| Confidential Research for the Riots Communities and Victims Panel Perceptions survey of residents...

| Confidential

Research for the Riots Communities and Victims PanelPerceptions survey of residents living in riot and non-riot areas

02/03/12

Aims and approach

The overall aim of the research is to build on findings from the Panels interim report and specifically address the following key aims;

• The usual suspects: How to help reduce re-offending for the good of the community and individuals.

• Hopes and dreams: How to tackle youth employment and a real and perceived lack of opportunity by young people.

• Building personal resilience: How to support young people to be responsible, ambitious, determined and conscientious.

• Children and parents: How to support parents to provide the best chances for their children.

• Riots and the brands: How brands can use their influence for the good of the community.

• The police are the public and the public are the police: How to improve perceptions of and relationships between communities and the police.

Methodology

In order to meet these aims, a mixed-methodology approach was adopted to the project;

STRAND ONE – literature review

STRAND TWO – interviews with offenders in riot and non-riot areas

STRAND THREE – engaging communities in riot and non-riot areas

Research was carried out in February 2012, and the exact approach and aims for each strand are discussed in further detail at the beginning of the relevant three sections of the research findings outlined within this report.

| Confidential

Strand 1 – Literature review02/03/2012

Key aim and approach

The key overarching aim for this strand of the research was to;

Explore what evidence exists on the cost-effectiveness of;

o youth justice programmes;

o family interventions; and

o preventative measures in dealing with young offenders and those at risk of crime and ASB

Full details of the approach taken to the review can be found in the stand-alone summary of this Strand of the research

Key factors associated with anti- social behaviour and offending

Effective Ways of Addressing the Risk Factors

Interventions need to take a multi-agency approach in order to address the multiple needs

many young people at risk of offending have. The following have been identified as key aspects of effective programmes:

Early interventions

School focussed

Targeted to need/multi-modal

Family intervention/ parenting programme

Diversionary/provision of positive activities

Community programmes

Positive consistent role model

What works?

Early interventions are effective at diverting young people from offending behaviour by diverting them away from criminal pathways at an early age. Interventions must be holistically targeted to the needs of the family or young people they are designed to help. Consideration must be given to the range of factors associated with offending behaviour, including acknowledgment of environmental issues. The role of schools to engage and deliver programmes to young people at risk of crime have proved successful nationally and internationally, whilst linking with other service providers to ensure wider needs are addressed.The provision of diversionary activities have proved successful in limiting opportunities for criminality amongst young people. The significance of a positive role model in the lives of young people – targeted interventions delivered by a designated key worker were more effective in reducing offending than instances where multiple workers were involved.Locally based programmes based and delivered at neighbourhood level can greatly assist engagement by families and young people.Due to the complexity of risk factors evident in the lives of young offenders requires a co-ordinated multi-agency response.

Examples of cost- effectiveness of Programmes

Interventions cannot be compared on a like for like basis. Programmes aimed at high risk offenders or those who have already offended are often more complex and therefore expensive than those which are aimed at low risk offenders, this will be reflected in the cost savings.

The Family Pathfinder programme which is delivered by Local Authorities and provides intensive support for families with multiple needs. Results showed significant improvements in outcomes for 46% of families supported. Findings also reported a return of £1.90 for every £1 invested [SCJ, 2010]..

The Learning Challenge works in secondary schools in the North East, providing group therapy sessions to tackle behavioural issues. Evidence shows a clear improvement in attendance for one third of pupils. It is calculated that for every £1 spent by the charity they produce £11.60 in savings. An aggregate saving of £2.7bn would be made if all preventable persistent truancy was tackled which is the equivalent of £250m per annum.

International examples of cost- effectiveness programmes

•Family Functional Therapy (FFT) is a family focussed intervention aimed at improving behaviour by helping family members understand how their behaviour affects others. FFT helps children and their families reduce aggressive interactions and instead promotes supportive interaction in the family. FFT was found to significantly reduce recidivism. Young offenders who had been sentenced by a court to probation were randomly assigned to the FFT programme or control, where the control group received standard probation consisting of weekly checks, education and guidance. (Sexton and Alexander, 2003) In a cost benefit analysis of the program based on earlier evaluations, it was estimated to save $7.69 for every $1 invested (Aos et al., 2004).

•Life Skills Training was delivered in schools in the US, consisting of largely disadvantaged young people. The programme involved teaching pupils, who were aged 11-12 and largely disadvantaged, a variety of cognitive-behavioural skills for problem-solving and decision-making. There were reported significant reductions in verbal and physical aggression and fighting, and delinquent behaviour 3 months after the intervention in experimental compared with control schools. The programme was also found to be highly cost effective, with estimated savings of $25.61 for every $1 dollar of investment (Aos et al., 2004).

| Confidential

Strand 2 – Views of offenders02/03/2012

Aims and approach

This strand of the research sought to engage offenders on their experiences of offending, and engagement with services to support and engage them.

Interviews with young offenders aged 11-17 had three core aims;

• what are the common themes and areas of divergence in offenders’ developmental pathways

• what are their experiences with agencies in the early stages of their criminal development up to the age of 18

=> Does this vary, and if so how across different types of area?

• what is the interaction between risk and protective factors identified as being influential to the young person’s pathway into and out of criminal behaviour

Interviews with adult offenders aged 18-24 focussed on the following core aims;• the drivers of offending behaviours (risk factors)

• the conditions that encourage more positive behaviours or paths away from criminal behaviour (protective factors);

• experiences of youth and adult services, including in the early stages of criminal behaviour; and

• experiences of the transition from youth services (up to age 17) to adult services (from 18 to 24);

• how youth and adult services can be adjusted to better meet youth/adult offenders’ needs.

Numbers of young people engaging with the research

In total – 25 offenders took part in one-to-one in-depth interviews that lasted around approximately 30-45 minutes in length. Response across each of the six study areas is outlined below;

Area Young Offenders aged 11-17

Adult Offenders aged 18-24

Total numbers interviewed

Rioter Area 4 1 5

Non-Rioter Area 3 3 6

Rioter Area 2 2 4

Non-Rioter Area 1 0 1

Rioter Area 4 1 5

Rioter Area 2 2 4

Totals 16 9 25

Views and experiences of offendersDevelopmental pathways – inter-relationship between risk factors

There are clear overlaps between the range of risk factors that led to the offending behaviour

of the young people and adults we spoke with.

Views and experiences of offendersDevelopmental pathways – key themesCommon factors cited by both adult and young offenders on why they got involved in crime;• Family problems – parental breakup, absent fathers, abuse

• Neighbourhood – clear distinction between the effects of living in a good and a bad area – moving into a certain areas was seen by many as catalyst to the start of their bad behaviour

• Accommodation issues – dislike of housing prompt more time spent out of home, often on the streets hanging around with mates, coupled with lack of things to do = offending

“maybe if I had a Dad around who would show me values of life….cause I didn’t have any ambitions [would have

stopped offending]”Rioter Area, adult ex-offender

“ I was fine until I moved into a new area. Then I moved in suddenly got in with the wrong people and I was drinking a

lot and kicking off at my Mum because I was drunk. That was the first time I got arrested.”Non-Rioter Area, young person

Views and experiences of offendersDevelopmental pathways – key themes

• Friendship groups – starting to hang out with the ‘wrong’ crowd. Feeling of belonging to a group of friends, with ‘older’ groups seen to exploit the younger groups. Providing a sense of attachment and support not evident at home

• Lack of purposeful activities – nothing good to do that doesn’t cost money

• Substance misuse – experimenting with drugs with friends

“I first took heroin when I was 12….also took pills for the first time when I was 12…I got into it by knocking around

with older people…when I was 11”Non-Rioter Area, adult ex-offender

“ You’ll just look at any mischief to stop getting bored”

Rioter Area, Young Person

Views and experiences of offendersDevelopmental pathways – key themes

• Truancy and/or exclusion from school – a result of bad behaviour and disengagement in school. Problems at school were often associated with problems occurring at home – coincided also with them hanging out with the ‘wrong’ people.

• Anger management issues – often resulting from family issues and dynamics

“I was getting more aggressive, short fused, I was getting violent”

Non-Rioter Area, young person

“ Used to go to gym after school to deal with anger, stopped me punching walls or flying off the handle”

Rioter Area, young person

Views and experiences of offendersInvolvement and views of riots

• People wanting “stuff” and money

• Young people being bored • Out of dislike for the police - gaining control over the police, getting

revenge• Taking advantage of the situation in areas outside London – for

example, when it was shown the police were not controlling it in London

“come on, we’ve got nothing else to do…lets go and nick some trainers”

Rioter Area, paired young people depth

“I was money motivated… when I wanted my bike; a moped – I started stealing phones so I could pay for one”

Rioter Area, adult offender

Views and experiences of offendersExperiences of agencies – early contact with services

Young people and adult offenders spoke of experience with the police through family problems early in life (rarely positive, especially if criminality in the family) and when they started hanging out with the friends/gangs in larger groups, whether they were causing ASB and/or offending (or not).

They also usually had some contact with social services, because they grew up in a family deemed at risk or due to a child running away. This contact was not well

regarded by most young people and offenders.

“I hardly saw [the woman from social services], you would have thought I would see her more [preventative

services] but I only saw her 4 times”

Non-Rioter Area ,young person

Views and experiences of offendersExperiences of agencies - School

• There were mixed views on help received at schools. There were some good examples of 1 to 1 mentoring provision, anger management or learning support being given and it having a positive effect.

• However, for others, despite the fact they were positive about the support, they felt it was not enough. They needed one to one support out of school so it was also there in the holidays and at the weekend.

“me behaviour did not change much because of it… I could have had some more help out of school…it was the

problems outside school that was causing the problems…things kicked off in the holidays”

Non-Rioter Area ,young person

“I’ve got a mentor with me now...if I get angry in class I can go to her and just calm down. I’ve got somewhere to go if I’m angry and I don’t have to stay in class and get angrier”


Views and experiences of offendersExperiences of agencies – CJ contact

Most young people and adults reported having contact with YOTs and Probation services, although experiences of both were mixed.

Where young people (and adult offenders) were most positive about this contact was where it was on a one to one basis. It was also where they had built a good relationship, they had been provided access to other services and the contact did not feel like a rushed appointment.

.

“YOT and probation services representatives aren’t interested in people. They just ask what you did today,

what you’re doing tomorrow, and push you out the door”

Rioter Area, adult


“The YOT have taught me how to control my anger and how to think about things differently. It’s made a big difference. They

have also got me on a six month apprenticeship... 2 weeks into it , really enjoying it, feel much more positive about future now.”


“all I had to do was go down, speak to them and that was it.”

Non-Rioter Area, adult offender

Views and experiences of offendersExperiences of agencies – CJ contact• There were mixed views towards the transition. Most found there was no

difference between youth services and adult services.

• However, some mentioned that the severity of the adult system did come as a shock, primarily around the enforcement of attending appointments. As a youth, they could miss appointments and not much was done – this was different as an adult. They found this a bit of a shock.

“…it becomes a lot more heavier. When you are under that 18 you get a slap on the wrists, its when you hit 18

they start threatening you with jail, probation, community service, things like that. Then you just keep

on getting locked up.”

Non-Rioter Area, adult offender


• Adult offenders also spoke of the frustration of working for certificates in prison and then not being offered the support to finish courses once released and the lack of aftercare in helping finding accommodation – factors seen to contribute towards likely reoffending.

“There’s a thing called St Giles and they help you with housing and re-housing when you get out of prison. And they make you sign a lot of paper work and the amount of

paper work you sign and that, you expect you’re gonna get somewhere when you come out, but you never do- the most you get is probably two nights in a B&B and then

you’ve got to do your own thing.”

Rioter Area, adult offender

Views and experiences of offendersMaking services more effective – what worked

• The services that young people and adult offenders reported as having the most significant impact on their behaviour was through one-to-one work. And this must be with a person:

• they get on with/can build a relationship with;

• who has time to spend with them to build this relationship and provide a tailored package for them;

• can talk to them about their future, give them some aspirations, instil importance of future and the consequences of their behaviour on future opportunities; and

• who understand their situation, been there i.e. ex-offenders, people from where they live

• A co-ordinated link to other services/opportunities – such as Connexions

• Targeted support according to individual need – i.e. accommodation, substance misuse

“He’d give us tips on how to calm down and that…it was someone for me to talk to that wasn’t a family member

and someone who understood what I was going through.”

Non-Rioter Area, young person

Went to live with

grandmother

• Naughty in class

• Arrogant & cocky

• Angry with teacher

• Sent home from school

• Likes living in area – has friends, plays basketball/football

• Involved in some shoplifting – nicking sweets

Caught for being involved in riots

•First time trouble with police

•Burglary x 3, 10mth RO

•Thought of free stuff

LIFE

• Not seen mother in 10 years (just befriended on Facebook)

• Sees dad every fortnight

• No support

• Getting along better at school

Aspirations -BASKETBALL

•Want to go to USA & play for team/v. good at it “It will show I did something positive”

•Upset that someone might stop him doing what he wants too

Aged 3Aged 13

Aged 8

• Only YOT support so far

– Useful to talk

– Not proper meetings

– RO panel – different people talking about same things “if heard once, don’t need to hear it again”

SUPPORT

Mentor

• Since December

• Calms down if get angry in class

• “somewhere to go if I’m angry”

Mum & Dad had

problematic relationship

Step dad abused him

• bunking/getting in trouble

• seemed funny getting into trouble

• fight – excluded for 6 months

• attitude – “used to be rude”

• Offered support but didn’t want it

• People around him influencing him

SCHOOL

5 years lived in area

Hanging around all bad people

Aged 9

FIRST TROUBLE WITH POLICE

–Robbery x 3 (not involved)

–Shoplifting

–Assaults

–got NFA

13

– Moved to nicer area/ permanent house in Upper Norwood

– don’t see old friends now as now goes to college now so no time/ doing GCSEs

– Has been in trouble with police again for robbery of phone

– Received community service

– Workshops – long and rubbish and not worthwhile

14

• YOT - long appointments, - no real support –

although worker does text telling him what to do

- helped when needed and getting him into

college

- Went on a boxing course

but stopped as ran beyond length of

order

• Mum - gives me lots of support but my choices

- tries not to upset her with

his behaviour

• School/college- people good there- show it’s good to be

good/positive role models

Support received

2002

Moved from Holland to

• Start new life with mum

• Town too small

2009

Moved to different area

2011

Dad moved back to Holland to take care of

Grandmother

• Little brother stabbed – he then attacked the person responsible as retaliation

• Received a court order as a result then too

2004

Followed sister to London

“not for me. I got in a bit of trouble”

• stabbed someone with screwdriver

• arrested but adjourned

2012

• Caught with knife - feels young people have to carry a weapon

• Received another court order

• Feels that this order has helped to calm him down

Born Holland

| Confidential

Research for the Riots Communities and Victims PanelPerceptions survey of residents living in riot and non-riot areas

02/03/12

Overview

• This survey represents the third strand of a three strand project for the Riots Communities and Victims Panel, commissioned by the Department for Communities and Local Government.

• The survey consisted of interviews with 1,204 residents aged 16+ living in six different areas of the country, purposively selected to ensure we gathered a mix of views from those living in areas inhabited by rioters and those living in areas where no rioters live.

• The areas were selected to ensure that their make-up (i.e. levels of deprivation, crime rates, etc.) was comparable, with the aim being to explore the reasons why, in light of this comparability, some areas were affected by rioters but not others.

• The overall aims of this survey strand were to: • Investigate what residents’ opinions of their local area are with regard to quality of life and how

tight-knit the community is.

• Assess what the residents’ opinions are towards opportunities for young people in the local area. In particular this is focussed on education and employment but we were also interested in finding out how young people are perceived by the wider community in general.

• Find out how the public view the police in their local area and their response to anti-social behaviour. We wanted to find out what the public’s relationship with the police was like.

• Investigate how young people are portrayed in the media and find out if the constant marketing and advertising which they are subject to played any part in driving them to riot.

Methodology

• Ipsos MORI conducted interviews with 1,204 respondents aged 16 or over, from specific clusters of adjacent MSOAs in 6 areas (approximately 200 interviews per area).

• These areas were purposively sampled by DCLG based on their profile (e.g. deprivation levels) and split into 4 ‘rioter’ areas and 2 ‘non-rioter’ areas.

• The sampling approach used was Random Digit Dialling (RDD), which ensured that a cross-section of the target audience was reached, including those with ex-directory telephone numbers.

• Quotas were set at a local level by age, gender, work status and ethnicity to reflect the population aged 16+ of residents in each respective area.

• Interviews were conducted over the telephone using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) and were carried out by Ipsos MORI in-house Telephone Operations centres. The centres are members of the Interviewer Quality Control Scheme (IQCS) and have Market Research Quality Standards Association (MRQSA) quality accreditation.

• Fieldwork took place between 14th February and 22nd February 2012.

Technical note (1)

• Data presented here is weighted to ensure it is representative of the local MSOA clusters/ areas surveyed. Firstly, data has been weighted by age, gender, work status and ethnicity to the known population profile of the relevant MSOA clusters/ area, using latest available Mid-Year Estimates. Secondly, because more interviews were carried out in some areas than others, aggregate figures have been adjusted to ensure that each area has an exact equal weighting.

• Due to the sampling methodology adopted for this survey, it is important to bear in mind that the aggregated figures across all six areas do not reflect the picture for the wider population of England, or indeed the individual cities surveyed, since we only targeted a small section of the population within each.

• Where results do not sum to 100, this may be due to multiple responses, computer rounding or the exclusion of don’t knows/not stated.

• An asterisk (*) represents a value of less than one half or one percent, but not zero.

• Throughout the questionnaire, local residents were asked to think about their local area when responding to questions - defined as the area within 15 to 20 minutes walking distance from the respondents’ home.

Technical note (2)

• All data are subject to sampling tolerances. The variation between the sample results and the “true” values (the findings that would have been obtained if everyone in the relevant areas had been interviewed) can be predicted from knowledge of the sample sizes on which the results are based and the number of times that a particular answer is given.

• Individual areas will be subject to a sampling tolerance of approximately +/- 7 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. For example, on a question where 50% of respondents give a particular answer, the chances are 95 in 100 that this result would not vary, plus or minus, by more than 7 percentage points from the “true” value had all residents living in the sampled area been interviewed. At the aggregate level (1,204 interviews) the sampling tolerance is +/- 3 ppts.

• When comparing answers between the different MSOA areas, between riot and non-riot affected areas, or between the aggregate findings and a particular MSOA area, sampling tolerances also apply. To illustrate, when comparing the views of respondents in one area (202) to those of all respondents (1,204) the difference would need to be greater than approximately +/- 8 ppts to be statistically significant.

• Please note that strictly speaking the tolerances shown here apply only to random samples. In practice good quality quota sampling has been found to be as accurate.

Q1 How would you rate the quality of life in your local area?

More rate their quality of life as good than poor but respondents living in rioter areas are more likely to rate it as poor.

Base: All. Telephone interviews with all residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14 th February – 22nd February 2012

14

16

10

8

20

13

18

12

19

44

41

49

37

52

34

51

40

51

17

15

16

18

17

20

13

17

15

16

19

14

22

8

23

12

20

10

8

9

9

3

10

6

10

4

1

1

2

1

1

12

1

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Total - Rioter Areas

Total - Non-Rioter Areas

Very good Fairly good Neither/nor Fairly poor Very poor Don't knowBase:(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)

Indicates good/poor is statistically significantly higher than total

Q2 Do you agree or disagree that your local area is a close, tight-knit community?

People tend to be fairly split over how tight-knit they think their local community is and there is no difference between rioter and non-rioter areas.


14

20

15

14

7

16

13

16

10

25

30

27

19

24

20

31

24

28

13

16

10

12

17

8

16

11

17

26

17

27

28

36

23

27

24

32

19

16

19

24

13

31

11

23

12

2

1

2

4

2

3

3

2

2

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither/nor Tend to disagree Strongly disagree Don't know Base:(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)

Indicates agree/disagree is statistically, significantly higher than total

Q3a To what extent do you agree/disagree that public services in your local area. . .? (listen to the public)

There is a roughly equal divide between those who think public services do listen to the public and those who do not. Riot affected areas are more likely to disagree though.


12

12

11

11

9

13

13

12

11

25

26

25

23

24

26

29

25

26

19

16

15

19

18

15

29

16

23

18

18

15

15

24

22

15

17

19

21

23

27

23

18

22

12

24

15

5

5

7

9

7

2

2

5

6

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither/nor Tend to disagree Strongly disagree Don't know Base:

(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q3b To what extent do you agree/disagree that public services in your local area. . .? (involve the public in decision making)

People do not tend to think that public services involve them in decision making; this is particularly the case in riot affected areas.


12

15

10

9

10

12

14

12

12

23

26

15

22

25

19

30

20

28

16

14

12

20

16

16

20

15

18

20

14

29

16

24

22

18

20

21

24

27

28

25

21

29

15

27

18

5

5

6

8

5

2

4

4

5

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q3c To what extent do you agree/disagree that public services in your local area. . .? (inform the public of decisions that have been made)

Nearly half of all respondents (49%) feel well informed about decisions that have been made, with little difference between riot and non-riot areas.


15

16

14

17

12

13

20

15

16

34

30

30

38

33

30

41

32

37

11

13

10

12

13

10

8

11

11

18

15

24

12

21

20

17

18

19

19

23

18

18

18

28

13

22

15

2

3

3

3

3

1

2

2

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q3d To what extent do you agree/disagree that public services in your local area. . .? (Work together effectively to make your area a better place to live)

Around half of respondents agree that public services in their local area are working together effectively to create a better place to live, although this is significantly lower in riot affected areas.


18

17

19

24

12

19

19

20

16

32

28

29

27

41

28

42

28

41

14

16

11

11

15

14

15

13

15

16

16

16

15

14

20

16

17

15

17

22

21

19

17

18

6

20

12

2

2

4

4

1

1

1

1

3

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q4a To what extent do you think that the following are problems in your local area? (Crime and anti-social behaviour)

Most (71%) believe that crime and ASB are problems in their area.

Base: All. Telephone interview with all residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14 th February – 22nd February 2012

37

34

44

53

23

44

25

44

24

34

34

38

29

35

31

36

33

36

22

23

13

14

35

17

32

17

34

6

9

5

3

7

7

6

6

6

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



A great deal To some extent Not very much Not at all Don't know Base:

(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)

Indicates problem/not a problem statistically, significantly higher than total

Q4b To what extent do you think that the following are problems in your local area? (Members of the community not treating each other with respect)

Around 3 in 5 respondents think that there is a problem with members of the community not treating one another with respect. Again, this is perceived to be more of a problem in riot areas


25

22

33

29

18

31

15

29

17

34

34

35

37

33

32

32

35

33

25

25

18

20

30

20

36

21

33

14

16

11

12

17

15

16

13

17

2

3

3

2

1

1

2

1

2

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q4c To what extent do you think that the following are problems in your local area? (Children leaving school with inadequate qualifications)

Around 3 in 5 believe children leaving school with inadequate qualifications is a problem in their local area; this is higher in riot affected areas.


32

33

38

40

24

33

26

36

25

30

29

30

30

31

30

31

30

31

16

13

9

14

20

16

21

13

20

8

14

5

2

10

7

7

7

9

14

10

19

15

14

15

14

15

13

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q4d To what extent do you think that the following are problems in your local area? (Housing issues (such as availability, affordability and quality))

Housing issues are seen as a problem by 59% of those asked. As previously seen, views differ depending on whether respondents live in a riot affected area.


28

34

31

37

19

27

22

32

21

31

28

35

28

29

32

31

31

30

20

21

17

15

22

17

29

18

26

12

11

7

11

16

16

11

11

13

9

6

9

13

7

7

8

10

9

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q4e To what extent do you think that the following are problems in your local area? (Lack of service provision for those who are elderly or unwell)

Around half (49%) of respondents agree that lack of service provision for vulnerable people is a problem in their local area; there is little difference between the areas surveyed.


20

25

20

18

18

26

14

22

16

29

28

24

28

36

28

31

27

33

23

23

29

19

24

20

27

23

25

13

17

11

12

11

14

12

13

12

14

7

16

12

13

16

15

14

23

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q4f To what extent do you think that the following are problems in your local area? (Materialism among young people)

Materialism amongst young people is perceived to be a problem by a significant majority, especially in riot affected areas.


35

35

44

43

30

32

24

38

27

32

32

30

26

28

35

38

31

33

17

19

11

12

21

16

23

15

22

8

7

7

10

8

7

9

8

9

9

7

8

13

10

6

9

10

9

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q4g To what extent do you think that the following are problems in your local area? (A growing gap between the rich and the poor)

Over half (56%) agree that increasing levels of inequality are a problem.


33

29

30

48

24

35

31

35

28

23

24

26

15

28

22

26

22

27

24

27

24

22

25

22

25

24

25

15

17

16

9

17

16

14

15

16

4

2

4

5

4

4

4

4

7

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q6a Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of these statements (Local schools adequately prepare young people with the skills and experiences they need to enter work)

There is a fairly even split between those who think schools do adequately prepare young people and those who do not, though in riot affected areas it is significantly less likely that people will agree.


18

27

18

14

17

19

13

19

15

25

21

21

20

34

22

34

21

34

11

9

8

10

10

13

13

10

11

16

16

16

20

15

15

12

16

14

20

22

25

16

19

20

22

18

10

6

12

14

8

12

8

11

8

21

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q6b Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of these statements (There is a suitable range of college courses available to prepare young people for vocational jobs)

Respondents are more likely to agree than disagree that there is a suitable range of college courses available but disagreement is higher in riot-affected areas.


29

29

23

25

36

33

29

28

33

26

23

24

27

33

24

27

25

30

9

12

10

8

5

10

9

10

7

11

12

10

12

8

10

15

11

11

14

16

17

7

14

13

16

10

10

8

15

11

11

9

7

11

9

17

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q6c Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of these statements (There are not enough opportunities for young people to choose vocational options at school, such as apprenticeships)

However, people broadly agree that there are not enough vocational options available in schools.


36

37

42

36

36

33

29

37

33

17

16

16

9

20

19

24

15

22

9

11

9

10

8

7

10

9

9

12

9

7

12

16

12

15

10

16

14

19

13

9

13

13

16

11

12

8

13

13

11

16

9

13

10

19

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q6d Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of these statements (Local schools have been doing enough to address truancy in your local area)

There are mixed views as to whether local schools are doing enough to address truancy.


20

22

19

19

21

24

16

21

19

22

20

19

24

25

19

25

21

25

15

17

13

10

14

13

20

13

17

8

8

9

8

9

6

9

8

9

14

20

15

6

17

9

17

7

21

13

25

24

25

21

22

21

23

15

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q6e Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of these statements (There are sufficient employment opportunities, in your local area, for young people when they leave school)

The vast majority disagree that there are sufficient employment opportunities for young people across all areas.


11

19

10

9

7

10

12

12

9

6

4

8

6

10

3

7

5

8

7

10

3

7

5

9

7

7

6

19

15

18

16

28

18

19

17

23

52

47

58

45

55

52

54

49

5

4

3

8

6

4

3

5

4

54

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q6f Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of these statements (Youth unemployment is a problem in your local area)

Linked to this, youth unemployment is seen to be a problem by the vast majority, regardless of where they live.


62

58

70

72

51

67

53

67

52

21

20

18

11

26

20

30

17

28

4

2

2

4

5

5

5

3

5

4

4

2

2

9

4

4

3

6

5

12

4

4

3

2

6

3

5

4

4

7

6

2

6

4

6

4

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q6g Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of these statements (Local public services, such as the council, are not doing enough to tackle youth unemployment in your local area)

In addition to acknowledging that youth unemployment is a problem, around 3 in 5 perceive that local services are not doing enough to tackle it.


41

45

51

44

32

45

27

46

30

20

16

20

19

25

17

25

18

25

11

10

7

9

13

11

13

9

13

12

8

9

10

14

13

17

10

15

10

15

6

7

7

11

10

9

7

6

7

9

8

7

6

7

7

10

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q7 When you watch or read news stories how positive or negative would you say the media are towards children and young people? Would you say they are. . .

Across all areas, around half believe that children and young people are portrayed in a negative light by the media.


14

17

11

13

12

16

16

14

14

30

26

30

31

31

26

35

28

33

53

53

55

54

55

55

48

54

51

3

3

1

3

4

1

3

2

4

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Generally positive about children and young people Neither postive nor negative about children and young peopleGenerally negative about children and young people Don't know Base:

(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)

Indicates positive/negative statistically, significantly higher than total

Q9a To what extent do you agree or disagree that . . .? (There is too much branding and advertising aimed directly at young people)

Further to agreeing that materialism amongst young people is a problem, around three quarters agree that there is too much advertising directed at them. As previously seen, views differ according to whether their area has been affected by the riots.


59

63

62

54

54

61

56

60

55

18

15

17

18

18

21

16

18

17

9

11

6

10

10

9

9

9

10

6

5

6

7

9

3

7

5

8

6

4

5

6

3

10

5

8

3

2

3

4

3

3

1

3

2

6

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither/nor Tend to disagree Strongly disagree Don't knowBase:

(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q9b To what extent do you agree or disagree that . . .? (Advertising puts pressure on young people to own the latest products)

In excess of 8 in 10 (85%) agree that the amount of advertising directed at young people could put pressure on them to own the latest products...


69

66

73

65

67

74

68

69

67

16

18

16

15

17

16

16

16

16

4

5

4

6

4

2

4

4

4

5

4

4

6

7

3

5

4

6

5

7

3

5

5

5

4

5

2

1

1

5

1

2

3

2

2

4

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q9c To what extent do you agree or disagree that . . .? (Steps need to be taken to reduce the amount of advertising aimed at young people)

...and most (70%) would like to see the amount of advertising reduced, regardless of where they live.


47

50

48

44

45

46

47

47

46

23

22

23

20

26

23

21

22

24

14

16

11

16

14

11

13

14

14

7

8

6

9

6

6

9

7

7

6

3

8

6

7

6

6

6

4

2

4

5

3

7

4

4

3

7

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q12 To what extent, if at all, were you personally or others in your household affected by the riots last summer?

40% of respondents living in rioter areas were personally affected.

Base: All those in riot affected areas. Telephone interviews with residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14 th February – 22nd February 2012

17

13

16

28

10

17

23

20

31

25

17

23

19

20

19

20

18

19

41

47

34

27

55

41

1

1

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area



(800)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(800)

(200)

Indicates great deal or some extent/ not very much or at all statistically significantly higher than total

Q14a How much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements (The police and local council seek people’s views about the anti-social behaviour and crime issues that matter in this area?)

A roughly even split exists between those who think the police do seek the public’s views on crime and ASB and those who do not.

Base: All. Telephone interviews with residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14 th February – 22nd February 2012

20

21

19

21

18

20

20

20

19

26

25

24

25

28

23

30

24

29

11

11

10

8

11

11

13

10

12

18

16

19

17

21

17

20

17

20

22

25

23

18

23

16

24

17

4

3

4

5

3

7

2

5

2

25

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q14b How much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements (The police and local council are effectively dealing with the anti-social behaviour and crime issues that matter in this area)

Around half (51%) think that crime and ASB are being dealt with effectively, but respondents in riot affected areas are more likely to disagree that this is the case.


19

23

17

17

14

21

21

20

17

32

25

31

33

37

29

39

29

38

13

13

14

11

15

13

11

13

13

14

14

14

14

12

12

15

14

14

19

20

21

18

23

10

21

14

4

5

3

3

4

3

4

4

4

21

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q14c How much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements (The police and local council keep people informed about how they are dealing with anti-social behaviour and crime issues that matter in this area)

Again, there is a divide on how well informed, by the police and local council, people feel.


18

16

16

20

17

18

22

18

19

25

19

25

25

26

26

29

24

28

10

13

7

7

10

9

12

9

11

20

21

21

17

24

17

17

19

21

25

28

27

21

26

19

27

20

2

2

3

2

1

4

1

3

1

28

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q15 Have you, personally, had any contact with the police in the past 12 months?

Nearly one in three (31%) have had some contact with the police in the past 12 months, with no difference between riot and non-riot areas...


31

29

26

31

30

37

32

30

31

69

71

74

69

70

63

68

70

69

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Yes NoBase:(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)

Indicates yes/no statistically significantly higher than total

Q16 Thinking of the most recent contact you’ve had with the police, how happy or unhappy were you with the way the police treated you during the contact.

...with the majority (66%) being happy with how they were treated by the police.

Base: All those who have had contact with police in last 12 months. Telephone interviews with residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14 th February – 22nd February 2012

38

29

47

37

34

38

45

38

39

28

30

29

28

22

28

31

29

27

8

10

9

7

9

7

9

8

9

10

9

11

10

14

8

6

9

10

15

23

4

18

18

9

15

13

1

4

3

1

2

13

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Very happy Fairly happy Neither/nor Fairly unhappy Very unhappy Don't knowBase:(367)

(58)

(51)

(75)

(67)

(245)

(122)

(55)

(61)

Indicates happy/unhappy statistically significantly higher than total

Q17 How likely, or unlikely, do you think it is that something would be done as a result of you making a complaint against the Police?

But, over half (53%) do not think that anything would happen if they were to make a complaint against the police.


14

17

10

17

8

15

17

15

12

26

25

23

24

35

24

28

24

32

25

24

30

19

26

24

27

24

27

28

28

31

34

22

29

26

31

24

6

6

7

9

8

2

7

5

6

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-RioterArea



Very likely Fairly likely Fairly unlikely Very unlikely Don't knowBase:(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)

Indicates likely/unlikely statistically, significantly higher than total

Q18a1 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement:

(Rehabilitation is the best way of preventing offenders from committing further crimes)

There is general agreement that rehabilitation is an effective way of preventing re-offending. The proportion that disagree is significantly lower in riot affected areas.

Base: Split sample : 608. Telephone interview with half residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14 th February – 22nd February 2012

35

41

34

45

30

32

26

39

28

31

30

32

28

36

31

31

30

33

7

10

8

8

5

7

5

8

5

10

5

10

5

16

9

16

7

16

14

10

16

13

17

18

13

15

2

3

2

1

4

4

2

2

11

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area




(100)

(97)

(94)

(106)

(393)

(215)

(109)

(102)


Q18a2 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement:

(Rehabilitation is generally a waste of time and effort)

Conversely, respondents are less likely to agree than disagree that rehabilitation is a waste of time.

Base: Split sample: 596. Telephone interview with half residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14 th February – 22nd February 2012

17

13

18

16

25

19

11

17

18

12

7

11

14

19

10

13

11

16

12

14

12

15

7

12

12

13

10

20

21

24

11

21

12

30

17

25

36

37

33

25

42

34

39

29

3

7

2

3

5

1

4

2

44

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither/nor Tend to disagree Strongly disagree Don't knowBase:(596)

(100)

(103)

(106)

(96)

(407)

(189)

(93)

(98)


Q18a1/2 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement: (Rehabilitation is the best way of preventing offenders from committing further crimes)(Rehabilitation is generally a waste of time and effort)

There is general agreement that rehabilitation is an effective and worthwhile method of preventing reoffending.

Base: All – split sample ( 608/ 596) Telephone interview with all residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14 th February – 22nd February 2012

Best way Waste of time

Strongly agree

Strongly agree

Tend to agree

Tend to agree

Neither/nor

Neither/nor

Tend to disagree

Tend to disagree

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know Don’t know

Q18b To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement:

(Rehabilitation does not work for all offenders, but is the most effective solution for offenders who want to stop re-offending)

A substantial majority (73%) agree that though rehabilitation may not work for all offenders it is the most effective way of helping those who do want to stop offending...


37

42

41

40

32

42

29

41

31

35

33

31

33

41

31

42

32

41

6

8

7

6

5

6

5

7

5

7

7

8

6

10

4

9

6

9

11

8

11

9

13

12

11

10

3

3

2

4

3

4

3

3

3

12

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither/nor Tend to disagree Strongly disagree Don't knowBase:(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)


Q19 How effective do you believe community sentences are as a way of rehabilitating offenders?

… But, they are split on whether community sentences are an effective way of rehabilitating offenders…


11

16

9

12

8

13

7

13

7

33

38

27

30

38

26

41

30

39

30

26

37

28

30

29

30

30

30

21

17

24

20

19

27

16

22

18

5

3

3

4

4

6

5

5

10

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Very effective Fairly effective Not very effective Not at all effective Don't knowBase:(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)

Indicates effective/not effective is statistically, significantly higher than total

Q20 How effective do you believe community sentences are as a way of punishing offenders?

... And they are even less likely to think community sentences act as an effective punishment.

Base: All. Telephone interviews with all residents aged 16+ Fieldwork dates 14th February – 22nd February 2012

9

17

6

9

6

11

7

11

7

29

34

24

27

31

28

31

28

31

35

27

40

34

37

30

42

33

39

22

19

28

25

20

26

15

24

18

4

4

2

5

5

5

4

5

6

Total

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area

Rioter Area

Non-Rioter Area



Very effective Fairly effective Not very effective Not at all effective Don't knowBase:(1204)

(200)

(200)

(200)

(202)

(800)

(404)

(202)

(200)

Indicates effective/not effective is statistically, significantly higher than total

For further information…

•Telephone:

020 7347 3000

•Email:

[email protected]

[email protected]

| Confidential

Strand 3 – Views of communities gained through qualitative discussion groups

02/03/2012

| Confidential

Views on the local neighbourhood and impact of crime and ASB

02/03/2012

View on the local neighbourhood – the good

Vibrant

Like a ‘village’

Friendly

Cohesive

Socially accepting

Sense of community

Accessible

Multicultural

Some very positive feeling towards their local area

Positivity was most keenly felt by those with young families who described themselves as ‘active’ in their local area (regularly out and about - in local parks, visiting parks, playgroups etc) and felt there was a lot to offer people in their situation.

BUT - those less actively involved in these wider community activities, such as the older (aged 50-60+) and those younger residents (18-24) felt more detached from these positive aspects.

“I don’t feel safe out after dark, it’s not a place for me – I tend to keep myself to myself. If I do have to venture out,

I’m looking over my shoulder – worried who I might encounter”

Rioter Area Resident (50+)

Olde

“There’s no respect between people, there’s selfish attitudes – people looking out for themselves with no time

for each other”Non-Rioter Area resident (18-50)

View on the local neighbourhood – the bad

Poor

Depressing

Deprived

Lacking opportunity

Derelict

Crowded

Deteriorating

Hopeless

Lack of respect Lack of social cohesion

Lack of ‘community’

Territorial = separated/’divided by postcodes’

Nothing to do

Ignored/neglected

View on the local neighbourhood

Descriptions of local communities and neighbourhoods were broadly similar between a Non-Riot Area and a Riot Area – communities were keen to point out key challenges faced in their area around poverty and lack of opportunity for young people;

Lack of employment opportunities (reduction in local manual industry/trade)

Lack of educational achievement/attainment

Lack of diversion/distraction activity

“There really is nothing for the young kids to do round here. There’s nothing for people with no job or benefits from age 16 to 18… at least then they can sign on and

get some money. Until that point - it’s no wonder they get into trouble”


Crime and ASB concerns

Concerns largely focussed on what people described as ‘low level ASB’ = dog-fouling, litter, vandalism, graffiti, spitting, rude behaviour

There were also concerns about drug dealing, burglary and car crime being very common

Younger Riot Area residents were concerned that the area had a bad reputation for crime and ASB that did not reflect their views – with a feeling that the area was given a bad reputation and things were blown out of proportion

In both areas, residents spoke at length about the damage caused by ‘postcode wars’ – with young people in effect not allowed to venture into neighbouring areas/communities/estates for fear of being identified as an ‘outsider’ and being attacked or targeted. This was felt to be very damaging to their otherwise positive sense of community

Impact of crime and ASB on people and the area

Older Riot Area residents did feel that local people were being de-sensitised to particularly violent crime, such as murder, stabbings etc – something they felt was relatively common in the N17 area of the borough

Older residents were more likely to feel that part of their local area were ‘no-go areas’ and were less likely to feel safe venturing out after dark

Fear and distrust of people were also commonly cited by those feeling crime and ASB were a significant problem

Why did riots (not) erupt in their local neighbourhood?

The key factor here was thought to be around police relations with the local community.

In one Rioter Area – relations were felt to be very poor, having not recovered from previous riots. Stop & search was widely cited, as was perceived ‘heavy-handed’ policing from those police drafted in from outside the area to deal with incident or operations without having a full understanding of local community sensitivities.

In one Non-Rioter Area – largely positive views towards the police and relations were felt to be the reason why rioting did not start in the area. It was acknowledged by some of the younger residents that whilst some did look to engage in trouble in the town centre – the police had “beaten us to it” – and secured the town centre. Lack of any significant animosity towards the local police, who were felt to on the whole do a relatively good job in the circumstances – was felt to be key to why locals did not take anything further. Young people felt there wasn’t the anger in the area to spark a riot

Why no rioting?

“There just wasn’t the need really here”Non-Rioter Area Resident (18-50)

“People here weren’t as angry as those in Tottenham who have been victimised”

Non-Rioter Area resident (18-50)

| Confidential

How to stop young people getting involved in crime and provide them with positive opportunities

02/03/2012

What do young people at risk of getting drawn into a life of crime need?

How to keep youngsters off the streets?

Youth clubs/activities were widely cited. Though the format of these would need to be flexible and ‘user-designed’ to ensure that activities were attractive and engaging.

“Kids don’t want to be playing table football or pool these days – they’re more demanding and need a different form

of stimulation. They want to be using technology and playing games on computers etc. ”

Non-Rioter Area Resident (50+)

Helping young people develop into positive adults: role models are felt to be crucial in the lives of young people

Focus on education

Literary and numeracy rates are felt to be low in deprived area – residents want to see more done to engage young people creatively to encourage and support learning.

There are also calls for a more vocational and employment related focus within the school system

Parenting

Poor parenting was felt to be a real problem – with young people being given poor examples and being bought up in a culture of dependency

Concerns were also raised about the cost of childcare and the impact this was having, particularly in one Riot Area, on the ability of people to work and provide that stable positive, aspirational home environment

Mentoring/positive (male) role-models

The majority felt that the lack of a positive male role-model was a key factor in the bad behaviour of many young people and would like to see more put into encouraging those with the relative skills to play a positive part in young people’s lives

Providing hope and aspiration

Bridging the gap (between 16 to 18)

How to fill the time of those leaving school at 16 and unable to find a job? They will need to find money somewhere and need a lot of will power to resist the temptations on offer out there

Further education/training/apprenticeship opportunities

Too many of our young people are felt to be leaving school at 16 with little or no basic qualifications or skills. Residents were keen to see more of an effort put into providing vocational opportunities to teach the skills needed to flourish in the workplace

Employment opportunities

This is the key challenge, particularly in deprived communities that in the past relied on industry and manufacturing for employment. The north east part of a Riot Area was described as an industrial wasteland now. Similarly concerns were expressed in a Non-Rioter Area about the opportunities available at the town’s major employers (An example was cited as a large local company which was no longer the ‘employer’ it once was)

Reintegrating young offenders back into the community

Less of a focus on prison or young offenders institutes/detention centre

Most expressed concern that the criminal justice system is too keen to send young offender away – and what they need is to serve some form of punishment within the community. This should be one that helps them to face the community they have wronged and will hopefully instil a more positive attitude towards the local area in them

Boot camp

A few others however, felt that punishment needed to be more severe – to move away from the “TV and play-station in your room” culture towards one which encourages/promotes a strong(er) work ethic

More practical support building a positive life

This tended to focus on housing support and help getting into the workplace – particularly for those who would be ‘starting again’ in life

Local employers could play a role here

| Confidential

Views towards local agencies and extent to which residents feel that they can impact on delivery

02/03/2012

Views towards local agencies

The Police were the most widely discussed organisation when it comes to focussing on crime and ASB.

In both areas the police were felt to be severely under-resourced, and not able to focus on effective ‘street-level’ policing, to engage the local community regularly and effectively and work with young people in the area.

In one Riot Area – this was felt to result in ‘low level’ criminality such as robbery, burglary and drug dealing going largely unchecked

“The police don’t have time for us – it’s just a playground for criminals… they know they can come in here, do what

they want and get away with pretty much anything”


Ability to influence police activity

The majority were not aware of any mechanisms to influence police activity in their area.

Some were however, familiar with local community forums or tenants association meetings with the local police to discuss local issues. The concern here however, was that whilst on the face of it there was an opportunity for some to question and challenge the police, they were not convinced their views were ever really listened to or accounted for anything.

Residents did suggest a number of potential activities that the local police could engage in to foster more positive engagement and relations;

Working more closely with young people through the local schools – many thought that police contact and involvement with young people in schools was far too infrequent, and there was an opportunity to foster more positive views towards and relations with the police from a young age

Spending more time engaging the local community at street-level to build positive relations and get more of a sense of ‘what matters’ to local people

| Confidential

The future of local communities – what would residents like to see change?

02/03/2012

Key changes required – Rioter Area

Focus on the high rate of unemployment in the area – and addressing the lack of industry and manual labour opportunities for young people in the area

Address the ‘lack of activity for young people’ situation – this could be through more investment in youth services, in particular youth clubs/centres for people to spend time in a more positive, supported, safe and hopefully aspirational environment with some positive role-models and influences around

Tackling increasing truancy – need to be more forceful, but also think creatively about ways to engage children who are not interested in school in it’s current form. This was felt to be a big challenge but crucial to increasing levels of qualification and skills amongst school-leavers

Key changes required – Rioter Area

Schools and parents need to work towards creating more positive and respectful young people, both in terms of respect for each other and those in their local community, but also their local area. Parenting interventions or programmes may help here with problem families or those more at risk of criminality

Need more police in the area – to enable them to find time to focus on lower-level crime and ASB on top of the high volume of serious violent crimes that they have to deal with. In particular it is felt that these need to be police who will get to know the local area and stick around, to understand the community and their issues/needs

More mentoring and positive role models – residents here felt that there were too many ‘directionless’ young men growing up without any positive influence, ambition or aspiration

Key changes required – Non-Rioter Area

A focus on parenting skills and the negative behaviours of some adults – particularly those involved with drugs and alcohol abuse. There was a feeling that too many young people are growing up surrounded by very negative examples and unstable home lives

More community policing was called for, police who will spend time talking to and getting to know local communities to get a feel for ‘the issues’ and work more effectively together

More fun/free things to do – to occupy young people, stop them getting bored and into trouble

Key changes required – Non-Rioter Area

More activities and opportunities for young people in the local area – focussing on youth clubs and services that will effectively engage and inspire young people, not trying to recreate the ‘youth clubs of old’ which focus on table tennis etc…. Residents feel that times have changed and youth services need to do the same

In addition to this point, it was felt that more effective use of available spaces/facilities could be made. For example – there was a suggestion that school building could be used at weekends or evenings to allow young people to use gyms or leisure facilities or computer rooms etc. People felt that this did not have to necessarily cost a lot of money

Subsidies for people to engage in positive/risk-free leisure activities… there were concerns that it costs a lot of money for poor families to do positive things together, like go swimming or go to the cinema

For further information…

•Telephone:

020 7347 3000

•Email:

[email protected]

[email protected]

| Confidential Research for the Riots Communities and Victims Panel Perceptions survey of residents...

Documents

Transcript of | Confidential Research for the Riots Communities and Victims Panel Perceptions survey of residents...