Crime | Insight Maker

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

Youth and community investment in Bourke

Lisa Ma

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

SID: 43626971.

Model displays the impacts of community development and police simultaneously on offenders in both youth and adult age groups. Also considers these variables simultaneously.

Model of Bourke's crime problem

Yu Mao

Exploration of Funding Distribution within Bourke, NSW

This Insight provides a vision of the current crime rate of Bourke and the impact that increases in funding in both community involvement and policing will have. It models this data across 24 months.

Stocks:

General Population of Bourke

This is the general population of Bourke, set by default at the current population of 3000.

Criminals

These are citizens that have been turned to crime due to a lack of community programs and police presence.

Incarcerated Criminals

When a criminal is found to be guilty they are placed in jail for a duration of time before being returned to the general population.

Community Involvement Program Participants

These are members of the public who are engaged with community programs.

Variables:

Size of Police Force

The number of police force members present in Bourke. The value is between 0-1 and represents no funding against full funding.

Funding for Community Programs

This represents the amount of funding committed to community programs. The value is set between 0-1 and represents no funding against full funding.

Description and Assumptions:

This model assumes that even with complete police funding there will never be a complete eradication of crime within Bourke.

Based on statistics gathered from this document:

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi020.pdf

Most crimes tend to carry with them a jail time of a year or less. As such, this model averages the amount of time spent incarcerated is 9 months.

This model assumes that the funding for these services will remain consistent across the entire period of time.

The model assumes that community programs will likely last 12 months.

Notable Data Points

As can be seen in the model, an increase in police funding causes an increase in criminals. There is a critical point where an increase in police presence leads to higher incarceration. Prior to this point, there is more crime, but fewer arrests.

An increase in social programs decreases crime overall.

43692273 - Reinvestment in Bourke, NSW

Benjamin Muir

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

Clone of Crime vs. Engagement

Brett Ely

Reoffending Scheme

David

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.

Clone of Impact of Social Services and Police on Youth Crime

Srinivas Nalla

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.

Assignment 3 44906064

Arvindhan Gopal Punitha

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

Clone of Crime vs. Engagement

Brett Ely

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

The Groups and factors are explained in depth below.

With a total population of 3000 the the total youth population is estimated to 2000.

Youth: Initialing this encompasses 2000 individuals aged 15-25 years that are currently living in Bourke.

Crime: this denotes the number of youth involved in crime

Conviction: this includes youth that have been caught after committing a crime.

Youth in detention: the number of youth that have been detained for a period of time after being convicted of a crime.

Community program involvement: The number of youth that participate in community programs.

FACTORS (affecting the groups above)

Crime Rate: the rate at which youth commit a crime, this variable based upon 'alienation'.

Caught: the ratio of youth committing crime are caught. This is variable based upon the 'policing expenditure'

Alienation: a ratio reflecting the division between Bourke's youth and law enforcement. This variable is based upon the level of policing expenditure and community program expenditure.

Policing Expenditure: The respective amount of money (000's of dollars) allocated to tackle youth crime.

SLIDER

min: 5 ($5,000)

max: 50 ($50,000)

Community Program Expenditure: The respective amount of money (000's of dollars) allocated running community programs aimed to help Bourke's youth population.

SLIDER

min: 0 ($0)

max: 40 ($40,000)

By adjusting the policing and community program expenditure parameters using the sliders shows fluctuations between the groups. For example, by increasing policing expenditure will increase alienation, subsequently the crime rate will increase. Furthermore an increase in the proportion of youth committing crime that are caught, subsequently increasing the youth being convicted and in detention.

On the other using the slider to increase the expenditure on community programs, will see increase in the the number of youth involved in the programs. Also the level of alienation will decrease and subsequently reflecting in a reduced crime rate.

Time variable used in this model is Months. This is shown in the relative simulations.

Bourke's Youth Crime (Rowena Mackintosh 43661041)

Rowena Mackintosh

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

SID: 43626971.

Model displays the impacts of community development and police simultaneously on offenders in both youth and adult age groups. Also considers these variables simultaneously.

Clone of Model of Bourke's crime problem

Ray Madachy

Model Information

This model is designed to make the link between people in Bourke, crime preservation and committed jail rate. Those elements are constantly affected by police, employment availability and education investment. I have simulated to show the number of criminals, jail, and alcohol addicted.

Model has used 4 elements are Bourke population, alcohol addicted, crime preservation, and jail. There are 3 variables: police, employment rate and education investment. These three variable are adjustable.

People in Bourke can involved in many different situations.

#1: They are drink and become alcohol addicts (drink stage). Base on the fact of Bourke problems, I have created a really hight rate drinking people (70% of town).The alcohol addicts are easily committed as criminals (50% 0f addicts) (commit stage). But this number can be decrease if they have higher education rate.

#2: They offended by temptation and become crime preservation (Temptation stage). Crime preservation can be considered and returned back to community (return stage). Otherwise, they convict to bad criminal guilty and go to jail ( conviction stage). The flow rate of conviction is also affected by the number of police. From jail, they could be release after five year and changing also base on the educate rate (release stage).

#3 They can have jobs in engage stage. Employment rate is also affected by education.

Bourke is showed as the number of people in town,

set to an initial value of 2000 to represent 100% of people in Bourke

Jail because the criminal issues of Bourke are wide spread so jail describes the number of people who convicted as criminals, which is 20% of crime rate and minus the percentage of police.

Alcohol addicted is the rate of people who usually using alcohol.

Crime preservation is the number of people who are under consideration after doing something wrong or commit a sin. This is the waiting stage to confirm a offender.

Police is a adjusted range number of police in town, which directly affect to temptation rate.

Employment : The unemployment rate in Bourke is hight. This apparently lead to community problem such as theft or drinking alcohol. Employment is made adjusted to decrease te temptation and alcohol addicted rate. Employment rate is increased by going up education investment.

Education Investment: I strongly focus on this element because the belief that the better education creates better community. Thus, education investment in this model could change the release, return, conviction, commit and temptation flows.

There are

2000 people in Bourke

Police range: 1-100

Education investment rate: 1-100

Employment rate: 1-400

Observation and Key assumption

Not all crime preservation will go to jail, some are returned back to Bourke.

Leaving all the variable at minimum, position results in the large amount of crime and after the the strong increasing in jail rate. The amount of jail is opposite the amount of criminals.

Leaving the employment and police at minimum but maximise the education investment rate, the elements widely fluctuate but gradually decrease to 0 after long time (34 years)

Leaving the education investment but maximise police and employment rate, the crime and jail amount almost a half during the time.

Bourke's Crime Problem Model

Ngoc Nhung Truong

Model Explanation

This simple model highlights key investment areas within the Bourke community that can influence the overall levels of crime.

The total population of Bourke is split into a percentage of adults and youth who have differing participation rates in community groups. Those who are engaged as a member of a community group most to a positive lifestyle state.

Those who do not wish to join or are not engaged in a community group are offered tertiary education. Similarly, those engaged in tertiary education move to a positive lifestyle state. Those who do not seek or engage in tertiary education are alienated from the community. They are at an 80% chance of committing crime. The other 20% voluntarily reengage with society. Once a crime is committed, the individual is either arrested or eludes arrest. The likelihood of arrest varies depending on policing expenditure. An individual who is arrested will be placed on trial and if found guilty will be placed in a correctional facility (either a juvenile detention centre of jail).

Assumptions

Community engagement participation rates vary depending on the individuals age, with youth more inclined to join a community group. Variance in expenditure is reflected in participation rates in a linear fashion.

Members of Bourke who are not engaged in community groups are targeted and presented with the opportunity to participate in tertiary education such as the teaching of trade-skills. Those targeted have the same likeliness to participate in tertiary education regardless of age.

Those who do not seek any for of community involvement are considered alienated and at a high risk of committing crime.

Sliders have been included to vary the total population size of Bourke, with ratios of Adult to Youth remaining the same. Expenditure can be varied depending on government distribution with the input in dollars.

It is assumed that all relationships are linear within this model. Individuals who are either in a positive lifestyle or correctional facility are in that state for six months before returning to be part of the population of Bourke.

Interesting Results

Even with no Policing Expenditure, there are times when there are no individuals in a correctional facility if Community Engagement Expenditure and Tertiary Skills Development Expenditure is maximised.

44854730 - Justice Reinvestment Framework Model for Bourke

Josh Stevens

Draft Insight 43674615

Abanoub Mickaeal

Bourke Youth Crime Model

This simple model is designed to simulate crime amongst youth in the country town of Bourke, Australia.

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]

The rates of transfer between these blocks are determined by several logical mechanisms which are explained below. All calculations are rounded for the obvious reason that populations are necessarily integer values. To facilitate investigation into the interaction between variables, only Police and Funding are adjustable. Any other inputs would unnecessarily complicate the model, and degrade its usability and usefulness.

Observations:

Police and Funding have an interaction that determines the outcome for criminals in the simulation. At a funding multiplier of 1 (standard) and with minimum police, Criminals outnumber youths by the end of the simulation. As the funding is decreased, this threshold increases until a funding multiplier of 0.2, where even the maximum number of police cannot control the criminal population.

Perhaps most interestingly, the equilibrium prisoner population depends on the sports club funding multiplier, not the number of police.

An interesting comparison can be found between setting the funding multiplier to 1.5 and police to 100, and setting funding to 0.3 with police at 225. This comparison is an ideal use for this model, as it reflects the benefits from community engagement seen in the case study.

Rates:

Commit Crime: The crime rate in Bourke is modelled to be dependent on several factors, principally the number of police in Bourke (a greater police presence will reduce crime). It is also assumed that a greater general youth population will increase the rate of crime, and that participation in the football club (or interaction with other engaged community members) will discourage crime. For these reasons, the rate of criminalisation is modelled with the equation:

Round([Bourke Youth]^2/([Football Club]*[Police]+1))

Arrested: The arrest rate is determined by a factor of the number of police available to charge and arrest suspects, as well as the number of criminals eligible for arrest. A natural logarithm is taken for police, as police departments should see diminishing returns in adding more officers. A logarithm is also taken of criminals to allow it to factor into the rate without swamping the effect of police. Thus, the rate is calculated with:

Round(ln([Police]+1)*5*log([Criminals]+1))

Released: The release rate is a straightforward calculation; it is set to increase with the square of the number of prisoners to keep the maximum number of inmates low. This is because Bourke is a small town with a small gaol and it would have to prematurely release inmates as the inmate population overflowed. Thus it is calculated with:

Round(0.001*[Prisoners]^2)

Recruited: The Football recruitment rate is assumed to be dependent on the population available for recruitment, and the funding received for the football club. A better funded club would recruit youths in greater numbers. Consequently, the recruitment rate is calculated with:

Round(ln([Bourke Youth]+1)*[Funding Modifier]+1)

Dropout Rate: The dropout rate from the football club is assumed to be dependent on the number of players (a proportion should quit every season) and the funding of the club (a well funded club should retain more players. Thus it is calculated with:

Round(1+ln([Football Club]*10/([Funding Modifier]+5)))

Self Adjust: A small leak flow to represent those criminals that cease their criminal activity and return to the general population.

Enjoy!

- Sam

Clone of 44910304 - Crime in Bourke

Andy West

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.

Clone of Impact of Social Services and Police on Youth Crime

Sravya Sri Egalapati

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.

Clone of Clone of Assignment 3 44906064

fredrick cm

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.

Clone of Impact of Social Services and Police on Youth Crime

Sravya Sri Egalapati

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.

Clone of Impact of Social Services and Police on Youth Crime

Sravya Sri Egalapati

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.

Clone of Assignment 3 44906064

fredrick cm

This model simulated possible crime rates of youths in Bourke.

Crime, Policing and Community Programs involving Youths in Bourke

Lauren Attwood

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.

Clone of Clone of Impact of Social Services and Police on Youth Crime

sub cribed

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.

Clone of Clone of Justice Reinvestment in Bourke

Phillip McDonald

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

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

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

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

Variables

There are two Variables involved in the model

1. Police Enforcement

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

2. Community Development

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

Adjusting Variables

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

Assumptions

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

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

References

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

Alienated Population

amir amiri

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.

Clone of Impact of Social Services and Police on Youth Crime

Sravya Sri Egalapati

Crime Models