 12 months with a 2 year probation period

-Community expenditure and support only begins in the probation period, unless “Juvenile Support” slider is used.

-For the purpose of this study on youth crime and support before a crime is committed, we do not include a possibility of relapse in the rehabilitation phase.

STOCKS

• Youth
  
• Crime – all offences committed by those under 18
  
• Punishment Facility – juvenile detention
  
• Probation – release from punishment
  
• Education system – various programs
  

VARIABLES

Policing Units – Policing Bourke's criminal activity, and convicting after a crime has been committed.

Juvenile Support Units – The variable change in crime IF the community funds Support Units for youth before a crime is committed.

Social Support Units – The number of social support units available for released offenders during rehabilitation phase.

Community expenditure – the amount of time and money being spent on social services and policing.

Birth rate, crime rate, dicharge rate, recidivism & conviction rate

INTERESTING RESULTS

Slide any of the 3 variables to the extreme.

This model shows that adoption rate of a positive lifestyle is directly influenced by social influences.

1/ Juvenile Support Unit impact

Press Simulate.

Slide Juvenile Support Units to the extreme. Simulate again.

Juxtaposition of Juvenile Support impact on Behavior Graph shows that Crime and Reoffend rates drop significantly.  More people turn to law-abiding positive activity.

This will again all change with the manipulation of the Social Support unit slider…..

2/ Social Support Unit impact

Social Support Units only influence those released from the Punishment facility. The more social services on hand to support rehabilitation phase the less chance of committing crime for the second time, with Reoffend rates dropping significantly when the Social Support Units Slider is adjusted to the extreme.

Rehabilitation rates only increase marginally, in spite of more social support feeding into that phase.

The greatest impact is shown on Law-Abiding and Crime. How could this be? A logical conclusion is that there is a finite number of youth in the community and those who have received positive social support during a learning phase of rehabilitation, then go on to influence their friends, their family, and have a positive influence on those around them.

3/ Police Unit Impact

Slide Policing Units to the extremes. Simulate. Policing Units Graph shows there is a significant decrease in Reoffend rates, and a higher rate of Conviction.

Curiously, rehabilitation rates drop and crime rates go up. How could this happen? A logical conclusion is that conviction and punishment is not a crime deterrent. It needs the added influence of social support services for there to be a positive impact on decreasing criminal instincts and activity on the whole.

Conclusions

Social support and home visits need to happen in the flow between Youth Population and Crime - “Juvenile Support Units”.

Investment in youth via these juvenile social support officers before they commit an offence, limits the amount of criminal activity over time. So, crime effectively decreases with the direct influence of social services at a young age.

Equally, with more police presence in the community, for those tempted to re-offend, they have a deterrent.

The most efficient management of the community issues faced in Bourke however lies with a combination of both Policing and Social Support services at all levels within the community.

<!--EndFragment-->