Justice Reinvestment in Bourke

Model Explanation:

One part of this model is displaying the typical lifestyle of many adults and youth in the town Bourke, North West of New South Wales. This lifestyle involves committing crime, getting arrested for the crime by police (or getting away with it) and spending time in jail (for adults) or juvenile detention (for the youth) or simply getting discharged.

Additionally to this traditional lifestyle being modelled, an alternative option called community groups has also been incorporated into the model. The model is showing that members of Bourke have the option to join a community group which the government hopes will improve their lifestyle when they are immersed once again into society, thus reducing the rate of crime.

The Stocks Involved:

Adult- The adults living in Bourke
Youth- The adolescents living in Bourke
Petty Crime- The standard crime committed by the youth of Bourke. This can include stealing cars and breaking into property.
Crime- The common crime circulating among the adults of Bourke. This includes domestic violence often as a result of heavy drinking.
Apprehended- Youth getting captured by the police
Arrested- Adults getting caught by the police
Juvenile Detention- Alienation of youth by police
Jail- Adults locked up by the police
Community Group- Groups formed for the people of Bourke to join. Includes development activities, sporting clubs and trade-skill learning classes.
Positive Lifestyle- Adults and youth who have improved themselves as a result of joining these community groups (the goal of community engagement program expenditure).

The Variables Involved and How to Adjust Them:

1. Policing: The number of police in the town of Bourke. The level and amount of punishment is dependent on the quantity of police present. 

Minimum amount is one as there should be at least one police existent.

2. Community Engagement Expenditure: The total amount of money spent into community groups to develop individuals. 

The purpose of the government is to spend money on community engagement activities so the minimum is at least one percent of the money they have available to spend and the maximum is 100 percent of the money they can afford to spend.

--> Both variables have a slider that goes up and down by one step. You can adjust both variables at the same time but take into account both variables have their own minimum and maximum.

Underlying Assumptions:

-Approximately 3000 people in Bourke

-Coefficients and initial values are arbitrarily chosen. These would be modified with real-life data.

-The only external influences on this model are police and community investment.

Suggested Settings for Interesting Results:

1. First move the policing and community expenditure sliders to their maximum. Hit the simulate button and look at the first time-series graph titled 'Youth Lifestyle'. Notice the delays between increase of each stock and the ordering: As Youth decreases, Petty Crime will increase. Then youth Apprehended will begin to increase followed by those going to Juvenile Detention. Youth will then start to increase again and the trend continues over the 3-year period displayed. Notice how the same pattern occurs for the time-series graph labelled 'Adult Lifestyle'.

2. Move the policing slider to 1 and the community expenditure slider to 100. Hit simulate. Notice in the 'Youth Lifestyle' graph how even with community expenditure at its maximum, over time, Petty Crime will still increase because there are hardly any police and hence hardly any youth getting caught so as a result the youth in Bourke keep to their regular immoral lifestyle. If you view the 'Adult Lifestyle' graph you will see the same pattern. (Note this point is a main reason for the conclusion drawn below).

3. Move the community engagement and policing slider to their minimum 1. Hit simulate. View the third display titled 'Community Engagement Program'. You will notice how Youth and Adult decrease and Crime and Petty Crime increase. Also, since community engagement is at its minimum too (not just policing) the amount of people in Community Groups decreases significantly and as a result the number of individuals creating a Positive Lifestyle for themselves decreases too.

4. Move the Community Engagement Expenditure slider to 1 and the Policing slider to 50 and look particularly at the last display labelled 'Adults and Youth: Membership and Crime Rates'. You will notice instantly how Community Group and Positive Lifestyle always have a lower number of individuals compared to the general Youth and Adult stocks as well as the Crime and Petty Crime stocks. This gives indication that a higher amount of investment should be put into the community engagement programs for better results. 

Conclusions:

A combination of policing and community engagement expenditure is the best solution for the people of Bourke as the policing will gradually reduce the amount of crime and the community development programs will help create a positive lifestyle for each individual that joins. Overall it is not efficient to just invest in community development programs. For the most effective outcome, an increase in policing is needed as well as investments in community engagement activities.

Note: You do not need to dive into any formulae. But feel free to move the sliders and hit that simulate button to view how the number of people in each stock changes based on the level of policing and community engagement expenditure!

INTRODUCTION 

​This model simulates the effect of Police expenditure, Community expenditure and substance abuse (Alcohol and drugs).

This model can be used by community member responsible for making expenditure decision for the community. The variable can be manipulated for see how changes in community engagement and policing expenditure affect other parts of the community.

STOCKS-

Youth- The adolescents living in Bourke            

Adult- The adults living in Bourke

Crime- The common crime circulating among the adults of Bourke.

Apprehended- Getting captured by the police

Community Group- Groups formed for the people of Bourke to join. Including development activities, trade-skill learning classes and sports.

Positive Lifestyle- Adults and youth who have improved themselves because of joining these community groups and leading a positive lifestyle.

VARIABLE-

Community Expenditure - The amount of money spent on community groups to develop skills and keep the adults engaged. The variable can be raised to increase the amount of population (Adult or Youth) joining a community group which can lead to a positive lifestyle.

Alcohol and Drugs - This variable acts as an agent to disengage Adult and Youth from the community.

The Policing Expenditure - The number of money spent after police. This variable can be changed to affect the number of people getting apprehended.

ASSUMPTION- 

1) 3000 People living in Bourke

2) External Influence - Community groups, Police and Substance abuse

3) 70% of the population are Adult and 30% are Youth

4) Crime- 600

5) Apprehended - 

6) Community Group - 300

7) Positive life - 100

8) Jail - 480

SUGGESTED SETTING

Positive Lifestyle lead by the community-      Setting the Community Expenditure to a high 80, policing factor to a medium 50 and Substance abuse to a low 30 we will see a surge of positive lifestyle.

High Rate of Engagement- An increase in the Substance abuse variable to 10% shows crime and people in jail increase but the ratio of people engaged in community groups is much higher.

CRIME RATE (HIGHEST) - If Community Engagement Expenditure and Policing Expenditure are reduced to zero the amount of crime increases significantly over time and the amount of people in jail reduces to near zero.

CONCLUSION

A combination of policing and community engagement expenditure is the best solution for the people of Bourke.The policing will gradually reduce the amount of crime and the community development programs will help create a positive lifestyle.

For the most effective outcome, an increase in policing is needed as well as investments in community engagement activities.

Justice Reinvestment in Bourke

Model Explanation:

One part of this model is displaying the typical lifestyle of many adults and youth in the town Bourke, North West of New South Wales. This lifestyle involves committing crime, getting arrested for the crime by police (or getting away with it) and spending time in jail (for adults) or juvenile detention (for the youth) or simply getting discharged.

Additionally to this traditional lifestyle being modelled, an alternative option called community groups has also been incorporated into the model. The model is showing that members of Bourke have the option to join a community group which the government hopes will improve their lifestyle when they are immersed once again into society, thus reducing the rate of crime.

The Stocks Involved:

Adult- The adults living in Bourke
Youth- The adolescents living in Bourke
Petty Crime- The standard crime committed by the youth of Bourke. This can include stealing cars and breaking into property.
Crime- The common crime circulating among the adults of Bourke. This includes domestic violence often as a result of heavy drinking.
Apprehended- Youth getting captured by the police
Arrested- Adults getting caught by the police
Juvenile Detention- Alienation of youth by police
Jail- Adults locked up by the police
Community Group- Groups formed for the people of Bourke to join. Includes development activities, sporting clubs and trade-skill learning classes.
Positive Lifestyle- Adults and youth who have improved themselves as a result of joining these community groups (the goal of community engagement program expenditure).

The Variables Involved and How to Adjust Them:

1. Policing: The number of police in the town of Bourke. The level and amount of punishment is dependent on the quantity of police present. 

Minimum amount is one as there should be at least one police existent.

2. Community Engagement Expenditure: The total amount of money spent into community groups to develop individuals. 

The purpose of the government is to spend money on community engagement activities so the minimum is at least one percent of the money they have available to spend and the maximum is 100 percent of the money they can afford to spend.

--> Both variables have a slider that goes up and down by one step. You can adjust both variables at the same time but take into account both variables have their own minimum and maximum.

Underlying Assumptions:

-Approximately 3000 people in Bourke

-Coefficients and initial values are arbitrarily chosen. These would be modified with real-life data.

-The only external influences on this model are police and community investment.

Suggested Settings for Interesting Results:

1. First move the policing and community expenditure sliders to their maximum. Hit the simulate button and look at the first time-series graph titled 'Youth Lifestyle'. Notice the delays between increase of each stock and the ordering: As Youth decreases, Petty Crime will increase. Then youth Apprehended will begin to increase followed by those going to Juvenile Detention. Youth will then start to increase again and the trend continues over the 3-year period displayed. Notice how the same pattern occurs for the time-series graph labelled 'Adult Lifestyle'.

2. Move the policing slider to 1 and the community expenditure slider to 100. Hit simulate. Notice in the 'Youth Lifestyle' graph how even with community expenditure at its maximum, over time, Petty Crime will still increase because there are hardly any police and hence hardly any youth getting caught so as a result the youth in Bourke keep to their regular immoral lifestyle. If you view the 'Adult Lifestyle' graph you will see the same pattern. (Note this point is a main reason for the conclusion drawn below).

3. Move the community engagement and policing slider to their minimum 1. Hit simulate. View the third display titled 'Community Engagement Program'. You will notice how Youth and Adult decrease and Crime and Petty Crime increase. Also, since community engagement is at its minimum too (not just policing) the amount of people in Community Groups decreases significantly and as a result the number of individuals creating a Positive Lifestyle for themselves decreases too.

4. Move the Community Engagement Expenditure slider to 1 and the Policing slider to 50 and look particularly at the last display labelled 'Adults and Youth: Membership and Crime Rates'. You will notice instantly how Community Group and Positive Lifestyle always have a lower number of individuals compared to the general Youth and Adult stocks as well as the Crime and Petty Crime stocks. This gives indication that a higher amount of investment should be put into the community engagement programs for better results. 

Conclusions:

A combination of policing and community engagement expenditure is the best solution for the people of Bourke as the policing will gradually reduce the amount of crime and the community development programs will help create a positive lifestyle for each individual that joins. Overall it is not efficient to just invest in community development programs. For the most effective outcome, an increase in policing is needed as well as investments in community engagement activities.

Note: You do not need to dive into any formulae. But feel free to move the sliders and hit that simulate button to view how the number of people in each stock changes based on the level of policing and community engagement expenditure!

HOW A NEW COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT INITATIVE MAY IMPACT YOUTH CRIME IN THE TOWN OF BOURKE, NSW

MKT563 Assessment 4:  Kari Steele 

Aim of Simulation: 

Bourke is a town in which Youth are involved in high rates of criminal behaviour (Thompson, 2016).  This simulation focuses on how implementation of a community engagement initiative may impact crime patterns of youths in Bourke.   The specific aim is to assess whether the town should initiate a program such as the Big Brothers Big Sisters Community-Based Mentoring (CBM) (Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development, 2018) program to reduce crime and antisocial behaviour (National Institute of Justice, n.d).  Big Brothers Big Sisters is a community mentoring program which matches a volunteer adult mentor to an at-risk child or adolescent to delay or reduce antisocial behaviours; improve academic success, attitudes and behaviours, peer and family relationships; strength self-concept; and provide social and cultural enrichment (Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development, 2018). 

Model Explanation:

An InsightMaker model is used to simulate the influence of Big Brothers Big Sisters Initiative on Criminal Behaviour (leading to 60% juvenile detention rates) with variables including participation rate and also drug and alcohol use.

Assumptions:

1/ ‘Youth’ are defined, for statistical purposes, as those persons between the ages of 15 and 24 (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, n.d).

2/ Youth population (15 – 24 years) makes up 14.1% of the total population of LGA Bourke which according to the most up-to-date freely available Census data (2008) is 3091 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2010).  Therefore, youth population has been calculated as 435 individuals.

3/ Big Brothers Big Sisters Program is assumed to impact LGA Bourke in a similar manner that has been shown in previous studies (Tierney, Grossman, and Resch, 2000) where initiative showed mentored youths in the program were 46% significantly less likely to initiate drug use and 27 percent less likely to initiate alcohol use, compared to control.  They were 32 less likely to have struct someone during the previous 12 months.  Compared to control group, the mentored youths earned higher grades, skipped fewer classes and fewer days of school and felt more competent about doing their schoolwork (non-significant).  Research also found that mentored youths, compared with control counterparts, displayed significantly better relationships with parents.  Emotional support among peers was higher than controls. 

Initial Values:

Youth Population = 435

Criminal Behaviour = 100

40% of youth population who commit a crime are non-convicted

60% of youth population who commit a crime are convicted

20% of youth involved in the Big Brothers Big Sisters Initiative are non-engaged

80% of youth involved in the Big Brothers Big Sisters Initiative are engaged

Variables:

The variables include ‘Participation Rate’ and ‘Drug and Alcohol Usage’.  These variables can be adjusted as these levels may be able to be impacted by other initiatives which the community can assess for introduction; these variables may also change in terms of rate over time.

Interesting Parameters

As can be seen by increasing the rate of participation to 90% we can see juvenile detention rate decreases with engagement (even with the 20% non-engagement of youths involved in program).  By moving the slider to 10% participation however you can see the criminal behaviour increase.   

Conclusion:

From the simulation, we can clearly see that the community of Bourke would benefit in terms of the Big Brothers Big Sisters Initiative decreasing criminal behaviour in youths (15 – 24 years of age) over a 5-year timeframe.  Further investigation regarding expenditure and logistics to implement such a program is warranted based on the simulation of impact.

References:

Australian Bureau of Statistics.  (2010).  Census Data for Bourke LGA.  Retrieved from www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/LGA11150Population/People12002-2006?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=LGA11150&issue=2002-2006

Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development.  (2018).  Big Brothers Big Sisters of America Blueprints Program Rating: Promising, viewed 26 May 2018, <www.blueprintsprograms.com/evaluation-abstract/big-brothers-big-sisters-of-america>

National Institute of Justice.  (n.d.).  Program Profile: Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) Community-Based Mentoring (CBM) Program, viewed 26th May 2018, <https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=112>

Tierney, J.P., Grossman, J.B., and Resch, N.L. (2000). Making a Difference: An Impact Study of Big Brothers/Big Sisters. Philadelphia, Pa.: Public/Private Ventures.
http://ppv.issuelab.org/resource/making_a_difference_an_impact_study_of_big_brothersbig_sisters_re_issue_of_1995_study

Thompson, G. (2016) Backing Bourke: How a radical new approach is saving young people from a life of crime.  Retrieved from < www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-19/four-corners-bourkes-experiment-in-justice-reinvestment/7855114>

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA).  (n.d.).  Definition of Youth, viewed 24th May 2018, www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/youth/fact-sheets/youth-definition.pdf

Justice Reinvestment in Bourke

Model Explanation:

One part of this model is displaying the typical lifestyle of many adults and youth in the town Bourke, North West of New South Wales. This lifestyle involves committing crime, getting arrested for the crime by police (or getting away with it) and spending time in jail (for adults) or juvenile detention (for the youth) or simply getting discharged.

Additionally to this traditional lifestyle being modelled, an alternative option called community groups has also been incorporated into the model. The model is showing that members of Bourke have the option to join a community group which the government hopes will improve their lifestyle when they are immersed once again into society, thus reducing the rate of crime.

The Stocks Involved:

Adult- The adults living in Bourke
Youth- The adolescents living in Bourke
Petty Crime- The standard crime committed by the youth of Bourke. This can include stealing cars and breaking into property.
Crime- The common crime circulating among the adults of Bourke. This includes domestic violence often as a result of heavy drinking.
Apprehended- Youth getting captured by the police
Arrested- Adults getting caught by the police
Juvenile Detention- Alienation of youth by police
Jail- Adults locked up by the police
Community Group- Groups formed for the people of Bourke to join. Includes development activities, sporting clubs and trade-skill learning classes.
Positive Lifestyle- Adults and youth who have improved themselves as a result of joining these community groups (the goal of community engagement program expenditure).

The Variables Involved and How to Adjust Them:

1. Policing: The number of police in the town of Bourke. The level and amount of punishment is dependent on the quantity of police present. 

Minimum amount is one as there should be at least one police existent.

2. Community Engagement Expenditure: The total amount of money spent into community groups to develop individuals. 

The purpose of the government is to spend money on community engagement activities so the minimum is at least one percent of the money they have available to spend and the maximum is 100 percent of the money they can afford to spend.

--> Both variables have a slider that goes up and down by one step. You can adjust both variables at the same time but take into account both variables have their own minimum and maximum.

Underlying Assumptions:

-Approximately 3000 people in Bourke

-Coefficients and initial values are arbitrarily chosen. These would be modified with real-life data.

-The only external influences on this model are police and community investment.

Suggested Settings for Interesting Results:

1. First move the policing and community expenditure sliders to their maximum. Hit the simulate button and look at the first time-series graph titled 'Youth Lifestyle'. Notice the delays between increase of each stock and the ordering: As Youth decreases, Petty Crime will increase. Then youth Apprehended will begin to increase followed by those going to Juvenile Detention. Youth will then start to increase again and the trend continues over the 3-year period displayed. Notice how the same pattern occurs for the time-series graph labelled 'Adult Lifestyle'.

2. Move the policing slider to 1 and the community expenditure slider to 100. Hit simulate. Notice in the 'Youth Lifestyle' graph how even with community expenditure at its maximum, over time, Petty Crime will still increase because there are hardly any police and hence hardly any youth getting caught so as a result the youth in Bourke keep to their regular immoral lifestyle. If you view the 'Adult Lifestyle' graph you will see the same pattern. (Note this point is a main reason for the conclusion drawn below).

3. Move the community engagement and policing slider to their minimum 1. Hit simulate. View the third display titled 'Community Engagement Program'. You will notice how Youth and Adult decrease and Crime and Petty Crime increase. Also, since community engagement is at its minimum too (not just policing) the amount of people in Community Groups decreases significantly and as a result the number of individuals creating a Positive Lifestyle for themselves decreases too.

4. Move the Community Engagement Expenditure slider to 1 and the Policing slider to 50 and look particularly at the last display labelled 'Adults and Youth: Membership and Crime Rates'. You will notice instantly how Community Group and Positive Lifestyle always have a lower number of individuals compared to the general Youth and Adult stocks as well as the Crime and Petty Crime stocks. This gives indication that a higher amount of investment should be put into the community engagement programs for better results. 

Conclusions:

A combination of policing and community engagement expenditure is the best solution for the people of Bourke as the policing will gradually reduce the amount of crime and the community development programs will help create a positive lifestyle for each individual that joins. Overall it is not efficient to just invest in community development programs. For the most effective outcome, an increase in policing is needed as well as investments in community engagement activities.

Note: You do not need to dive into any formulae. But feel free to move the sliders and hit that simulate button to view how the number of people in each stock changes based on the level of policing and community engagement expenditure!