Assignment 3: Bourke Crime and Community Development​

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 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-->

A Model of the Rate of Adult and Youth Crime and Community Spending in Bourke:

This is a model which displays whether community spending and the number of police can affect both adult and youth in committing a crime and becoming involved in community activities. 

The Underlying Assumptions:

It is assumed that adults and youths in the town of Bourke are the populations that we are interested in modelling. It is noted that a high number of people in Bourke are engaged in crimes. Therefore, people in Bourke are tempted or likely to commit petty crimes. Since petty crimes are not serious offences, both adults and youths who commit petty crimes will return to being adults and youths. However, if the crime is thought to be serious, people are sent to jail as a consequence. Once the people in jail serve their jail sentence, they are released from jail and returned to being themselves. 

In addition, the community introduced community activities, such as football clubs to reduce the number of crimes. Adults and youths in Bourke can be engaged with community activities and then return to being themselves. 

The variables of community spending and number of police are sliders which demonstrate the level of influence on different stocks and relationships when the number of police and community spending are adjusted. The simulation will reflect the adjusted pattern/trend. For example, if we hold community spending constant while adjusting the number of police, we see at one police officer, many people are committing petty crimes and not many are caught and placed in jail. However, if we change the number of police to 30, we can see a decrease in petty crimes and an increase in going to jail. Furthermore, if we change police to 60, almost no one is committing a petty crime and no one is sent to jail. 

• There are no other influences besides community spending and the number of police.

• The number of police is negatively related to the amount of petty crime.

• People are not learning from past mistakes.

• Community spending is negatively related to the amount of petty crime, but positively related to engaging in community activities.

• All values and time period, concepts are made up for the purposes of the model and for simplicity. They do not reflect real-life figures or time periods. 

 • Initial values are as follow:

           Bourke youth: 1000

           Bourke adult: 1000

           Bourke petty crime: 500

           Bourke jailed population: 500

Explanation of the model:

This model begins with adults and youths engaging in petty crime. Petty crime activities may include theft, assault or disorderly conduct like domestic violence in adults. Petty crime or the more serious crimes that lead to jail are affected by the number of police, and amount of community spending. The number of police affects the amount of people getting caught committing a petty crime or placed in jail. In addition, if people are not caught or did not commit a serious crime, they are returned to being adults and youths. 

Moreover, for the people in jail, they are sentenced for a period of 4 months before being released back to being themselves. This period of 4 months can vary for different crimes and does not represent the actual or real-life time period for any crimes. 

It is assumed that the justice reinvestment plan in Bourke will have community activities like football clubs. The purpose of the plan is to reduce the amount of crime and people going to jail. Thus, people in Bourke are engaged in these activities for 4 months, during which it prevents people from committing a crime.

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

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.

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-->

Bourke has a youth population (under 24 years of age) of 998 (ABS, 2015). These 998 persons begin arbitrarily split between the general population [Bourke Youth], youth in the football club [Football Club], youth engaged in criminal activity [Criminals] and incarcerated youth [Prisoners]

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-->

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

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 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.

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 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.

Bourke has a youth population (under 24 years of age) of 998 (ABS, 2015). These 998 persons begin arbitrarily split between the general population [Bourke Youth], youth in the football club [Football Club], youth engaged in criminal activity [Criminals] and incarcerated youth [Prisoners]

​Youth Crime rate in Bourke

About the Model

This model is designed to simulate the youth population in Bourke, specifically focusing on the number of criminals and incarcerated dependent on a few key variables.

Within the model, a young person living in Bourke can be classified as being in any of five states:

Young Community Member: The portion of the youth population that is not committing crime and will not commit crime in the future. Essentially the well behaved youths. A percentage of these youths will become alienated and at risk.

Alienated and At Risk Youths: The youths of Bourke that are on the path of becoming criminals, this could be caused by disruptive home lives, alcohol and drug problems, and peer pressure, among other things.

Criminal: The youths of Bourke who are committing crimes. Of these criminals a percentage will be caught and convicted and become imprisoned, while the remainder will either go back to being at risk and commit more crimes, or change their behaviour and go back to being a behaving community member.

Imprisoned: The youths of Bourke who are currently serving time in a juvenile detention centre. Half of the imprisoned are released every period at a delay of 6 months.

Released: Those youths that have been released from a detention centre. All released youths either rehabilitate and go back to being a community member or are likely to re-offend and become an alienated and at risk youth.

The variables used in the model are:

Police- This determines the police expenditure in Bourke, which relates to the number of police officers, the investment in surveillance methods and investment in criminal investigations. The level of expenditure effects how many youths are becoming criminals and how many are being caught. An increase in police expenditure causes an increase in imprisoned youths and a decrease in criminals.

Community Engagement Programs- The level of investment in community engagement programs that are targeted to keep youths in Bourke from becoming criminals. The programs include sporting facilities and clubs, educational seminars, mentoring programs and driving lessons. Increasing the expenditure in community engagement programs causes more young community members and less criminals and at risk youths.

Community Service Programs- The level of investment in community service programs that are provided for youths released from juvenile detention to help them rehabilitate and reintegrate back into the community. An increase in community service expenditure leads to more released prisoners going back into the community, rather than continuing to be at risk. Since community service programs are giving back to the community, the model also shows that an increase in expenditure causes a decrease in the amount of at risk youths.

All three of these variables are adjustable. The number of variables has been kept at three in order to ensure the simulation runs smoothly at all times without complicated outputs, limitations have also been set on how the variables can be adjusted as the simulation does not act the same out of these boundaries.

Key Assumptions:

The model does not account for the youths’ memory or learning.

There is no differentiation in the type of criminals and the sentences they serve. Realistically, not all crimes would justify juvenile detention and some crimes would actually have a longer than six-month sentence.

The constants within in the calculations of the model have been chosen arbitrarily and should be adjusted based on actual Bourke population data if this model were to be a realistic representation of Bourke’s population.

The model assumes that there are no other factors affecting youth crime and imprisonment in Bourke.

There are 1500 youths in Bourke. At the beginning of the simulation:

Young Community Member = 700

Alienated and At Risk Youth = 300

Criminal = 300

Imprisoned = 200

Noteworthy observations:

Raising Police expenditure has a very minimal effect on the number of at risk youths. This can be clearly seen by raising Police expenditure to the maximum of twenty and leaving the other two variables at a minimum. The number of Alienated and at Risk Youths is significantly higher than the other states.

Leaving Police expenditure at the minimum of one and increasing community development programs and community service programs to their maximum values shows that, in this model, crime can be decreased to nearly zero through community initiatives alone.

Leaving all the variables at the minimum position results in a relatively large amount of crime, a very low amount of imprisoned youth, and a very large proportion of the population alienated and at risk.

An ideal and more realistic simulation can be found by using the settings: Police = 12, Community Engagement Programs = 14, Community Service Programs = 10. This results in a large proportion of the population being young community members and relatively low amounts of criminals and imprisoned.

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:

I have used a Systems Dynamic model which is made up of stocks, flows, and primitives.
A linear function (Straight Line Method) has been created to determine the impact of adjusted expenditure levels in policing and community development. The town of Bourke experiences extremely high youth detention levels. The cause of this detention level is said to have many contributing factors. These include, the at home environment of the youth, with many households experiencing domestic violence incidents. While other contributing factors are the lifestyle of the youths external environment, with many youth not attending school, not having their license, and being unemployed. Each of these factors only increase the youth crime rate in Bourke.  In order to combat this, research into crime prevention has been implemented in Bourke. Increased expenditure on community development programs like domestic violence consultation groups, football clubs, free driving lessons and talks between elders and the youth have been implemented in the hope to reduce youth in detention.
My model demonstrates the effect of increased expenditure on community development verse increased expenditure on policing. The ultimate outcome would be to establish a balance between expenditure on policing and expenditure on community development, thus resulting with as little youth in detention as possible.


Assumptions:

Bourke total population: 3,000
Bourke total youth population: 2,000
Initial Value are as followed -
Bourke youth in community: 500
Bourke youth involved in crime: 250
Bourke youth in Juvenile detention: 250