POP Center Responses Using Civil Actions Against Property Appendix A

Appendix A: An Expanded Script Approach for Use with Civil Remedies

Understanding step by step how particular crimes are committed will assist you in identifying situational crime prevention (SCP) measures that can be implemented to block each step of the crime or make it more difficult for an offender to complete it.83 This crime-script approach can be laid out in a diagram or table (see Tables A1 and A2), with columns setting out the general stages of the crime (column 1), the linked offender actions (column 2), and responses (column 3), which are usually SCP measures.† The other columns set out can be used for detailed planning of a prevention initiative.

To use this table (or construct one of your own to aid in planning your problem responses), first look at the stages of the crime (the “script action” column). Do not focus only on the stage in which the crime is actually done (the “doing” stage) since you may be able to interrupt it at an earlier stage and limit the harm done. Once you have focused on a particular stage or script action, then you can look at what you might be able to do to prevent this action from occurring. To do this, look across that row and note the types of controls you might use to change an offender’s actions. Note that you will be considering who could carry out these controls, and how they might operate in practice. Keep in mind that this is a tool for your use; you are not required to fill in every box or consider every possibility, but the more information you have, the more comprehensive and effective your responses will be.

This approach is very flexible and permits the number of factors that can be linked to an SCP response measure to be expanded, which is particularly useful for helping you visualize the role of a civil remedy in the crime-prevention process. For example, the type of intervener (usually a multi-agency partnership), the focus of the SCP control (usually the place for these remedies), the medium of control or third party (usually the “controller” of the place or “place manager,” using routine activity theory concepts84), the type of inducement (a civil remedy, criminal penalty, or a non-coercive incentive), and other dimensions of the measures (such as the mechanism by which the SCP works) can be included in the expanded table (see Tables A1 and A2).85

† A blank table appears in Appendix B as Table B1.

This type of expanded crime script may be particularly good for you to use when: (a) one single technique is unlikely to be able to block the crime in the setting where the prevention initiative is needed, (b) more than one person controls a setting, or (c) more than one agency will be called on to enforce the remedy to help stop the crime. The scripts described here—drug crimes in housing, and alcohol-related disorder or violence around bars and pubs†—are general crime scripts for crimes that are frequently the focus of property-related civil remedies. Note that the particular type of civil remedy that can be used appears in the “Situational Controls” column. In the example of a drug crime sale in public housing (Table A1), the civil remedies that could be used include tenancy agreements that could result in eviction and nuisance abatement actions. In the example of alcohol-related disorder in an entertainment district (Table A2), civil remedies related to zoning and licensing requirements are illustrated.

† See Appendixes C and D for more examples of the use of place-based civil remedies for these two types of crime- and place-specific problems.

Table A1. Expanded Crime Script: Hypothetical Anti-Drug Campaign in Public Housing (See Appendix C) 

Table A2. Expanded Crime Script: Hypothetical Alcohol-Related Disorder Campaign in an
Entertainment District (See Appendix D)

This type of expanded script is probably most important to use for planning, where gaining a consistent, shared perspective on how the pieces fit together is crucial for the project, but it can also be used during the implementation period, and for the evaluation. Here is a checklist that can be used with the blank table (Table B2). Table B1 may be useful as well in helping you determine how each remedy will work.

Planning process (part of the “Analysis” phase of the SARA model):

• Locate places that your previous scanning has identified as important, such as those that have repeated crimes occurring there.
• Begin developing a working script for each type of crime at each of these locations. Develop more than one script for a broad crime category if these crimes involve different stages or elements.
• Elaborate the crime scripts as you get more information.
• Don’t forget to talk to local residents and other community stakeholders, as they are your eyes on the street.
• Be situation specific.
• Find a targeted location that is subject to close government regulation—e.g., public housing or licensed premises selling alcohol—or one that is in such disrepair that it poses a public nuisance (e.g., a public safety hazard). Civil remedies are most likely to apply to these types of places.
• Seek contacts in potential partner agencies (e.g., housing departments, state liquor licensing bureaus) and community groups (with a stake in solving the problem) to add to the planning process.
• Identify responses likely to be effective in stopping each stage of the crime or disorder problem.
• Determine which of these is likely to be essential to stopping the crime and make sure these are included in the planned initiative.
• Among the other responses, look for those that involve fewer resources, are less expensive to use, and are easier to implement, but only choose these if they appear likely to work. Beware of false economies that may cost little but waste time, energy, and those resources that are used.
• Keep in mind that you will need to identify a control site for use in a later evaluation.
• Identify and measure any crime displacement or diffusion of crime control benefits.

Implementation process (part of the “Response” phase of the SARA model):

• Target each response at the actor who can control or change the situation.
• Identify the agency(ies)—and who in the agency—that is (are) enforcing these controls through the possibility of civil legal action.
• Make sure the agency(ies) has (have) the requisite expertise and capacity to provide legal notice of the potential use of the civil remedy, as well as to enforce it (if needed).
• Publicize any successes.†
• Talk to community members and line officers.
• Check that each response is being addressed as planned. If it is not, identify what appears to be impeding the process.
• Modify the response or add more resources, as needed.

Evaluation process (“Assessment” phase of SARA model):

• Look at calls for service and arrests, talk to local residents and business owners, measure relevant visible signs of disorder or crime occurrences.
• Identify which parts of the crime or disorder problem were inhibited and which were not.
• Determine whether crime (or disorder) fell in the targeted location(s) and in the control site(s).
• Tally the overall costs of the project, as well as the benefits.
• Evaluate whether there was any crime displacement and, if you found any, how extensive it was.‡
• Make sure that you document any crime control benefits that diffused to other locations or to non-targeted crime problems.

† See Response Guide No. 5, Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns.

‡ See Problem-Solving Tool Guide No. 10, Analyzing Crime Displacement and Diffusion.

As noted above, it is clear from looking at an expanded crime script that achieving a successful outcome may lead to the use of several different types of measures in addition to property-focused civil remedies. The exact combination of measures will differ from place to place, based on the needs and resources available. This “package of measures” approach, however, usually presents problems for measuring the success of particular aspects of the problem-solving initiative (the evaluation process or “Assessment” phase of SARA model). It is difficult to disentangle the effects of changes that were put into effect at roughly the same time. This may help explain why relatively few rigorous evaluations have been carried out on the use of civil remedies in crime prevention.86 If the initiatives are introduced in phases, however, it may be possible to determine whether the initial measure used was sufficient by itself to reduce the crime and disorder in an area or at a venue.