Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to describe a case study of a pilot program in which a collaborative problem-solving approach was implemented at hot spots of juvenile and youth crime in downtown Seattle, Washington.
Design/methodology/approach
Two matched pairs of youth crime hot spots were allocated at random to treatment (“non-enforcement problem-solving”) or comparison (“policing-as-usual”) conditions within matched pairs. In the treatment condition, police collaborated with community and local government partners to develop problem-solving strategies that deemphasized arrests and other traditional law enforcement approaches. Impacts on crime incidents, calls for service, and police activity were assessed using difference-in-differences Poisson regression with robust standard errors.
Findings
No significant impact on crime or calls for service was observed at one site, where several problem-solving approaches were successfully implemented. However, crime and calls for service were significantly lower at the other site, where some enforcement activity took place but non-enforcement problem-solving was limited.
Research limitations/implications
The authors find mixed support for non-enforcement problem-solving at hot spots. The enforcement may be necessary for stabilization, and must be balanced with the risks of justice system involvement for youth. Political support at the city level is necessary for collaboration. Limitations include the small number of sites in this pilot study and key differences between treatment and comparison locations.
Originality/value
This study is one of the first to assess the impact of primarily non-enforcement problem-solving specifically at youth crime hot spots.
Computer-Based Assessment of Chinese Students’ Component Skills of Problem Solving: A Pilot Study
