Justice Reinvestment in Bourke - 44588410
Underlying Assumptions:1. The Bourke youth population starts off as 1000 individuals as indicated by their 2016 population.2. The initial crime rate is 0.5, meaning that 50% of the youth population are at risk of committing petty crime.3. The jail sentence for any one individual convicted of a petty crime is 6 months.4. The initial number of people already committing petty crime is 200 youths.5. The initial number of incarcerated individuals is 100 youths.6. The town has a certain ratio of which the funding between policing and community engagement can be divided. This means that if a certain percentage of funding is allocated to policing, the remaining is allocated to community engagement expenditure.
Variables1. Crime rate - the percentage of youth that are at risk of committing petty crime. This is included with a slider as the crime rate within any community fluctuates.2. Conviction rate - the percentage of youths in policy custody who will be convicted for the petty crime they committed.3. Recidivism rate - the percentage of youths released from juvenile detention who will commit crime again within the next 6 months. This variable is a constant of 0.7 as confirmed by statistical analysis of the Australian government.4. Discharge rate- the percentage of convicted youth who are released back into the community. This variable is a constant of 0.5 in this model, meaning that 50% of convicted juveniles are released into the community every 6 months.
Interesting Things to Note1. A high percentage of police expenditure results in a large number of incarcerated individuals and, after a period of time, an increased number of petty crime and thus low community engagement.2. A low percentage of police expenditure and thus a higher expenditure of community engagement expenditure results in a low number of incarcerated individuals and a high amount of recreational club members. While community engagement is increased, so is petty crime as a result of low incarceration.3. A balance between police and community engagement expenditure results in a fluctuating amount of incarceration and a high amount of community engagement. Thus this is the best solution in decreasing crime rates in the town of Bourke.
Bourke's Youth Crime Initiative Tina Knopek MKT563 Big Data Analytics
Justice Reinvestment in Bourke - 44909209
EFFECTS OF POLICING AND COMMUNITY INVESTMENT ON ADOLESCENTS IN BOURKE
The model depicts the community of Bourke, analysing the implications of varying community investment and law enforcement expenditure on crime patterns. In particular, it focuses on youth crime.
The town's initially high crime rates is mostly attributable to its limited activities and remote location. Ultimately, the aim of this model is to show how a manipulation of variables can alter youth crime and other stocks.
ASSUMPTIONS OF THE MODEL
1. Bourke has a population of 3,000 - 1,200 (40%) which make up the youth population, and the remaining 1,800 (60%) is the adult population.
2. Simulation value for community investment is 40%.
3. Simulation value for police officers is 450.
4. The reconviction rate (70%) is assumed to be higher than the
conviction rate (60%). This is because we assume that law enforcement will be imposed
more strictly to those who have already committed a crime at least once.
5. The ‘Engaged’ rate is assumed to be 80%. Given the lesser presence of youth (1,200) in comparison to adults (1,800), it is more likely that the youth population will be required to engage in ‘Community Engagement Programs’ such as sporting clubs or trade-skills.
6. The ‘Improved Youth’ rate is 80%. This is assumed to be high given the nature of the target study. In short, the youth population will be easier to improve, as opposed to if we were analysing adults.
7. It is assumed that, if convicted, juvenile detention time is six
months due to the ‘petty’ nature of youth crimes.
1. Youth population – percentage of youth residing in Bourke.
2. Youth crime – number of people out of the youth population who have committed an offence.
3. Juvenile detention – consequence of committing a crime for youth.
4. Community engagement program – a government
expenditure reform that involves providing support to the disadvantaged.
1. Community investment – effectiveness of the community engagement program implemented by government, (initial simulation value 40, or 40%). This has been applied on a linear basis to flows applicable to ‘Community Engagement Programs’.
2. Police officers – number between 1-1800 out of the
adult population who are police officers (initial simulation value 450, or 25%).
This value is linked with ‘Law Enforcement’, to which Law Enforcement is
applied to Conviction Rates. Law Enforcement is assumed to increase at a
decreasing rate due to strong beliefs that there are decreasing marginal
benefits in increasing the absolute number of police officers (according to the
Law of Diminishing Returns).
HOW TO GET INTERESTING RESULTS
1. At 50% community investment, disengagement is higher than improved youth throughout the study time period. This is interesting because there is a significantly higher amount of ‘Improved Youth’ (80%) compared to ‘Disengaged’ (20%). For that reason, it is surprising that there are more disengaged than improved adolescents in Bourke. However, at 100% community investment, ‘Improved Youth’ outweighs ‘Disengaged’ adolescents.
2. At 50% Police capacity (900 Police Officers), the conviction and reconviction rates are higher than adolescents not being convicted. ‘Convicted’ and ‘Not Convicted’ tend to move more closely together, on an absolute basis, compared to ‘Reconvicted’ and ‘Not Reconvicted’.
Olivia Miu (44909209)
the Model of Young community member in Bourke -11678182 Ziwei Zhang
the level of education and punishment can affect the number of criminals
Relationship between Youth Alienation, Police and Community Development in Bourke
This model illustrates the relationship between Community Factors (which includes social disadvantage, economic issues, family trauma) on Disengaged Youth, Crime and the impact of the Just Reinvest Program. This model particularly illustrates the complexity of factors on outcomes and how factors are interrelated making crime a wicked problem that is not easily viewed in isolation from the socio-economic and social causes.
StocksYouth in Burke is set based on Australian Bureau of Statistics levels but is easily modified to track population changes on modellingDisengaged Youth are those with problematic behaviour
Crime Levels are those Disengaged Youth who go on to commit a crimeEarly Intervention Programs are those run through Just Reinvest as part of the community program - the quantity of these can be adjusted.
Data of Note- Economic Impact is five times cost of running the program- Justice Impacts are roughly 66% and Non-Justice Impacts make up the remaining 33%.
While the UN defines "Youth" as 15 - 24 year olds, the KPMG report outlines programs for 10 - 24 year olds therefore in the context of Bourke the 10 - 24 year old age bracket is considered "Youths". This has been rounded to 700 people (ABS 2016 Census).
- It is estmated 70% of Bourke Youths will have problematic behaviour with 50% of those going on to commit a crime and be caught
- Cost of Early Intervention Youth Program is estimated at $100 per person per crime
While this model shows the impacts and benefits of additional funding on early intervention programs and the flow on affects this has on crime, it does not take into account the underlying cultural and social disadvantage issues that are often motivators for crime nor does this model take into account issues such as cultural prejudice and bias, over-policing or additional early intervention methods.