National Process Evaluation of Operation Weed and Seed, Research in Brief

• NCJ Number: 161624
• Author(s): J A Roehl; R Huitt; M A Wycoff; A Pate; D Rebovich; K Coyle
• Date Published: October 1996
• Length: 15 pages
• Publication Series: NIJ Research in Brief
• Grant Number(s): 92-DD-CX-K044
• Agencies: NIJ
• Publication Type: Program Description (Demonstrative)

Annotation

A national process evaluation was initiated to gather information on Operation Weed and Seed program implementation and activities in 19 high-crime neighborhoods through the end of 1993.

Abstract

Approximately $1.1 million was provided to each of the 19 sites selected for the 18-month demonstration period. Working from a blueprint provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, each city customized a program to meet the needs of targeted communities. Weeding generally involved law enforcement and prosecution efforts against criminals, while seeding entailed crime prevention and neighborhood revitalization programs. Grant funds were used more often to support weeding efforts and community policing than seeding programs. The weeding emphasis at most sites was on drug-related, gun-related, and violent crimes. Most cities targeted street-level drug dealing, but a few directed resources toward curbing drug trafficking and high-level operators. People who ordinarily did not consult with each other, such as prosecutors, area residents, police officers, and social service personnel, were able to coordinate their efforts, share resources, and solve problems. Interagency cooperation was reported to be stronger among law enforcement agencies than among prosecution offices at most sites. The most common seeding programs involved primary prevention for children and intervention strategies for older youth. Safe Havens, multiservice centers offering a variety of youth and adult services, were established at each site and were integral parts of seeding. Background information on the Weed and Seed initiative and on law enforcement tactics is provided, and implications of the evaluation findings for future Weed and Seed programs are discussed. 9 notes and 5 exhibits