Police Crackdowns

The results of the study data found that the strategy of hot spot identification and targeting caused a lasting reduction of crime and disorder behaviors within the target areas. Vehicle patrols within the target areas were found to cause a residual deterrent effect but research data showed that the duration at which officers need to stay within the hot spot area in order to have a greater residual effect is approximately 10 minutes. Further, the optimal time frame for officers to stay within the target area is 10 to 14 minutes. Continued officer presence within the hot spot area after 14 minutes has a diminished effect (Koper, 1995). In addition, the strategy of intensified patrols was found to reduce total police calls for service within

the hot spot areas by between 6 to 13% (Taylor, Koper, & Woods, 2010).
Spatial-temporal targeting. As hotspot policing becomes more popular among law enforcement agencies and as technology improves, a new technique called spatial hotspot identification has emerged as a helpful tool in hotspot identification. Simply put, spatial targeting is the location of hotspots by overlaying crime data with crime mapping software that utilizes geographic information systems (GIS) to break the area into small grids. The software highlights high crime areas and provides for visualization by showing high crime areas on a color heat density map (Ratcliffe, 2004).
To compliment the more common spatial targeting is the technique of temporal hotspot identification. In the same way that spatial targeting breaks crime down into small pieces of location data, temporal targeting breaks crime down into time segments in an effort to identify when crime is most likely taking place. If the exact times of criminal activity are unknown, special law enforcement software programs create a probability matrix to calculate the most likely occurrence timeframes (Ratcliffe, 2004).
The Hotspot Matrix. Time and location patterns used in combination with each other can help law enforcement agencies develop a response to identified crime patterns. Spatial events can be broken down into three pattern types:
Dispersed. A dispersed pattern is an identified hotspot where similar crimes take place within a region but where crime is not clustered together within the region.
Clustered. A clustered pattern is an identified hotspot where similar crimes take place in close proximity to one another in the same general area within a region.
Hotpoint. A hotpoint pattern is an identified single hotspot location where similar crimes are taking place (Ratcliffe, 2004).
Like spatial patterns, temporal patterns are also broken down into three types:
Diffused. A diffused pattern is one where the crime identified in the hotspot pattern could take place at any time during the twenty-four hour period.
Focused. A focused pattern is one where the crime identified in the hotspot pattern could happen throughout the day but there are identifiable times when it is more likely to take place than others.
Acute. An acute pattern is one where the crime identified in the hotspot pattern takes place within a small amount of time during the twenty-four hour period (Ratcliffe, 2004).
Using several combinations of the six patterns outlined above, the hotspot matrix provides police leadership with a game plan of strategies to combat identified crime patterns. As an example, a pattern of crime spread out in a substantial geographical area (dispersed) which can occur at all hours of the day and night (diffused) might elicit a response that includes high visibility patrols targeting the specific hotspot area and a public education program designed to warn of the crime pattern. Another example might include a specific location (hotpoint) such as a store that is seeing a specific type of crime taking place during a small timeframe each day (acute). Strategies to combat this might include surveillance units and unmarked police units. (Ratcliffe, 2004)
Spatial-temporal identification and strategy implementation can be a major advantage to police departments. The application of agency resources to combat crime problems come at a cost. This strategy helps to make agencies efficient and effective. There is little advantage to having shift officers conduct directed patrols at targeted hotspots at night while on overtime if time analysis indicated that the crimes are taking place during daylight hours. For agencies impacted by tight budgets or manpower shortages, patrol strategies based on spatial-temporal analysis and resource deployment is a good option (Ratcliffe, 2004).
Police crackdowns.

Another police strategy similar in nature to that of hotspot policing is the police crackdown. Police crackdowns are “sudden increases in officer presence, sanctions, and threats of apprehension either for specific offenses or for all offenses in specific places” (Sherman, 1990, p. 1). Police crackdowns became popular in the 1980’s and have been used to combat crimes such as impaired driving, domestic battery, drug sales, prostitution, traffic offenses and various other criminal activity (Sherman, 1990).

Crackdowns typically have three elements: presence, sanctions, and media threats. Presence is the increase of police personnel in either places or situations where crime is taking place. A sanction is any type of imposition placed upon an offender by law enforcement. This could include traffic stops, arrests, DUI checkpoints, or other actions taken against violators. The final element is a media threat. Media threats are public announcements by law enforcement that describe increases in police activity that is or is about to take place (Sherman,

1990).
Sherman examined eighteen case studies on crackdowns in an effort to determine the effect that these police actions had on future criminal activity. Most long duration crackdowns resulted in crime deterrence in the short term but the effects dissolved after a brief period. In some cases, the deterrence factor began to dissolve despite sustained or increasing dosages of police presence. In five of the eighteen studies, crime deterrence continued for a significant period after the crackdown had ended (Sherman, 1990).
In another study on crackdowns, the Kansas City Police Department conducted a research trial on the effects of crackdowns on crack houses.

The study took place between 1991 and 1992. The research found similar results to Sherman’s review discussed above. The Kansas City study found that an initial modest deterrence in both calls for service and crime reports was observed in the surrounding area but that decay quickly followed. While the police raids on the crack houses showed a response by police to the problem, the high cost of these types of actions question the response given the lack of sustained benefit (Sherman & Rogan, 1995).

Sherman’s review of the crackdown case studies showed mixed results on the duration of residual benefits of crackdowns. While most showed an initial deterrent effect, some showed a quick decay of benefits while others showed a longer duration of deterrence. Based on these results, an effective strategy for crackdown operations may be to use crackdowns for limited durations but move the target locations frequently (Sherman,

1990).
Data driven approaches to crime and traffic safety (DDACTS). A modified hotspot strategy that has seen success in recent years is Data Driven Approaches to Crime and Traffic Safety or DDACTS. The strategy is designed to reduce crime, traffic crashes, traffic violations, and social harm simultaneously by conducting traffic enforcement within targeted hotspot areas (McClure, Levy, La Vigne, & Hayeslip, 2013). At a time when agencies are facing challenges with increasing demands for police services and budget battles, DDACTS provides a strategy that moves agencies from deployment decisions based on where officers can write the most tickets to where they can be the most effective at reducing crime and traffic crashes (Kuo, Lord, & Walden, 2013).
DDACTS utilizes seven key operational principles: 1) Agencies seek out partnerships with other criminal justice organizations and community organizations for the purpose of identifying new problems and to help in promoting and gaining acceptance in the community for the DDACTS enforcement strategy. 2) Agencies utilize all available data sources to obtain the necessary information to successfully identify crime and traffic problems. 3) Agencies analyze the collected data for the purpose of identifying crime and traffic problems. Geographic location information as well as other factors such as temporal information is used to identify key overlapping hotspots where both crime problems and traffic problems exist. 4) Using a combination of high visibility patrolling, traffic enforcement, and directed patrols, patrol unit officers as well as traffic resources are deployed to targeted areas. 5) A strategy of regular and ongoing communications with residents, business owners, and other community partners is conducted to report the outcomes of the strategy efforts. 6) Agencies engaged in DDACTS regularly monitor, evaluate, and make necessary adjustments to the ongoing strategy in order to meet the objectives of the program. 7) Agencies document the outcomes of the deployment strategy (McClure et al, 2013).
DDACTS was formally launched in 2008 from a partnership formed between the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (Burch, 2009). A review of six agencies utilizing the strategy showed positive results in all six locations. Results included reductions in both traffic related incidents as well as crime. In Baltimore, Maryland, burglaries were reduced by 16.6%, robberies by 33.5%, and vehicle thefts by 40.9%, during DDACTS operations. Nashville, Tennessee reported a 13.9% reduction in UCR Part One reported crimes along with a 72.3% increase in DUI arrests during the same period. Injuries from motor vehicle crashes were reduced by nearly 31% with a fatal crash reduction of 15.6% (Kuo, Lord, & Walden, 2013).