Implementing a Burglary Prevention Program with Evidence-Based Tracking: a Case Study

Abstract

How was a system of tracking and feedback implemented to achieve a high percentage of treatment delivered as intended to residences targeted for super cocooning, and how successful was the tracking in ensuring implementation of the cocooning program? The case study of implementing a tracking system for notifying neighbours of burglary victims is based on intensive tracking of all 43 burglaries in a 2-month summer period in one small area of Greater Manchester. The system of tracking featured a written paper and pencil report on each residence visited, with entries audited against GPS records of where each reporting officer was located at the times and places listed in the written report. Body-worn video records were used to triangulate the written and GPS records. The policy tracked was the goal of face-to-face contact with residents of four houses on either side of each burgled residence, plus the initially burgled home, or nine visits per burglary. Of the potential 387 homes to visit after each burglary, only 266 occupied dwellings were identified, of which 230 (93%) were visited by Police Community Service Officers (PCSOs) assigned, 141 of them within 2 days after the initial burglary (61%). These visits and second visits resulted in 154 face-to-face discussions warning occupants about an elevated risk of burglary (58%). No contact or leaflet at all was delivered to 12.5% of all potential properties. The case study showed that the tracking and feedback was instrumental in delivering these outputs. The time and effort needed for supervisors to track the delivery of an evidence-based, tested crime prevention programme does not exceed supervisory time available, making tracking systems of this kind a feasible element of police business as usual.