At the Society for Evidence-Based Policing 2021 Virtual Conference, Thomas Abt explained how violence reduction efforts can be enhanced if the focus is taken off the guns, knives or drugs themselves, and instead placed on the illegal behaviors; that is, gun-carrying, knife-carrying and drug dealing. This can open new avenues for intervention with a focus on the illegal behavior settings.

Crime hot spots are chronic illegal behavior settings. We can diagnose their attractors and generators of illegal behavior with Risk Terrain Modeling (RTM), then aim to change the ways these places influence or enable interactions of people that result in repeated crime outcomes.

But in contrast to Abt's recommendation to focus on people in hot spots, the focus of crime prevention with RTM turns to the places themselves and not directly on people at all.

There’s a synergy of place-based approaches to crime prevention informed by RTM and considerations of criminal behaviors because some settings are likely attracting or promoting these behaviors more than others.

This 'illegal behavior-setting' framework incorporates the role of personal preferences for crime. That is, how individual persons select and use the environments that they occupy and the impact this has on crime outcomes. It views behavioral outcomes as a function of a dynamic interaction among people that occurs at places.

We can analyze why human interactions at particular places result in repeated crime outcomes. We can better understand the situational contexts for crime that routinely occur at high-crime settings.

It's well known that crimes cluster and hot spots form. Hot spots are symptoms of chronically problematic places. Crimes are the outcomes of illegal behaviors. Particular features of the landscape concentrate or interact to create unique behavior settings for crime.

With RTM we can diagnose environmental features that connect with crime and that create vulnerable places or persistent hot spots. Then multiple stakeholders can intervene to address the collective influences of environmental features that attract illegal behaviors as part of an approach to crime prevention.

There’s compelling evidence to focus on certain types of environmental features at chronically crime-prone places. Abt's argument to consider behaviors, makes the emphasis on place even more pertinent.

A prism serves as a good analogy for Data-Informed Community Engagement, or DICE.

The glass prism separates light into its component parts. Through the rainbow that emerges we see the full spectrum of colors and the role that each one of them plays in creating visible light. That is, we can observe visible light, but need a prism to see its component parts.
 
With DICE, we notice an emerging or persistent crime problem, and use risk terrain modeling (RTM) analysis to diagnose its contributing factors. Then we share this information with multiple stakeholders who coordinate their own existing resources to intervene by doing what they do best at the places that need them most.
 
While everyone’s initiatives may appear separate from one another, they combine to produce a deliberate and impactful response to crime problems throughout the city because they’re all acting on the same information to guide their plans and actions. The result is a comprehensive and sustainable crime prevention strategy, with policing just one part of the larger effort.
 
DICE can be a strategy for community policing and spearheaded by a police department. It can also be a city’s violence reduction plan run out of City Hall or by a community partner.
 
In his essay on the Quality Police blog, Joel Caplan discusses DICE in more detail. It introduces you to data analysis with risk terrain modeling and presents case studies that have made RTM actionable by sharing the burden of crime prevention and public safety with multiple local leaders.

Over a short period of time, the COVID-19 outbreak has become a global pandemic spreading over hundreds of countries and territories around the world. In response to this unprecedented crisis, national and regional governments are implementing various strategies that seek to reduce the spread and impact of this virus. The most common measure calls for all citizens to stay at home and limit their interactions with other individuals through a process of social distancing. In an effort to reduce the stigma created by social isolation, the World Health Organization (WHO) clarified the need for physical distancing while allowing people to socialize remotely as opposed to in-person. Other restrictions have included the closing of schools and all non-essential businesses in an effort to reduce the spread of the virus by limiting opportunities for interactions among people at particular places.
 
In some countries, these restrictions are enforced through the use of police or the military (e.g., Spain or Italy), while others have opted for a less aggressive approach that doesn’t require police enforcement (e.g., U.S.A.). These measures have effectively altered the social fabric and routine activities of entire cities and communities around the globe. In a city like New York, the number of daily subway riders has dropped by more than 70% (according to the MTA). In densely populated world capitals where thousands of people used to congregate in any given day, streets are now mostly empty. Only grocery stores and a handful of businesses deemed by local governments to be essential remain open.
 
The current lockdown situation has led to significant changes in the way people interact and connect with their environment. It has also led to an increase in economic uncertainty and large-scale layoffs across varying job sectors. These changes can affect the way crime opportunities are distributed across the urban, suburban and rural landscapes. Suburbanites who once routinely commuted into cities for work, for instance, are now home in the suburbs all day and night. The fundamental question then becomes whether or not a changing environment can have a significant effect on the way crime is distributed.

In the city of Newark, New Jersey, recent crime statistics show that overall crime is down by 25%, with 41% fewer violent crime incidents and a 9% decrease in property crime (according to NPD data). A similar pattern seems to follow in other cities like New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago. However, it is yet unknown whether crime will continue to go down in the next weeks and months. And, most importantly, whether future crimes will emerge at past hotspots or if new ones will emerge.
 
As cities change due to people’s altered routines and customs, one can expect that new crime patterns will emerge at new places. New hotspots will not be in the same areas as past hotspots. The spatio-temporal dynamics of crime are closely intertwined with the built environment where people’s activities take place. As these places change, offenders will likely find new opportunities at non-traditional places for criminal activity. In the coming weeks and months, law enforcement and other local stakeholders will need to be prepared to adapt to the new situational contexts for crime created by the COVID-19 outbreak.
 
The current situation calls for data-informed approaches that can be used to chart these changes and help community groups and public agencies make decisions about how to channel resources to enhance community safety before new crime hotspots emerge or persist. These changes do not have to be noticed by surprise. Implementing better analytics and data are important steps in making emergent problems visible before they’re chronic, especially when they focus on the physical characteristics of incident locations. Being aware of emerging threats and new patterns of behavior is an essential component of public safety and community well-being (e.g., https://newarkcollaborative.org).
 
It is therefore fundamental to expand the analytical capacities of decision-making agencies during these challenging times. Efforts will not only need to be data-informed but also require collaboration and coordination across multiple public and private agencies and nongovernmental organizations (here's a quick guide from Rutgers University). A multi-stakeholder data-informed effort allows for priority resource allocations to the people and places that need them most while quickly adapting to the continuously evolving situational contexts created by the current health crisis. Today, more than ever, data-informed community engagement programs are needed to address this global health crisis at the local level.

The COVID-19 pandemic and response measures, such as school and work closures, has altered the routine activities of many people. It has also created new high demands for retail goods that are sold-out or in short supply at particular types of businesses. This creates new and uncommon interactions among people at places that could result in different opportunities for crime than what cities/towns are used to from past experience. The Modus Operandi and situational contexts of crime are likely to change too as a result.

Some types of crimes are probably more likely to increase, or decrease, compared to others. Whether police calls-for-service and/or crime rates ultimately increase or decrease is still to be systematically studied. Regardless of the frequency of crime incidents, the current pandemic situation is likely to alter the spatial and temporal patterns of crime.

Hotspots of last month, or this time last year, are not likely to be the same as, nor predictive of, current crime locations. Under normal circumstances, hotspot maps can be predictive and actionable for interventions when crimes and their situational contexts remain stable. But, things are different now -- with routine activities, opportunities, situational contexts, and places of crime changing drastically from historical observations and experiences.

Minimizing uncertainty in the face of emerging or persistent crime patterns provides an effective response to these challenges. Diagnosing emerging crime trends, as well as existing persistent hotspots, helps to minimize uncertainty about observed outcomes. For instance, whereas the environmental backcloth for robberies in the recent past might have related to well-known attractors/generators, emerging patterns may differ because they connect to different environmental features that are more relevant to the contemporary situational contexts of crimes (or opportunities for offending).

The Rutgers Center on Public Security (at Rutgers University) has made risk terrain modeling (RTM) easily accessible  through the RTMDx software to conduct analyses that diagnose environmental conditions for crime. This diagnosis produces actionable information to help police and other community stakeholders understand emerging problems and respond in ways that “flatten the curve” of crime trends before they get out of control.

RTMDx is available for free to any public safety agency that wants to use it for actionable intel during these uncommon times. Go to www.rtmdx.gratis for access.

From the book Risk-Based Policing: Evidence-Based Crime Prevention with Big Data and Spatial Analytics (2018 University of California Press)

Risk Terrain Modeling (RTM) analyzes illicit drug trafficking, sales and use. RTM diagnoses seller and buyer preferences for drug markets and forecasts alternative spots or emerging settings for displacement or expansion of this behavior.

RTM has been used in the United States to profile how the physical landscape affects drug dealing (of many kinds of drugs). Open-air dealing, in particular, is a complex endeavor between buyers and sellers who are frequently strangers or only loosely acquainted. Yet they must find a way to balance a competing set of demands: access and security. In the Chicago study, drug dealers and buyers took advantage of several features of the environment to establish ideal opportunities this transaction. Different types of drugs had different ideal settings, or markets, based on specific environmental qualities. These findings inform place-based policies and intervention strategies (including policing) aimed at disrupting drug markets.

RTM has also been used to analyze and intervene at drug use locations, to forecast overdose 'hot spots', and to preemptively deploy resources to these places that are in the greatest need of intervention. Some public health oriented interventions have been to strategically deploy Narcan to city officials or business owners working in certain areas -- to enable overdose treatments quickly, and save lives; to place more sharps containers in public spaces -- to minimize littering of used syringes and accidental exposures to residents, visitors and public employees; to locate 9-1-1 call boxes (e.g., emergency cell phones) -- to enable reporting of overdoses or other emergencies; and to optimize advertising and recruitment campaigns for drug treatment and supportive services.

Students at the University of Pennsylvania produced a spatial risk model of opioid overdose events for the City of Providence, Rhode Island by examining overdose locations in relation to environmental risk factors, community protective resources, and neighborhood characteristics to offer an assessment of areas in the city where local stakeholders can strategically allocate resources to achieve the greatest impact. The Providence Safe Stations program or the Providence Healthy Communities Office can use forecasted high-risk places for overdose as a site suitability analysis or to improve outreach and communication efforts.

​In Bogota, policies and hotspot policing practices intended to suppress illicit drug markets have resulted in sale locations becoming more dispersed. This has made monitoring and intervention even more difficult for local authorities. But new efforts at monitoring the markets of three illicit substances (cocaine, marijuana and basuco) provides valuable insights for disrupting emerging trends. Escudero and Ramírez found *drug prices* to be closely tied to certain environmental variables. And, because drug dealers seek strategic locations and conditions were profit margins are maximized, the risk terrains depicting these places serve as excellent place-based forecasts. RTM also offers actionable intel for effectively disrupting the situational contexts of these settings. 

The Ideas for Peace Foundation used RTM to study microtrafficking of drugs in 5 Colombian cities (PDF reports from the Colombian Ministry of Justice): Bogota, Pasto, Medellin, Cali and Barranquilla

Environmental features can influence drug sales and use behaviors, and aggravate risks of chronic drug markets at particular places. RTM can help to diagnose these environmental vulnerabilities and identify places that are most in need of resources and risk reduction strategies.

Crime reductions are important to police agencies and the communities they serve for many reasons. One reason is that less crime saves money.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) estimated that preventing just 6 violent crimes could save local criminal justice systems $100,000 and free up more than 9 hours of a police officer's patrol time. Recent surveys show that 2/3 of gunshot victims are uninsured, yet the average nationwide cost of treating gunshot wounds in hospital is $21,000 per person. Just 10 fewer shootings could result in over $200,000 worth of hospital cost savings, and, of course, 10 lives possibly saved.

Risk Terrain Modeling (RTM) is crime analysis that helps answer where and why crime happens. It finds important spatial patterns in your data and then it uses this diagnosis to make accurate and actionable predictions. Policing with RTM makes every dollar spent on public safety more effective. It's smart policing.

​RTM is one reason given for Atlantic City's crime drop last year. The Atlantic City Police Department (ACPD) fully implemented risk-based policing with RTM in 2017, and they succeeded in achieving month-to-month crime reductions and higher case clearance rates, all while improving community relations. They were credited with a 36% reduction in violent crimes by the end of the year. This represents a potential cost savings to the local criminal justice system of over $1.6 million. 

Hazardous road conditions, dangerous intersections, intoxication, fatigue or distracted driving are commonly linked to motor vehicle crashes. Geo-spatial factors can also influence driver behaviors and, therefore, increase the risks of crashes along certain sections of roadways, particularly where these factors co-locate.

For example, a risk narrative might be: drivers are anxious or in a rush to arrive at the stores to get their coffee, and then leave coffee shops or cafés or convenience stores while simultaneously pouring creamers, adding sugars, or reapplying the lids one-handed; drivers may exit bank drive-thrus while counting money or putting cash in wallets or purses; or drivers may pick at the french fries, open dipping sauces, or attempt to eat full meals upon exiting fast food takeout restaurants.

These and other environmental features can influence driver behaviors and aggravate roadway risks at places nearby where they interact. Risk Terrain Modeling can help to diagnose these environmental hazards and identify roadways that are most vulnerable. Then use professional judgement, expertise, and evidence-based practices to solve these problems through risk reduction strategies.

This 2018 research study showed that RTM can also fit within a DDACTS framework to provide law enforcement with guidance for identifying places where vehicle crashes are likely to occur in the future. RTM's focus on where and why provides insights for multi-stakeholder partnerships capable of preventing traffic crashes and related injuries.