Add Comment

The region’s urban communities can thrive only if they are safe places to live.  MetroFuture seeks a reduction of crime rates in all municipalities, while calling for the biggest improvements in urban areas where crime rates are now worst.  This can be accomplished through application of innovative youth violence prevention and community policing programs, increased use of crime analysis, and prisoner reentry programs that will help to reduce rates of recidivism.  

Currently, there is considerable regional disparity in crime rates. Violent crime rates in the Inner Core (7.6 per 1,000) are four times as high as violent crime rates in Maturing and Developing Suburbs (1.8 & 2.0 per 1,000, respectively.)  Property crime rates follow a similar pattern.   

While there are many different reasons for higher crime rates in urban communities, youth violence is a particularly troubling and prominent problem.  Recent experience has demonstrated that a multi-pronged approach involving police, community groups, service agencies, and youth can successfully help to prevent youth violence.  Similar collaboration is the cornerstone of community policing, which can demonstrate great success if it has the necessary financial and organizational support.  A more robust information infrastructure for crime data will help police departments to address crime issues proactively and assess their performance.  More public access to crime data, through web-based crime mapping tools, will help to correct misconceptions and foster more effective community-based solutions to crime.  Preventing recidivism is a critical component of crime prevention in urban areas and requires a more systemic and evidence-based approach to offender reentry, including collaboration with non-traditional partners such as community leaders and service providers. 

5)    Support proven youth violence prevention programs
In order to be safe and welcoming places for residents and families, Metro Boston’s urban communities must deal with the problem of youth violence, which disrupts the fabric of urban neighborhoods and contributes to negative perceptions about the safety of urban areas.  Preventing youth violence will help at-risk youth to lead more productive and fulfilling lives and will allow more families to live in urban areas with less fear of random violence.  

The problem of youth violence is large and complex. Youth violence can take many different forms in different places, and youth crime problems often are caused by several underlying factors, involve multiple groups, and occur in many locations. Overcoming this challenge will require concerted partnerships among public safety officials, community-based organizations, schools, the judicial system, and residents.  Best practices for youth violence prevention include five components: social intervention, opportunity provision, suppression, community mobilization, and organizational change.  

Many communities in Metro Boston are implementing these practices through funding from the Charles Shannon Community Safety Initiative Grant program.  The Shannon Grant program was created in 2006 to support regional and multi-disciplinary approaches to combat gang violence.  The program funds coordinated programs for prevention and intervention, including anti-gang task forces, targeted enforcement, focused prosecution efforts, and programs aimed at successful reintegration of released prisoners.  The program also funds local action research partners and a statewide youth violence research center in Northeastern University.  The statewide research center conducts assessment of the program, provides technical assistance to communities, and disseminates youth violence best practices.  This initiative has demonstrated considerable success and should be sustained and expanded to more communities. 

5.a    The Legislature and Governor should fund the Charles Shannon Community Safety Initiative at progressively increasing levels

6)    Increase community policing efforts
Application of community policing strategies can both deter crime and improve relationships and interaction between police and the public.  Community policing employs partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address crime and the underlying causes of crime.  It is also contingent on organizational transformation of police departments to reflect modern management practices, including performance assessment and accountability.  

The state’s Community Policing Grant Program was developed to support these programs, but was reduced considerably due to budget constraints.  This program should be fully funded. 

6.a    The Legislature and Governor should fully fund the Community Policing Grant program

7)    Increase the analytical use of crime statistics
Increased availability and analytical use of detailed crime data is important for two reasons: it can increase the effectiveness of crime prevention efforts; and it can correct misperceptions about the safety of urban neighborhoods.  State of the art crime analysis can help police departments to identify and manage crime problems before they get out of hand.  Access to data can also help community groups to have a better understanding of the crime problems in their neighborhood, so they can be more effective partners with law enforcement.  

Currently, law enforcement agencies across the Commonwealth are required to submit crime data to the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security NIBRIS system.  However, this data is not easily interpreted because of inconsistencies in formatting, reporting, and quality.  Much of this inconsistency arises due to out-of-date software and lack of consistent data entry protocols.  NIBRIS data also lack geospatial information, so they cannot be used for crime mapping analysis that can identify patterns and support strategic distribution of resources.  This lack of mapping capacity is especially problematic for efforts to coordinate enforcement across municipal boundaries.

The state’s Executive Office of Public Safety and Security is in the process of addressing these challenges by implementing a Statewide Information Sharing System database to remedy the problems of previous crime databases.  This “incident tracking warehouse” will support a variety of public safety related activities, including municipal use of a spatial statistics program for the analysis of crime incident locations.   However, the statewide system will only be as good as the data in its warehouse. All municipalities should participate in the program, which may require them to increase their in-house crime reporting capacity, including staff, hardware, software, and protocols.  

Regional collaboration on crime analysis is important because many criminal entities such as gangs operate with little regard to political boundaries.  Collaboration can also increase the resources available to municipalities through shared equipment or staff.  Regional crime mapping centers currently exist in the MAPC region (Boston, Lynn, and Framingham), but their coverage does not currently include every municipality (or even every urban municipality.)  These centers can provide a venue for formal coordination and exchange of data, which currently occurs on an ad hoc basis through personal relationships and incident-specific efforts.  Municipalities, MAPC, the Northeast Region Homeland Security Advisory Council, and state agencies should also evaluate the potential for a truly regional system managed by MAPC, which has extensive GIS, data, and public safety capacity. 

7.a    The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security should complete development and implementation of the Statewide Information Sharing System (SWISS)

7.b    Municipal police departments should participate in the Statewide Incident Sharing System

7.c    Every urban municipality should establish a crime analyst position or collaborate with a regional crime analysis center

7.d    Municipal police departments and regional crime mapping centers should establish websites for public access and mapping of crime data

8)    Expand prisoner re-entry programs to reduce recidivism
Since many crimes are conducted by recidivists, increased attention to re-entry programs is critical to reduction of crime rates regionwide, and especially in urban communities.  A more systemic approach to offender reentry would involve traditional agencies as well as more involved collaboration with non-traditional partners such as community leaders and service providers.  

Almost 20,000 inmates are released every year in Massachusetts, but do not have access to a strong system of supports and preparation for reentry.  More than 50% of released offenders are arrested or re-incarcerated within three years of release.  Reducing recidivism requires a combination of strategies affecting sentencing, prison services and assessment, reentry planning, post-release supervision, and data collection.  

Increased coordination among relevant agencies is also necessary, since different agencies manage arrest, incarceration, release, and support.  These agencies – the Departments of Health and Human Services, Public Safety and Security, Labor and Workforce Development, and the Department of Probation and the Court system – should work together to build implement a more unified system that provides inmates with the support and training they need to become productive members of society.

8.a    The Governor should establish an Offender Transition Task Force to address issues of prisoner reentry into their communities and recidivism