U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice National Institute of Justice R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f March 2001 Issues and Findings Crime Mapping and Analysis Discussed in this Brief: An as- sessment of how community orga- by Community Organizations nizations in Hartford, Connecticut, used the Neighborhood Problem Solving (NPS) system, a computer- in Hartford, Connecticut based mapping and crime analysis technology. The NPS system en- By Thomas Rich abled users to create a variety of maps and other reports depicting Crime mapping has become increasingly community policing field offices. Devel- crime conditions by accessing a popular among law enforcement agencies oped with NIJ funding, the system enables database containing the most re- and has enjoyed high visibility at the Fed- users to create a variety of maps and other cent 2 years of incident-level police information. eral level, in the media, and among the reports depicting crime conditions by us- largest police departments in the Nation, ing a database containing the most recent Key issues: The objective in Hart- most notably those in Chicago and New 2 years of incident-level police informa- ford was to extend basic mapping York City. However, there have been few tion, including citizen-initiated calls for and crime analysis technologies efforts to make crime mapping capabilities service, reported crimes, and arrests. Al- beyond the law enforcement com- available to community residents and or- though some police departments routinely munity by putting them into the ganizations, although a National Institute publish aggregate crime statistics and a hands of neighborhood-based organizations so they could analyze of Justice (NIJ)-funded project in Chicago few publish incident-level crime informa- incident-level data and produce in the late 1980s aimed at introducing tion on the Internet, the objective in Hart- their own maps and reports. The mapping to community groups showed ford was to extend basic mapping and assessment discussed in this Brief that this technology could benefit them.1 crime analysis technologies beyond the was conducted to determine the Access to timely and complete incident- law enforcement community so that extent to which community organi- level crime information—among other neighborhood-based organizations could zations used the system, to under- obstacles—has inhibited the spread of analyze incident-level data. stand how these organizations mapping to communities. used the software, and to assess NIJ sponsored an assessment of Hartford’s the effect of the system on com- To get the community more involved in system by Abt Associates Inc. to deter- munity organization effectiveness, crime prevention, Hartford, a city of mine the extent to which community orga- perceptions of neighborhood 130,000 in central Connecticut, expressed nizations used it, to understand how these safety and quality of life, and an interest in providing community-based organizations used the software, and to as- police-community relations. organizations with a crime mapping and sess the effect of the system on community Key findings: analysis system. This technology—dubbed organization effectiveness, perceptions of the Neighborhood Problem Solving (NPS) neighborhood safety and quality of life, ● Seven of the 14 sites used the NPS system regularly. Two sites system—was developed and implemented and police-community relations. This used the system on several in 1997 and 1998 in 14 locations through- Research in Brief discusses the findings occasions but not on a regular out Hartford, including community organi- of this research. basis. The remaining five sites zation headquarters, public libraries, and either did not use the system at all or used it only once. Support for this research was provided through a transfer of funds to NIJ continued… from the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f Issues and Findings Project origin strategies, and assessing results. City . continued employees were trained in community- In November 1994, Hartford was 1 of 12 oriented government techniques. In addi- ● Factors explaining the variety of cities to receive a Comprehensive Com- tion, CCP began funding the community use patterns include the community munities Program (CCP) grant from the organization United Connecticut Action for organization leader’s degree of U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Neighborhoods in 1997 to provide addi- interest in the system, available Justice Assistance. The Hartford CCP tional training and technical assistance to personnel resources at the site, the sought to shift the focus of city govern- site’s experience with community the committees. ment away from the professional civil ser- organizing and community-based problem solving, and the relevance vice model to a decentralized government Beginning in 1995, the committees were of both the system and the crime that recognizes residents as its “custom- eligible to receive personal computers data to the organization’s primary ers” and attends to problems and solu- equipped with standard business produc- work objectives. tions they identify. In 1988, the police tivity software and a laser printer. Many department had initiated community- committees immediately took advantage ● While all regular-use sites made oriented policing with the formation of the of this offer, although some did not apply extensive use of crime data, some Community Service Officer (CSO) unit. sites placed the highest value on for their computers until 2 or 3 years CSOs focused exclusively on problem arrest data and others closely exam- later. The NPS system was eventually in- ined calls-for-service data. Maps solving within a specific neighborhood. stalled on these computers. The Hartford were the most popular report The department also formed partnerships Police Department and Abt Associates format. with other agencies, including schools, jointly administered the NPS program. youth organizations, and other criminal The police department provided data on ● The majority of frequent NPS us- justice agencies. In 1995 and 1996, calls for service, crimes, and arrests to ers felt they gained a “much better Hartford established a number of CCP- Abt Associates, which formatted the data understanding” of crime conditions supported initiatives and programs that in their neighborhood using the sys- and provided it to the community organi- tem. The majority of frequent users created, in the words of one veteran com- zations. Abt Associates maintained the believed that access to comprehen- munity organizer, “an infrastructure” that NPS system software, while the city of sive crime data did not change the supported the NPS system. According to Hartford maintained the computers. extent to which they felt safe in the this organizer, having this infrastructure Trinity College in Hartford provided the neighborhood. in place was a necessary condition for committees with e-mail and Internet widespread acceptance and use of the accounts beginning in 1996. ● Hartford’s extensive problem- NPS system. solving infrastructure, including neighborhood problem-solving Citizen-based problem-solving committees, System capabilities committees, veteran community one of the most important CCP initiatives, In 1997, representatives of the problem- organizers, and a supportive envi- were formed in each of Hartford’s 17 ronment in the city government and solving committees, Hartford city officials police department, was key to the neighborhoods. In many neighborhoods, involved in the city’s CCP, Abt Associates program’s success. Without this in- these committees consisted of residents al- staff, and representatives from the Hartford frastructure, the system likely would ready active in the existing neighborhood Police Department and other city service have been used by interested par- citizen groups, but the committees were agencies held a series of meetings to deter- ties to examine crime information an entirely new group for some neighbor- mine what information—particularly auto- but not necessarily for effecting hoods. The committees were charged with mated information—would be useful (and neighborhood change. identifying and prioritizing neighborhood could be provided) to the committees to problems and, with the help of city agen- Target audience: City- and county- support their problem-solving activities. level police, planning and administra- cies, implementing solutions to those prob- Ideally, an information system supporting tive officials, neighborhood-based lems. The city retained an independent problem solving—especially one with organizations, and researchers. consultant to conduct problem-solving mapping capabilities—would contain data training for the committees. The training from a variety of sources, including city, focused on recognizing and analyzing State, and Federal agencies; private and problems, developing and implementing nonprofit organizations; and neighborhood- 2 R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f based organizations. Such data would vanced computer-aided dispatch, case for service, crimes, and arrests. No enable maps to show a multidimen- incident reporting, and online arrest names or other personal identifying sional view of crime. For example, one booking systems. The department has information are provided (see “Data layer of a map display could contain a used computerized crime mapping Elements Provided