NCJ Number
118269
Date Published
1988
Length
15 pages
Annotation
Results of efforts to establish and operate community crime prevention programs suggest that policymakers and administrators who are considering planning such programs should carefully assess the crime-related problems that need addressing, determine the levels of crime prevention they will try to achieve, and make a realistic assessment of the chance of assembling the volunteers and other resources needed.
Abstract
Community crime prevention programs have a logical appeal, but evaluation studies have not found strong evidence that these efforts achieve their intended goals. In fact, some studies suggest that these programs have increased the fear of crime. However, it is not clear whether the lack of success stems from flaws in the underlying theory or from the lack of proper implementation. Program planners must recognize the level of prevention to be achieved: primary, secondary, or tertiary. Efforts to involve citizens in primary prevention should recognize that few citizens are likely to take part. A shared understanding of the underlying causes of crime and a strong leader are both crucial to the success of primary prevention efforts. In contrast, participation in some secondary crime prevention measures also arises from public-minded motives, while other measures are privately motivated. Thus, the need to build a consensus of values is less critical for secondary crime prevention efforts. Furthermore, tertiary crime prevention involves mostly private motives and are reactive in nature. The majority of tertiary prevention efforts seem to offer material incentives. Planners should keep these distinctions in mind as they develop programs. Recommendations for further research and 24 references.