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-->

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

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-->

ContextBourke is a remote town located 800km northwest of Sydney, situated on the Darling River. The Maranguka Justice Reinvestment project emerged as Bourke was concerned about the number of Aboriginal families experiencing high levels of social disadvantage and rising crime. Bourke has worked for many years to develop a model for improving outcomes and creating better coordinated support for vulnerable families and children through the true empowerment of the local Aboriginal community. Maranguka, meaning ‘caring for others’ in Ngemba language, is a model of Indigenous self-governance which empowers the community to coordinate the right mix and timing of services through an Aboriginal community owned and led, multi-disciplinary team working in partnership with relevant government and non-government agencies (Impact of Maranguka Justice Reinvestm...)
The Model
This model simulates the effects of community support funding and crime on at risk youth in the town of Bourke. It also shows how key indicators affect the engagement of youth in society. Breaking the cycle of self destruction by providing support at all stages. 

Variables
Bourke Youth- This variable can be adjusted to show the impact of population numbers on the effectiveness of community projects and funding levels.Community Funding- This variable can be adjusted to show the impact of community support programs to create positive behaviour change.Crime Rate – This variable can be adjusted to show the impact on at risk youth.

Conclusion
The model clearly shows that an increase in support services via increased funding will help break the cycle of youth alienation and build better futures.

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

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 complex systems model ‘Engagement vs Police Expenditure for Justice Reinvestment in Bourke, NSW’ evaluates the effectiveness of allocating government funding to either community engagement activities or law enforcement. In this model, it is possible for the user to designate resources from a scale of 20-100 and to also modify the crime rate for both adults and youth. Below, there are detailed notes that describe the reasoning and assumptions that justify the logic applied to this model. Similar notes can be found when stocks, flows and variables is clicked under the field ‘notes’.

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 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-->

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 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.

​Youth Crime rate 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-->

Background

The town of Bourke is in north-west New South Wales and became the first pilot site to implement an Aboriginal-let model of justice reinvestment in 2013, known as the Maranguka Justice Reinvestment Project. The project aimed to demonstrate that sustainable outcomes can be achieved by redirecting funding to the underlying causes of youth crime.

Model explanation

This complex systems model depicts the relationships between different players and helps simulate youth crime patterns when influenced by funded community engagement activities, fluctuating levels of alienation, and police funding over a period of 2 years. The funding of community engagement activities aims to increase youth participation and therefore reduce the rate of criminal activity.

Assumptions

75% of Bourke’s youth are disengaged from society.

25% of Bourke’s youth are engaged with society.

50% of Bourke’s engaged youth are not interested in the community activities.

60% of disengaged youth are alienated.

Police expenditure: 30

Community engagement expenditure: 60

Stocks

Youth of Bourke
Total youth population in Bourke. We are assuming there are 500 youths susceptible to committing crime within Bourke.

Community activities
Community programs aimed at youths which could include sports, arts and cultural programs, counselling, support groups, learner driving school, school holiday programs and health and development checks.

Disengaged Youth
Youths who are not engaged in positive community activities and are at risk of committing criminal activities. These youths may be affected by domestic and family violence, drugs, alcohol or abuse.

Engaged Youth
Youths who are engaged in society in a positive way. The aim of this program is to have all youths positively engaged in Bourke’s community.

Crime
Youths who have committed a criminal offence.

Prison/detention
Youths who are found guilty of a criminal offence and are now in prison or detention.

Rehabilitation
Youths who have left prison/detention and are now attending rehabilitation programs. This rehabilitation should decrease the likelihood of youths re-offending.

Variables

Police expenditure
Funding for police presence to decrease the number of youths participating in criminal activities and whether they are convicted and imprisoned. If youths are imprisoned, police expenditure can also help move them towards rehabilitation to lessen the chance of re-offence.

Community engagement expenditure
Funding of community activities aimed at the youth of Bourke. These activities are designed to positively impact the lives of youth and lessen the chance of alienation and disengagement from the community.

Alienation
Contributing factors to alienation of youths in Bourke include domestic and family violence, drugs, alcohol, abuse, homelessness, and lack of education.

School/VET attendance
The rate at which Bourke’s youth attend school or vocational education and training courses (VET) to further their education and increase their engagement in the community.

Conclusions

This complex model indicates the impact of only a few variables, yet there are many more that can be considered. However, this model shows that over a period of 2 years, the combination of community engagement funding, police funding and education can improve the lives of Bourke’s susceptible youth. The most significant impact is made by the community engagement funding. If this funding is decreased, the rate of engaged youth decreases, and the rate of disengaged youth does not improve.