Crime | Insight Maker

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

Carlo Ralph De Musis

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

Srinivas Nalla

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

JAMES SAVAGE

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

Daniel Chalk

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

Exemplo.

Modelo criminal de exemplo 01

Carlo Ralph De Musis

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 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

Shyam Sunder Raju Anantha Kumar

Justice Reinvestment in Bourke

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

Clone of Assignment 3 44650701

Vinzaris

Assignment

This assignment illustrates the effects of police fundings and community expenditure on the society.

And how we can improve the Town (Bourke).

Stocks

Population- Population of Bourke (3000)

Adults- 60% of the population in Bourke are Adults

Youth- 40% of the population in Bourke are young

Crime- Crimes committed by the young and adults under any bad influence or mischief.

Caught- Caught by police after or during the crime is committed

Community Group- Groups formed by the people to provide better lifestyles and a better environment.

Positive Lifestyles- People who adopt the better lifestyle and be a better person.

Variables

Community Expenses- The amount spent on the community to attract more people and make better lives.

Police Fundings- The amount spent on/for the police to make the streets more safer.

Assumptions

1. 3000 is the considered population for the model.

2. The values which are affecting the model are Community expenses and Police fundings.

3. 60% of the population is Adults

4. 40% of the population is Youth

5. 500 people are already doing crime

6. 365 people are already in jail.

7. 200 people are already involved in community groups and have positive lifestyle

8. There will be some people who will join community groups but will quit and get attracted towards bad influence.

9. There will some people who will have attracted towards bad influence and mischief but will not do any kind of crime and go home.

10. There will some people who will be caught but not be charged or they are not eligible for going to jail.

How Model Works

--Population is divided in two Young and adults; Young/Adults are either attracted towards Bad influence or mischief or engaged with the community group.

--If they are engaged in any community group they will either have a good lifestyle and better behaviour, and then go back to population or they will disengaged, and quits, and get attracted towards Bad influence or mischief.

--When the people are attracted towards bad influence or mischief they will either commit a crime or go back to population, when they commit any crime they will be caught by the police.

--Then they are either charge and sent to jail, or they are sent back to population.

--When criminals are sent to jail they have to stay there for about 10 months and then released and sent to the population.

All in all, if we have to improve Bourke we have to use the best combination of the variables (How much to invest and where to invest) so that we can have the best results and better people in the town.

Assignment_3_MGMT220_[44178751]

Laksh Taneja

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

Shyam Sunder Raju Anantha Kumar

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

Harikrishna Elaprolu

Criminal Rate

Yan Zhang

MKT 563, Assessment 4

Name Sothearen Khuoy

ID: 11709868

This model illustrated how crime impact on community development.

The diagram illustrated of community development and unemployment rate in Bourke town. The assumption of Bourke population is set as 3,000, and unemployment population set as 500. While unemployment rate is effective by crime and prisoners. The value of crime is 100, and the initial value of prisoners are 300.

Variable of diagram is shown the relationship between community development and lack of human resource. If Bourke community lack of human resource, it will be negative impact to unemployment and positive impact to crime. While all of the influences will be impact to community development. All in all, the crime in Bourke community is affect to community development and unemployment in community also.

Influence of Community development in Bourke

Sothearen Khuoy

Model Explanation:

This system dynamics model visualises the impact on investment into policing and community engagement resources on the crime rates within the youth population of Bourke, NSW.
The model also adds in the variable of funding for safe houses. With a high rate of domestic violence, unfavorable home conditions and other socio-economic factors, many youth roam the streets with no safe place to go, which may lead to negative behaviour patterns.

Assumptions

Youth Population: 700
Total youth population in 2016 for Bourke LGA was 646 (ages 10-29). (Census, 2016) Figures rounded to 700 for purposes of this model simulation.

Constants:
70% registration and engagement rates for Community funded programs
30% attendance rate for Safe Houses
50% crime conviction rate

Variables

Positive and Negative Influences

The model shows a number of key variables that lead youth to become more vunerable to commit a crime (such as alienation, coming from households with domestic violence, boredom and socio-economic disadvantages such as low income), as well as the variables that enhance the youth's likelihood to be a contributing member of the community (developing trusted relationships and connections with others, and having a sense of self worth, purpose and pride in the community). These factors (positive and negative) are aggregated to a single rate of 50% each for the purposes of the simulation, however each individual situation would be unique.

Police Funding / Resources

Police funding and resources means the number of active police officers attending to criminal activities, as well as prevention tactics and education programs to reduce negative behaviour. The slider can be moved to increase or decrease policing levels to view the impact on conviction rates. Current policing levels are approx 40 police to a population of under 3000 in Bourke.

Crime Rate

Youth crime rates in Australia were 3.33% (2016). Acknowledging Bourke crime rates are much higher than average, a crime rate of 40% is set initially for this model, but can be varied using the sliders.

Community Program Funding / Resources

Community Program Funding and Resources means money, facilities and people to develop and support the running of programs such as enhancing employability through mentorship and training, recreational sports and clubs, and volunteering opportunities to give back to the community. As engagement levels in the community programs increase, the levels of crime decrease. The slider can be moved to increase or decrease funding levels to view the impact on youth registrations into the community programs.

Observations

Ideally the simulations should show that an increase in police funding reduces crime rates over time, allowing for more youth committing crimes to be convicted and subsequently rehabilitated, therefore decreasing the overall levels of youth at risk.

A portion of those youth still at risk will move to the youth not at risk category through increased funding of safe houses (allowing a space for them to get out of the negative behaviour loop and away), whom them may consider registering into the community engagement programs. An increase in funding in community engagement programs will see more youth become more constructive members of the community, and that may in turn encourage youth at risk to seek out these programs as well by way of social and sub-cultural influences.

Clone of Justice & Community Support Investment and the Impacts on Bourke Youth Population

Hamza Razi

About the Model

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The variables used in the model are:

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

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

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

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

Key Assumptions:

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

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

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

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

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

Young Community Member = 700

Alienated and At Risk Youth = 300

Criminal = 300

Imprisoned = 200

Noteworthy observations:

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

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

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

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

Clone of Bourke Justice Reinvestment - Nicholas Hayward 44553625

Abdul Faheem Mohed

MGMT Assignment 3 Insightmaker

Model Description:

This is a system dynamic model. This model is simulating the problem that is occurring in the town of Bourke NSW. It represents that as there is a lack of activities for the youth to participate in they take part in crime to satisfy their boredom. So, the model demonstrates what happens to the crime rates of the youth when more community investment is put in as well as what happens to crime when police presence is increased in Bourke. This simulation is displayed over 5 years monthly.

Assumptions:

<!- Community investment is distributed equally between all the activities.

2. Community investment affects participation rates and reduces the crime rates.

3. The number of police affects the caught rate of crimes

4. When investment increases crime decreases

5. When police presence increases crime rates decreases but the number of youth caught increases

6. The minimum amount in detention is 3 months so there is a 3-month delay – also detention released occur every 3 months and they are released in batches.

7. The amount being released corresponds to the amount caught

Interesting Results:

Police (5), Community Investment (0) – this is a based result showing crime is high and the caught rate is low with no police presence

Police (30), Community Investment (0) – it shows crime is decreasing and amount caught is increasing as more police are present

Police (45), Community Investment (0.2) – it displays that crime is decreasing and the other activities are becoming more popular and is satisfying the youths boredom as well. Boredom also decreases.

Police (65), Community Investment (0.4) - crime and boredom have reduced dramatically due to an increase in investment. Also, the caught rate is becoming more frequent. Also sporting and tafe activities are becoming more prevalent.

Police (100), Community Investment (0.5) – Max police and community investment, shows crime, boredom and amount caught have diminished. Sport and tafe have increase rapidly.

<!- Variables involved:

<!- Community investment – is an adjusted variable as it displays the increase in investment in the community showing a maximum of 50% and a minimum of 5%. This variable can be adjusted with the community investment slider.

<!- Caught variable – it determines the rate of being caught by dividing the amount of police by 100 to get a percentage. This is fixed, but is adjusted by the police stock. This variable can be adjusted with the police slider.

Educated Rate - is a fixed variable with a if statement saying once crime is lower than 100 people more people are leaving tafe educated.This is to show that the rate changes once crime decreases.

Leaving rate - is a variable that is fixed with a if statement saying once crime reaches less than a 100 it reduces the amount leaving. This is to show that the rate changes once crime decreases.

Stocks:

Tafe - Trade skills, Hospitality, vet, personal training

Sport - AFL, Rugby, Netball, Volleyball, Soccer, Cricket

Boredom - in the community walking around the streets, at home doing nothing and looking for trouble.

Youth - population of youth

Crime - Stealing, breaking and entering, drinking under age, taking illegal substances, assault and destroying property.

Caught - gets caught by police.

Police - on duty to take of the community.

Detention - jail/juvenile detention is the punishment for the crimes.

Va

MGMT 220 Assignment 3 - 44588917

Dylan Latham

Purpose of the model

To show the impact of increasing number of active police and increase development programs in order to lessen crime in the city of Bourke.

Assumptions

3000 residents in Bourke

4.37% of the population is consider to be At Risk

Funding and # of Police units will be consistent in a 12 month period.

STOCKS

AT RISK INDIVIDUALS

Individuals who committed a crime

CRIME

Includes Domestic violence and Petty Crimes.

JAIL

Once an At Risk Individual is convicted of their crime they get sent to this.

COMMUNITY PROGRAM

Where at risk individuals can register and commit to a community program.

NOT AT RISK INDIVIDUALS

Once an at risk individual completes the community Program

VARIABLES

LGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDING

Amount of funding that can be used to increase Police Units, or improve the community Program

POLICE UNITS

Amount of Police that are active in Bourke at a given time

ARRESTS

Arrests rate depends on number of active police units

PROGRAM COMPLETION RATE

Program completion depends on the amount of Funding it gets

SET NUMBERS

Total population of Bourke is 3000 as seen here.

Total Number of At Risk Individuals is collected at a research conducted by BOCSAR.

At risk individuals include crimes such as Domestic Violence, Robbery, Break and enter dwelling, Break and enter non-dwelling

Suggested Settings.

Maxing one slider while the other is at its minimum value, to show which gives a bigger impact

Maxing Both sliders to show how it affects the crime rate.

Both sliders at its minimum value to show how crime rates would react.

44638965 - Marian Joseph Sabana

MJ Sabana

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.

Clone of Brouke Community engagement (Big data) {Anu Priya 11662683}

Gyanendra Lama

Model Explanation:

This system dynamics model visualises the impact on investment into policing and community engagement resources on the crime rates within the youth population of Bourke, NSW.
The model also adds in the variable of funding for safe houses. With a high rate of domestic violence, unfavorable home conditions and other socio-economic factors, many youth roam the streets with no safe place to go, which may lead to negative behaviour patterns.

Assumptions

Youth Population: 700
Total youth population in 2016 for Bourke LGA was 646 (ages 10-29). (Census, 2016) Figures rounded to 700 for purposes of this model simulation.

Constants:
70% registration and engagement rates for Community funded programs
30% attendance rate for Safe Houses
50% crime conviction rate

Variables

Positive and Negative Influences

The model shows a number of key variables that lead youth to become more vunerable to commit a crime (such as alienation, coming from households with domestic violence, boredom and socio-economic disadvantages such as low income), as well as the variables that enhance the youth's likelihood to be a contributing member of the community (developing trusted relationships and connections with others, and having a sense of self worth, purpose and pride in the community). These factors (positive and negative) are aggregated to a single rate of 50% each for the purposes of the simulation, however each individual situation would be unique.

Police Funding / Resources

Police funding and resources means the number of active police officers attending to criminal activities, as well as prevention tactics and education programs to reduce negative behaviour. The slider can be moved to increase or decrease policing levels to view the impact on conviction rates. Current policing levels are approx 40 police to a population of under 3000 in Bourke.

Crime Rate

Youth crime rates in Australia were 3.33% (2016). Acknowledging Bourke crime rates are much higher than average, a crime rate of 40% is set initially for this model, but can be varied using the sliders.

Community Program Funding / Resources

Community Program Funding and Resources means money, facilities and people to develop and support the running of programs such as enhancing employability through mentorship and training, recreational sports and clubs, and volunteering opportunities to give back to the community. As engagement levels in the community programs increase, the levels of crime decrease. The slider can be moved to increase or decrease funding levels to view the impact on youth registrations into the community programs.

Observations

Ideally the simulations should show that an increase in police funding reduces crime rates over time, allowing for more youth committing crimes to be convicted and subsequently rehabilitated, therefore decreasing the overall levels of youth at risk.

A portion of those youth still at risk will move to the youth not at risk category through increased funding of safe houses (allowing a space for them to get out of the negative behaviour loop and away), whom them may consider registering into the community engagement programs. An increase in funding in community engagement programs will see more youth become more constructive members of the community, and that may in turn encourage youth at risk to seek out these programs as well by way of social and sub-cultural influences.

Clone of Justice & Community Support Investment and the Impacts on Bourke Youth Population

Hamza Razi

Crime Models