U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance

SurveyingCommunitiesA Resource forCommunity JusticePlanners

U.S. Department of JusticeOffice of Justice Programs

810 Seventh Street NW.Washington, DC 20531

John AshcroftAttorney General

Deborah J. DanielsAssistant Attorney General

Richard R. NedelkoffDirector, Bureau of Justice Assistance

Office of Justice ProgramsHome Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Bureau of Justice AssistanceHome Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

NCJ 197109

This document was prepared by the Center for Court Innovation, under grant number2001–PP–CX–0001, awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs,U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily representthe official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which alsoincludes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of JuvenileJustice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

About the Author

As a planner for the Center for Court Innovation, LesliePaik was responsible for the administration of an annualcommunity survey in Red Hook, Brooklyn, New York. Sheis pursuing a doctorate in sociology at the University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles, studying the rise of problem-solving courts—such as community courts, drug courts,and mental health courts—in the United States.

SurveyingCommunitiesA Resource forCommunity JusticePlanners

Cover photos © 1995 PhotoDisc, © 1998 PhotoDisc, and © 2003 Wonderfile Corporation.

Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Community Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Needs Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Community Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Evaluations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Survey Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Red Hook Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Appendix A: Sample Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Appendix B: Sample Survey Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Sources for Further Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

iii

There are many ways to identify acommunity’s concerns. One approachis to interview neighborhood leaderssuch as clergy, the heads of businessgroups, and school principals. Anotherway is to hold focus groups that bringtogether citizens—teenagers, singlemothers, members of various ethnicgroups—to discuss their neighborhood.These methods, however, only reach asmall segment of the community. Tobuild on this information and developthe most complete picture possible,many community justice planners useanother tool: community surveys.

Conducting a survey requires time,manpower, and the ability to design ascientifically sound questionnaire andanalyze its results. Although thismonograph cannot provide communityjustice planners with time and staff, itcan give planners a head start on howto craft and conduct a survey.

1

Introduction

Over the past several years,community justice initiatives

around the country have sought toredefine the relationship betweencriminal justice agencies and citizens.Community justice advocates aproblem-solving approach to crimeand safety issues that calls on judges,prosecutors, defenders, police, andprobation officers to do more thanchurn cases through the criminal justicemill. Community justice calls oncriminal justice agencies to pursuenew goals instead of simply respondingafter a crime has occurred. Amongthese goals are preventing crime,increasing community involvementand neighborhood safety, and handlingcomplex problems (e.g., drug abuseand family dysfunction) that often fuelcriminal behavior.

For this approach to succeed, however,community justice practitioners needinformation. They need to know acommunity’s strengths and weaknesses;what local residents want from thecriminal justice system; and mostimportant, what neighborhoods identifyas their priorities. Are youth gangsthe most pressing problem for localresidents? Is drug dealing? Or are theirconcerns more prosaic—teenagersloitering, a noisy nightclub, or litterin an empty lot?

This monograph, Surveying Communities: AResource for Community Justice Planners, sharesthe experiences of those who have conductedsuccessful surveys that helped to developthe Red Hook Community Justice Center inBrooklyn, New York. The lessons learned fromthe preparation, administration, and analysisof this community survey can assist otherjurisdictions in achieving a better understandingof community needs and delivering moreresponsive programs to meet those needs.

—Robert Victor Wolf, Director ofCommunications, Center for Court Innovation

surveys offer the same benefits tocommunity justice planners as tobusinesses researching a product’sappeal: “We just did what businessesdo all the time. It’s called marketresearch. It’s what any successfulcompany in America does.”

A survey can enhance a planner’s workin a number of key areas.

Needs Assessment

When a project is in the initialplanning phase, the most important

3

Community Surveys

Community surveys can give planners adetailed picture of a community’s priorities,expectations, and self-image. A survey—whetherconducted by phone, on the street, or fromdoor to door—gathers information fromhundreds and potentially thousands ofstakeholders. Surveys also sort data in a formthat is perfect for analysis. Rather thangathering anecdotal impressions during a focusgroup, a well-designed survey crystallizesinformation into quantifiable data. For instance,a statewide survey in Vermont found thatonly 37 percent of residents had a favorableimpression of the state’s Department ofCorrections, but 93 percent would support thecreation of reparative boards (panels of citizenswho oversee probation terms for nonviolentoffenders). The results of this survey gaveplanners valuable information that helped themmake the case to funders and elected officialsthat reparative boards were worth trying.

—Robert Victor Wolf

When asked to coordinate a surveyof the Red Hook community

in Brooklyn, New York, the initialreaction was, “Why?” The planningteam had already conducted focusgroups and one-on-one interviewswith community residents and leaders;it seemed that little could be gainedby the labor-intensive task ofdistributing and analyzing hundredsof questionnaires. But now, afterorganizing an annual survey in RedHook for the past 4 years, the value(and the challenges) of a communitysurvey are apparent.

Although a survey does not replacethe knowledge gained through focusgroups and individual interviews, itdoes deepen a planner’s understanding.Adam Mansky, coordinator of the RedHook Community Justice Center(Justice Center), explained, “Surveysunderscore certain ideas that plannersmight have, letting them know whatthe community does or doesn’t want.It’s another way to ensure that yourproject is responding to realcommunity needs.”

John Perry, the director of planning forthe Vermont Department of Corrections(which conducted a statewide surveyabout its department), finds that

4

function of a survey is to give aprogram its fundamental shape.Questions are addressed to setparameters, such as:

■ What problems should a programfocus on?

— Drugs?

— Gangs?

— Theft?

■ What kinds of solutions are mostdesirable?

— Targeted law enforcement?

— Greater emphasis on offenderspaying the community back?

— More services to help offendersfind legitimate work?

■ What community resources areavailable to support the program?

— Church groups?

— Civic organizations?

— Ad hoc volunteers?

With answers to these questions,planners can build a program that bestmeets the community’s needs. Alsothe survey elicits feedback fromeveryone—not just a handful of theneighborhood’s most vocal citizens.According to Mansky, “There are about15 or 20 leaders at every communitymeeting, but how do you reach beyond

them to the average person on thestreet? A survey is the perfect tool forthis. It offers some reassurance thatcommunity leaders are accuratelyrepresenting the needs and interestsof their constituents.”

Community Support

A survey sends a clear message tocommunity stakeholders that theiropinions matter. This is especiallyimportant in neighborhoods that arewary of government intervention andsuspicious of outsiders. By conductinga survey, planners show that theirproject will be different: it will not bean unwanted government program.Rather, the project will be tailored tothe community’s needs and concerns.The annual survey used by the JusticeCenter is designed to last 20 minutes,but it can take longer. This designshows the community that you areinterested in their concerns by takingtime to listen. James Brodick, thedirector of community programs at theJustice Center, relates his experience:“I think it shows that when you reachout, people are willing to talk with you.We might spend an hour chatting withelderly residents. They can’t believethat we are interested in hearing whatthey have to say.”

Outreach

A survey offers an opportunity toeducate a community about a newproject. Every time a surveyor makesa connection with a citizen, it creates

an opportunity for dialog and a chanceto shape public opinion about theproject. If surveyors are properlyequipped with information about theinitiative, they can and should answercitizens’ questions. In Red Hook, forexample, surveyors tell the peoplethey are interviewing about the JusticeCenter and invite them to visit. KecheaBrown, a surveyor, recounted one suchexperience: “A woman stopped to dothe survey but wasn’t mentally there. Iasked if she was okay and she startedtalking about how she was losing herapartment, having problems withwelfare, etc. I told her that I knew aplace where you can get help: theJustice Center. I gave her the bus route,telephone number, and namesof people to talk to. She got on thebus straight to the Justice Center.”

Partnerships

Partnerships are a key component ofany community justice project. Surveyresults can help identify potentialpartners and convince them that theircooperation is needed. If the communityidentifies a need such as job training,affordable housing, or drug treatment,planners can begin to forge relationshipswith the appropriate agencies. To dealwith crime in a housing project, itmay make sense to partner with thelocal housing agency or communitydevelopment organization. To respondto drug abuse, a drug treatmentprovider is a logical partner. In WestPalm Beach, Florida, for instance,community court planners surveyedresidents approximately 6 months

before the court opened. Tom Becht,coordinator of the court, said that thesurvey showed that trash and litterwere by far the top concerns. Realizingthis was a community priority, thecourt’s community service crewsfocused on cleaning up theneighborhood. Planners also used thesurvey data to convince the city to getinvolved. “The city now is adopting aplan where they’re going to clean upproperty and bill the landlords aftergiving them a notice that they need toclean up the property themselves,”Becht said.

Evaluations

Any project, especially one that is newor experimental, needs to be evaluated.Questions to consider include thefollowing:

■ Is the project achieving its goals?

■ Are things working as intended, orhave unanticipated obstaclesrequired a change in strategy?

■ Is the public satisfied with theresults so far?

■ How have the public’s attitudeschanged over time?

A survey can help answer thesequestions, especially if it isreadministered on a regular basis asare the Red Hook and West PalmBeach surveys. In addition, a surveycan reveal if the public is aware thatthe community justice program exists

5

6

cultivate community support for aproject cannot vigorously measurepublic opinion. In other words, asurveyor cannot say, “This is a greatproject,” and then ask communitymembers for their opinion of theproject without potentially biasing theresults. Even with this caveat, however,it still makes sense to track communityattitudes. Survey results will help withprogram design and help plannersgauge their progress.

Funding

Funders like to support projects thatmeet a community’s needs. A surveycan help persuade a potential funderthat the need for a new program isgenuine. Survey results can also helpshow that the community supports aproject and that a project has had atangible effect on residents’ attitudesabout crime, safety, and theneighborhood in general.

and give a sense of what they thinkabout the program. For example, ayear after the community court inMinneapolis opened, a telephonesurvey was conducted to measurecommunity awareness and satisfactionlevels with the court. Court officialslearned that only 20 percent ofresidents in the catchment area hadheard of the Hennepin CountyCommunity Court, which suggestedthat more could be done to educatecitizens about the court’s existenceand its role in the neighborhood.However, officials were encouragedto learn that a large majority ofresidents supported the court’s keyfeatures, such as having offendersperform community service andlinking offenders with court-monitoreddrug treatment.

Although a survey can offer a senseof whether progress has been madein public opinion, the results may notstand up to scrutiny from academicresearchers. A survey designed to

■ Should be mailed out and filled inby respondents on their own orfilled in by trained surveyors.

■ Should cover one topic or severaltopics.

■ Should be conducted in-house, byconsultants, or by volunteers.

Regardless of the method used, asurvey should be simple and short.Remember that you are asking citizensto volunteer time; do not keep themany longer than absolutely necessaryor you may cause resentment. Somesurveyors conduct a survey test runwith a few community members andthen ask for their feedback. Samplefeedback questions include thefollowing:

■ Were there questions you did notlike or that did not make sense?

■ Was the wording confusing?

■ Were there questions missing thatyou wish had been asked?

Types of Questions

In general, community justice plannersrely on three types of questions:

7

The survey process can be brokendown into three major steps:

design, collection, and analysis.

Design

The design phase involves the actualwriting of the survey. First andforemost, a survey needs to be clear:use plain language and simplesentences to reduce the chance forconfusion. Experience also has taughtthat multiple-choice questions withpreset answers (e.g., yes or no andmultipoint scales, such as big problem,problem, and not a problem) are moreuseful than questions that invite open-ended responses (such as in your ownwords and describe what you thinkabout). Preset answers are easier to useto code responses and analyze data,and people seem to prefer multiple-choice questions to help organize theirthoughts.

Available Resources

The nature of a survey also depends onavailable resources. Staff size, time,money, and survey expertise determinewhether a survey:

■ Is best administered by phone or inperson.

Survey Process

Collection

There are many different ways toadminister a survey. The Denverdistrict attorney’s communityprosecution program sponsored asurvey in which teenagers whowere members of a special youthempowerment team asked 225 of theirpeers about things they liked anddisliked in their neighborhood. In WestPalm Beach, Florida, community courtplanners adapted the Red Hook surveyto meet their community’s needs—sending staff to conduct 60 interviewsamong targeted residences andbusinesses in the catchment area andrepeating the survey every year totrack changes over time. Others partnerwith local universities: Memphis’Community Court contacted theUniversity of Memphis’ Departmentof Criminology and Criminal Justice,which used graduate assistants toconduct both phone and in-personsurveys during the course of asemester. Some hire outsideconsultants: Vermont’s Departmentof Corrections hired a private marketresearch firm to conduct a statewidetelephone survey about the departmentand its proposed reparative probationprogram. Similarly, the communitycourt project in Minneapolis hired alocal survey research firm to do atargeted telephone survey within thecourt’s catchment area. The surveyasked residents about their knowledgeand opinion of the project and itsvarious components (e.g., communityservice, job training, and drugtreatment).

1. Those that relate to specificprogram components (e.g., Wouldyou support allowing low-leveloffenders to perform communityservice in the neighborhood? If so,what kinds of projects would youlike to see them perform?).

2. Those that solicit opinions aboutneighborhood strengths andweaknesses (e.g., Do you thinklocal schools or churches or socialservices agencies are doing anexcellent, good, fair, or poor job?).

3. Those that obtain overallimpressions about the communityand provide a baseline for futuresurveys (e.g., Do you feel safe inyour home, in the subway, or in thepark? What is the most pressingissue facing the community—drugabuse, juvenile delinquency, crime,housing problems, or somethingelse?).

Planners can get ideas for questionsby looking at other surveys, includingthe National Crime VictimizationSurvey—a telephone survey conductedby the Bureau of Justice Statistics(for more information, visitwww.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict.htm)—and the Red Hook survey (seeappendix A). In addition, the U.S.Department of Justice’s Weed andSeed national evaluation includes asurvey that measures communityperceptions of neighborhoods, publicsafety, and the criminal justice system.

8

Training

Whether the survey relies onvolunteers or paid professionals,everyone conducting the surveyshould receive basic training thatcovers how to ask the questions, fillout the survey form, and make theexperience pleasant and productive.The goal of training is to makesurveyors comfortable with the formsand the target area. For example,some volunteers may be nervousabout asking questions and botheringpeople. More experienced surveyorsmay be anxious about going into anew neighborhood, especially ifcertain areas seem dangerous. Trainingcan include role plays of differentsituations, discussions about safetyprecautions, and practice runs of thesurvey to allay these concerns.

Volunteers

Community members make the bestsurvey volunteers. In Red Hook,citizens were more willing to stopand take time to answer questions ifthe surveyor was also from theneighborhood. In this way, Red Hookvolunteers were able to break down atraditional barrier that stands betweensurveyors and participants and fosterthe trust needed to engage participants.“The majority of the times, peoplecome to the door and know me. Theysay, ‘Oh it’s you, Natasha, I’ll do yoursurvey,’” said Natasha Richie, a RedHook surveyor. “They feel better andmore secure in talking to me.”

Target Area

A successful survey also needs a cleartarget area. This can be a geographicboundary or a demographic group,such as teenagers, the elderly, singleparents, or other groups. In Red Hook,the target area is clearly defined by anelevated highway that physicallydivides the neighborhood from therest of Brooklyn. This target area issubdivided into different geographiczones, and surveyors are assigned toeach zone and work together to ensureadequate coverage of their area.Similarly, West Palm Beach divided itscatchment area into six subareas andcompleted 10 surveys from each areato ensure a representative sample.

Analysis

The extent to which planners can usesurvey results depends in large part ontheir ability to analyze the data. Someprojects have turned to experts—agraduate student familiar withstatistical research or a local collegeprofessor. This document does notdetail how to analyze data. Instead,here are a few pointers.

■ When selecting a software package,keep in mind the complexity ofthe survey and the number ofquestionnaires. To analyze smallsurveys, like the 60 questionnairescollected in West Palm Beach, abasic spreadsheet such as Lotus orExcel should be sufficient. Largersurveys in which hundreds of

9

questionnaires are completed everyyear, such as Red Hook’s, probablywill require a more flexible programsuch as Access or even SPSS.

■ Establish protocols for data entry.For example, those entering the dataneed to know what to do if morethan one answer is circled.

■ Another important point to rememberis that a survey can go beyondsimply tabulating responses toquestions. The survey data allowfor comparing responses betweensubgroups or examining trends overtime. This kind of analysis can helpplanners answer key questions suchas the following:

— How has the percentage ofresidents who see public

drinking, drug use, litter,loitering, or another specificproblem as a very seriousproblem changed from year toyear?

— Do older residents have adifferent assessment of theseriousness of local crime thanyounger residents?

— Do men and women wantdifferent types of services?

— Do African-American residentsapprove of police performancemore or less than Latinoresidents?

10

11

Much of the information containedin this monograph is drawn from

the experience of planners who workedon the development of the Red HookCommunity Justice Center, amultijurisdictional community court inthe heart of a low-income, high-crimeneighborhood in Brooklyn, New York.

Planning for the Justice Center startedin 1994, and in 1995, the centerlaunched its first program. The RedHook Public Safety Corps (Corps) isan AmeriCorps program with 50participants from the community whowork on crime-prevention and victim-assistance projects. For their work inthe Corps, participants receive a smallstipend, an education award, andvaluable work experience.

Design

The team quickly seized onto theCorps members as a potential vehiclefor completing a comprehensivecommunity survey. Greg Berman, theoriginal planner of the Justice Center,recalls, “We had obtained a prettygood picture of community needs frominterviews and focus groups, but wewanted more. We wanted to reach abroader segment of the community.The Corps allowed us to make sure

that what we were hearing was trulyrepresentative of the entireneighborhood’s concerns.”

Berman and the rest of the teamcreated an ambitious questionnaire—9 pages with approximately 170questions—that was designed to take20 minutes to administer. Althoughthe survey is long, communityresidents have been supportive. ShonaBowers, a life-long resident of RedHook who now runs the Corps, says,“Before becoming involved with theCorps myself, I remember seeingCorps members walking all over theneighborhood with clipboards. I’dthink, ‘Look, they’re back for thatsurvey.’ It felt good to see themcoming back to ask us what we, asresidents, wanted for our community.”Bowers is not the only resident whoknows about the survey: In the 2000survey, 37 percent of the respondentsstated that they had participated inprevious surveys.

Collection

This survey, which is now known as“Operation Data,” serves two principalpurposes: to measure communityperceptions of neighborhood safetyand to spread the word about the

Red Hook Survey

program. To meet these goals,surveyors speak to as many people aspossible in a 2-week period. With 50full-time interviewers, the surveyreaches hundreds of people each year.In 2000, for example, 960 peoplewere interviewed, which represents9 percent of Red Hook’s 10,846residents (or 18 percent ofhouseholds). With so manyquestionnaires to enter and numbersto process, the entire process takesabout 5 months from the first day ofsurveying to the dissemination of afinal report. The bulk of this time isdevoted to entering data; eachquestionnaire takes approximately20–25 minutes to enter into thedatabase.

Training

Because most Corps members havehad no experience in administering asurvey, surveyors undergo a full day oftraining. This training covers, amongother things, interviewing techniques(including tone of voice and speakingslowly and clearly), safety procedures(interviewers are told always to travelin groups and never go inside anapartment), and role plays of difficultscenarios (hostile, unresponsive, ornervous participants). Membersperform a 2-hour test run that covers asmall target area. After the test run,Justice Center staff give feedback oninterviewing techniques and thevolunteers have a chance to discussany issues or problems that come up.

Corps members are divided into 10groups of 5 members each. Each grouphas two pairs: one person asks thequestions while the other records theanswers. The fifth member serves asthe group captain to oversee the day’swork. The captain fills out a buildinglog to track which households havebeen contacted and is responsible fortroubleshooting when problems arise.By reviewing the daily building logssubmitted by each team captain,program staff can ensure that thesurveyors are covering the targetedarea in a comprehensive and effectivemanner.

Obstacles

Over the years, the Red Hook surveyhas faced two main obstacles:language barriers and timing.

A significant number of residentsspeak only Spanish, making the surveydifficult to complete for surveyors whospeak only English. This problem isaddressed by making sure the surveyteams have both Spanish- and English-speaking members.

The other major challenge is findingpeople at home. People often are notat home when surveyors come.Therefore, the survey is done bothduring the day and in the evening.Surveyors also go to more than justapartment buildings; they visit thelocal health center, businesses,banks, supermarkets, and housingdevelopment offices during rent time.

12

Analysis

The annual Red Hook survey is amassive undertaking that requires thetime and attention of numerous staff—managers, researchers, and others atthe Justice Center. While the effort issignificant, so are the benefits. Thesurvey has gone a long way towardbuilding local support for the JusticeCenter and shaping Justice Centerprograms. Mansky, the coordinator ofthe Justice Center, says that “OperationData is like a map. It tells us wherewe’ve been, where we are, and wherewe’re going. Mayor [Edward I.] Kochused to go around the city askingpeople, ‘How’m I doing?’ Well, thisis our way of going around theneighborhood and asking folks howthe Justice Center is doing.”

Over the years, the survey has yieldeda number of surprises. Despite RedHook’s “Wild West” reputation as aplace where drugs and gun violencerule the streets, the residents whoparticipate in Operation Data are alsoconcerned about quality-of-lifeconditions. Each year, more than 60percent cite garbage, littering, poorstreet lighting, and rundown parks asmajor neighborhood problems.

Less surprising but equally distressing,Operation Data revealed high levels offear in the neighborhood, especiallyin the early years. Although residentsreport feeling safe in their apartments,the moment they step outside theirdoors, their feelings change dramatically.One out of three feels unsafe in theelevator or the building lobby.

Survey participants respond to realproblems they face every day—urinein their elevators, graffiti in theirstairwells, and lights broken by drugdealers eager to work in darkness.Many feel these conditions create anatmosphere where more serious crimecan flourish.

New Programs

In response, the Justice Center hasdedicated a team of Corps members tomake physical improvements in andaround the Red Hook Houses. Workingwith the New York City HousingAuthority, team members repair brokenlocks and hallway lights, conduct safetyinspections, and organize graffiticleanups. “Our work makes a directimpact on living conditions for people inthe Houses. Take our safety inspections:by immediately reporting when anelevator ceiling lock has broken, weprevent kids from riding on top ofthe elevators for fun, which can beextremely dangerous,” remarks RobertoJulbe, a former Corps member who isnow on staff at the Justice Center.

Safety inspections and repairs byCorps members are examples of howthe survey results can affect JusticeCenter programs. Another example isthe Red Hook Youth Court. Over aperiod of 2 years, community residentscited youth crime as a problem andexpressed concern about the lack ofservices and jobs for youth in theneighborhood. In response, the JusticeCenter turned these concerns into aprogram for local teenagers. Opened inApril 1998, the Red Hook Youth Court

13

Mansky explains, “The survey drovehome the point that there was acommunity need for mediation.” Thisdemand, expressed through the survey,made mediation a prominentcomponent of the Justice Center. Themediation office is located centrally onthe main floor and across from thecourtroom. If needed, a judge caneasily send a case across the hall formediation.

As planners had hoped, the Red Hooksurvey has also become a vehicle topromote the Justice Center’s programsamong local residents. In addition tosoliciting answers to survey questions,Corps members discuss the purpose ofthe Justice Center. Throughout aninterview, Corps members take theopportunity to describe the projectand its services, inviting participantsto the Justice Center to see what ishappening. The survey is valuablewhen planners craft communitypresentations, respond to pressrequests for information, and completefunding applications. The surveyresults also are disseminated to theJustice Center’s partners as part of itscollaboration-building efforts. Inaddition, these results are used as partof an independent evaluation of theJustice Center that is being conductedby Columbia University’s Center forViolence Research and Prevention.

14

addresses low-level juvenile offensesby training teenagers to serve asjudges, jurors, and advocates for theirpeers. This court determines sanctionsfor offenders involved in infractionssuch as truancy, graffiti, and disorderlyconduct. Because these sanctions aredesigned in part to pay back thecommunity harmed by these quality-of-life offenses, the 1998 survey askedcitizens what sanctions they wouldlike the Youth Court to use. Based onthe residents’ opinions, Youth Courtsanctions now include communityservice projects (e.g., communitygardening and park cleanups), essays,and letters of apology.

The next year’s survey (1999) allowedthe Justice Center to track whether theYouth Court had made its presenceknown in the community. That surveyshowed that the majority of residents(54 percent) had heard about theprogram, and more than 75 percentof that group was satisfied with it.

Partnerships

The survey’s impact, however, goesfar beyond programming. It hasstrengthened partnerships with otheragencies. For example, residents’consistently high demand formediation convinced Safe Horizon,the largest provider of mediationservices in New York City, to providea staff person at the Justice Center.

15

In many ways, the circumstances inRed Hook were ideal for conducting

a large survey. A large cadre ofcommunity members was ready to godoor to door. It is a relatively small,well-defined community, making iteasier to reach every corner of theneighborhood. Further, on-staffresearchers were available to help designthe survey and analyze the results.

However, it is possible to conduct asurvey with far fewer resources. Thereare numerous ways to approach asurvey—from a professional projectconducted by consultants (as inVermont) to less formal initiatives(like the youth survey carried out byteenagers in Denver). In West PalmBeach, Florida, a survey of 60residents helped community courtplanners develop a community serviceprogram. Likewise, the youth survey inDenver helped highlight teenagers’ topcommunity concerns: crime (includinggraffiti, gangs, and shootings) and

quality-of-life problems (such ascleaner alleys, better street lighting,and improved traffic controls). Inresponse, members of the Denverdistrict attorney’s youth empowermentteam are trying to have more stop signsinstalled in the neighborhood and areorganizing neighborhood cleanups.

When it is well executed, a survey canbuild planners’ knowledge about acommunity, cultivate the goodwill ofstakeholders, nurture partnerships,and measure a program’s effectivenessover time. Combined with othermethods of community outreach—such as convening focus groups,attending meetings of neighborhoodorganizations, and creating communityadvisory boards—a survey can helpensure that a community justice projectmakes the neighborhood safer bybuilding stronger ties between criminaljustice agencies and the communitiesthey serve.

Conclusion

17

Appendix A: Sample Questionnaire

The following is a shortened version of the survey administered annually by theRed Hook Community Justice Center in Brooklyn, New York. Questions addressquality of life, personal safety, community resources, and justice system issues.

Red Hook Public Safety Corps—Operation DataCOMMUNITY SURVEY

Opening Remarks: Hello, my name is _____________. I’m with the Red Hook PublicSafety Corps. We’re conducting a survey to learn about the strengths and problemsof your neighborhood. Participation in this survey is voluntary, and your responseswill be kept confidential. This information is for research purposes only. The surveywill take about 20 minutes.

1. First, I have a few basic questions. What is your relationship to this

neighborhood?

1 Resident2 Merchant3 Worker4 Other: _________________________

2. How many years have you lived or worked in this neighborhood?

(If less than 1, put 0) __________________

3. In general, how do you feel about this neighborhood as a place to live or

work?

1 Very satisfied2 Somewhat satisfied3 Neutral4 Somewhat unsatisfied 5 Very unsatisfied

4. Over the past year, how would you rate the quality of life in the

neighborhood? Is the quality of life:

1 Very poor2 Poor 3 Okay 4 Good 5 Very good

5. In the past year, do you think the quality of life in the neighborhood has

improved, stayed the same, or declined?

1 Improved 2 Same 3 Declined

6. Let’s talk about the problems that may exist here. After each issue that I

state, tell me whether it is a:

1 - Very big problem 2 - Big problem

3 - Minor problem 4 - Not a problem

1 2 3 4 Public drug sales 1 2 3 4 Fighting in public 1 2 3 4 Public drug use 1 2 3 4 Public drinking 1 2 3 4 Mugging 1 2 3 4 Littering 1 2 3 4 Prostitution 1 2 3 4 Begging and panhandling 1 2 3 4 Domestic violence 1 2 3 4 Child neglect or abuse 1 2 3 4 Residential burglary 1 2 3 4 Vandalism 1 2 3 4 Shoplifting 1 2 3 4 Garbage on the streets 1 2 3 4 Graffiti 1 2 3 4 Rundown parks/green areas 1 2 3 4 Poor street repair/poor street lighting1 2 3 4 Abandoned property

7. When I say a location, tell me whether you feel very safe, safe, unsafe,

or very unsafe during the day:

1 - Very safe 2 - Safe

3 - Unsafe 4 - Very unsafe

1 2 3 4 On the street 1 2 3 4 In your home 1 2 3 4 In your lobby 1 2 3 4 In the elevator 1 2 3 4 In the stairways 1 2 3 4 On the way to and from the subway 1 2 3 4 At the local subway 1 2 3 4 In the stores 1 2 3 4 In the parks

18

8. For the same locations, tell me whether you feel very safe, safe, unsafe,

or very unsafe at night:

1 - Very safe 2 - Safe

3 - Unsafe 4 - Very unsafe

1 2 3 4 On the street1 2 3 4 In your home1 2 3 4 In your lobby 1 2 3 4 In the elevator 1 2 3 4 In the stairways 1 2 3 4 On the way to and from the subway 1 2 3 4 At the local subway 1 2 3 4 In the stores 1 2 3 4 In the parks

9. In what other places do you feel unsafe? ____________________

10. A: I want to stress again that all of your responses will be kept

confidential and will be used for research purposes only. Have you been

a victim of any of the following crimes within the past 12 months?

Yes No 1 2 Mugging/robbery 1 2 Rape/sexual assault 1 2 Domestic abuse 1 2 Child abuse 1 2 Burglary of home 1 2 Burglary of car 1 2 Theft of money or personal belongings1 2 Assault 1 2 Shooting 1 2 Stabbing 1 2 Other: ____________________________

B: CORPS MEMBER: If participant answers yes to any of these questions,

ask, “Was the offender under 18 years old?”

Yes No

1 2 Mugging/robbery 1 2 Rape/sexual assault 1 2 Domestic abuse 1 2 Child abuse 1 2 Burglary of home 1 2 Burglary of car 1 2 Theft of money or personal belongings1 2 Assault 1 2 Shooting 1 2 Stabbing 1 2 Other: ____________________________

19

11. What other problems is the neighborhood facing?_____________________

12. Are the following items strengths or weaknesses of the neighborhood?

Identify each as:

1 - Very strong 2 - Somewhat strong 3 - Not strong or weak

4 - Somewhat weak 5 - Very weak

1 2 3 4 5 Tenant association or block association 1 2 3 4 5 Churches 1 2 3 4 5 Soup kitchens 1 2 3 4 5 Health clinics/medical centers 1 2 3 4 5 Afterschool programs 1 2 3 4 5 Economic/business development programs 1 2 3 4 5 Recreational centers 1 2 3 4 5 Schools 1 2 3 4 5 Parks/public spaces 1 2 3 4 5 Stores 1 2 3 4 5 Social services agencies 1 2 3 4 5 Red Hook Public Safety Corps

13. What other organizations/leaders/programs in the neighborhood do you

consider strengths or weaknesses of the community?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

14. In your experience, is police response excellent, good, satisfactory, or

unsatisfactory in your neighborhood?

1 Excellent 2 Good 3 Satisfactory 4 Unsatisfactory 5 No opinion

15. Would you characterize the relationship between the police and your

community as:

1 Very positive 2 Somewhat positive 3 Neutral 4 Somewhat negative 5 Very negative

16. Would you characterize the district attorney’s office’s response to

complaints and issues raised by the Red Hook community as:

1 Very positive 2 Somewhat positive 3 Neutral 4 Somewhat negative 5 Very negative

20

17. Would you characterize the relationship between the court system and

your community as:

1 Very positive 2 Somewhat positive 3 Neutral 4 Somewhat negative 5 Very negative

18. Have you heard of the Red Hook Community Justice

Center, the community court? (If no, skip to #74)

1 Yes2 No

19. Where did you hear of the Red Hook Community Justice Center? From a:

1 Friend 2 Family 3 Local organization (If yes, which one?________________________)4 Newspaper/poster 5 Red Hook Public Safety Corps 6 Other: _______________________________

20. In general, how do you feel about having a community-based justice

center in your community or nearby?

1 Positive 2 Neutral 3 Negative

21. If they were available to you at the Red Hook Community Justice Center,

would you use the following services?

Yes No 1 2 Entitlements and housing advocacy assistance 1 2 Medical care, including HIV, STD, and TB testing 1 2 English as a second language classes 1 2 Drug treatment 1 2 GED classes 1 2 Job training and job referral services 1 2 Neighborhood legal services for defendants 1 2 Childcare for court users 1 2 Mediation/conflict resolution

22. What other services would you want or use in the center?_______________

23. What gender are you? CORPS MEMBER: You can answer this from

observation.

1 Male2 Female

21

24. What ethnic/racial group do you consider yourself a part of? [optional]

1 Black 2 White 3 Native American 4 Asian 5 Latino 6 Other: _______________________________________

25. How old are you?

1 18 or under 2 19 to 25 3 26 to 40 4 41 to 60 5 61 or over

26. How many people are there in your household? ________________

27. How many of them are children? ________________

Comments? __________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

Thank you for your time!

22

23

Appendix B: Sample Survey Report

To give a sense of the types ofreports that can result from this

data collection, the following areexcerpts from the Red Hook surveyreport produced in 2000, using datacollected in 1999. This report includesfindings over time and has a formatthat is readable and accessible. Itattempts to summarize the findingsand also present them in a way thatwill allow readers to draw their ownconclusions about the data. Thisflexibility adds to the credibility ofthe report’s data.

A. Summary

In October 1999, 50 members of theRed Hook Public Safety Corps, anAmeriCorps community serviceprogram, administered a communitywidehousehold survey in Red Hook,Brooklyn, for the fifth consecutiveyear. Known as Operation Data, thesurvey focused mainly on residents’perceptions of neighborhood publicsafety and quality of life, existingcommunity resources, and the criminaljustice system. The 50 members of theRed Hook Public Safety Corps (themajority of whom are Red Hookresidents) completed 968 interviews—a sizeable sample of a community withonly 10,846 residents. The survey

reached 9 percent of the community or18 percent of the households in RedHook (the respondents reported amedian household size of two people).

In teams of five people, the Corpscovered all major geographical areasin Red Hook—the Red Hook Houses,businesses, and private residences.Team members went door-to-door tohouses and, in some cases, to variousorganizations (e.g., the HousingAuthority management office and thelocal health clinic) to find residentswho were not at home. Theyadministered the survey in bothSpanish and English.

The data suggest the followingconclusions:

Satisfaction with Red Hook isleveling off. The percentage of peoplewho are satisfied with Red Hook (50percent) has decreased slightly froma peak of 57 percent in 1998. Inaddition, after 4 years, this year marksthe first decrease in the percentage ofpeople who feel the quality of life inRed Hook is improving. In the 2000report, 51 percent said the quality oflife was better than last year, comparedto 62 percent in the 1999 report, 63percent in the 1998 report, and 34percent in the 1997 report.

problems in Red Hook. While drugsremain the most prevalent problem(selling at 82 percent and using at 72percent), littering, garbage, publicdrinking, public fighting, and graffitiwere all identified as problems bymore than 60 percent of theparticipants. Child abuse/neglect,panhandling, burglary, prostitution,shoplifting, and mugging were citedless frequently.

Over the 4 years, it seems violence ison the rise: 62 percent felt that publicfighting was a big problem, up from42 percent in 1996. Concerns aboutmugging and burglary increased bymore than 5 percent. In addition, morethan 35 percent reported carrying aweapon, either sometimes or always,as a safety precaution. In contrast,fewer participants cited streets andabandoned property as problemscompared to the last 2 years.

Victimization. Indications that violenceis on the rise are further evident in termsof victimization. Looking over the past5 years, the percentage who reportknowing someone who was a victim ofviolent crime has increased. The greatestincreases were in domestic abuse (morethan 20 percent in 1999 compared to10 percent in 1996), rape/sexualassault (15 percent in 1999 comparedto 6 percent in 1995), and child abuse(more than 16 percent in 1999compared to 11 percent in 1996).More than 18 percent said they knewa victim of a shooting, assault, orrobbery.

24

Violence in Red Hook is a bigproblem. Violence seems to be onthe rise in Red Hook. The percentageof people who report fighting andmugging as a major problem hasincreased steadily since 1996—from42 percent to 62 percent for fightingand from 40 percent to 51 percent formugging. In addition, more than 35percent of the participants reportcarrying a weapon as a safetyprecaution.

Fear in Red Hook is down. At thesame time, the level of fear seems tobe decreasing substantially. In 1998,more than 65 percent reported feelingunsafe at night in subways, lobbies,and streets, and only 45 percentreported feeling unsafe in similarareas in 1999.

Improved perceptions of thecriminal justice system. For thefourth straight year, the percentageof respondents who rated the police,courts, and district attorney as positiveincreased. Between 1996 and 1999,positive perceptions of criminal justiceagencies increased from 14 percent to38 percent for the police, from 10percent to 30 percent for the courts,and from 9 percent to 28 percent forthe district attorney.

B. NeighborhoodQuality of Life

For the fourth straight year, quality-of-life issues still dominated theparticipants’ responses as the biggest

percent of the survey participants hadheard of the Youth Court. When askedabout their satisfaction with theprogram, 68 percent reported beingsatisfied or very satisfied, a slightdecrease from 76 percent a year earlier.

Other community services. Althoughthe majority of respondents ratedseveral community agencies (e.g., theCorps, schools, afterschool programs,and churches) as strengths, this stillrepresents a lower percentage ofpeople than in 1998. The biggestchanges from the previous year werethe percentage of those who felt soupkitchens were strengths (increasedfrom 31 percent to 44 percent); socialservices agencies were strengths(increased from 35 percent to 45percent); and economic/businessdevelopment programs were strengths(increased from 37 percent to 46percent).

D. Criminal Justice

When participants were asked abouttheir opinion of various criminaljustice agencies, they were mostpositive about the Red HookCommunity Justice Center, followedby the police, judicial system, anddistrict attorney. Overall support forthe justice system has increasedsubstantially since 1996: thepercentage who feel positive increasedfor the police (from 14 percent to 38percent), for the judicial system (from10 percent to 30 percent), and for thedistrict attorney’s office (from 9percent to 28 percent).

C. CommunityResources

This section is crucial to anycommunity justice survey in that itshows that you care about what thecommunity thinks about yourprograms that operate in theneighborhood.

Red Hook Public Safety Corps. TheCorps’ work in the community isbecoming better known. Knowledgeof the Corps increased 7 percent—from 61 percent who had heard of theCorps in 1998 to 68 percent in 1999.Of those who had heard of the Corps,most knew from friends (41 percent)and family (24 percent). More than 60percent said they were satisfied withthe Corps, down slightly from 67percent the previous year.

In terms of the services offered by theCorps, the most well known are themost visible or long-term projects,such as the Red Hook Youth BaseballLeague (85 percent), Coffey Parkclean-up activities (82 percent),community gardens (80 percent), andgraffiti removal projects (79 percent).Mediation remained the least knownproject of all the Corps’ servicesduring the fourth year.

Red Hook Youth Court. In only itssecond year, the Youth Court—aprogram that trains youth to serve asjudges, jurors, and attorneys to hearcases of youth who commit low-leveloffenses such as truancy and fareevasion—has made its presence knownin the community. More than 58

25

Center, more than 80 percent said yesto all of the listed services. Theservice that was seen as most helpfulwas job training, followed by daycare,law-related education, and a landlord/tenant resource center.

26

More people are hearing about theJustice Center. Almost 60 percent ofthe survey participants had heard aboutthe Justice Center—up 5 percent fromthe previous year. When asked if theywould use services at the Justice

27

Sources for FurtherInformation

Center for CourtInnovation

The winner of an Innovations inAmerican Government Award fromthe Ford Foundation and Harvard’sJohn F. Kennedy School ofGovernment, the Center for CourtInnovation is a unique public-privatepartnership that promotes new thinkingabout how courts can solve difficultproblems like addiction, quality-of-life crime, domestic violence, and childneglect. The center functions as theNew York State Unified Court System’sindependent research and developmentarm, creating demonstration projectsthat test new approaches to problemsthat have resisted conventionalsolutions. The center’s problem-solving courts include the nation’sfirst community court (MidtownCommunity Court in New York) aswell as drug courts, domestic violencecourts, youth courts, family treatmentcourts, and others.

Nationally, the center disseminates thelessons learned from its experimentsin New York, helping courts acrossthe country launch their own problem-solving innovations. The centercontributes to the national conversationabout justice by convening roundtableconversations that bring together

leading academics and practitionersand by contributing to policy andprofessional journals. The center alsoprovides hands-on technical assistance,advising court and criminal justiceplanners throughout the country aboutprogram and technology design.

For more information, call212–397–3050 or e-mailinfo@courtinnovation.org.

Bureau of JusticeAssistance

810 Seventh Street NW.Washington, DC 20531202–616–6500Fax: 202–305–1367Web site: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

Bureau of JusticeAssistance Clearinghouse

P.O. Box 6000Rockville, MD 20849–60001–800–688–4252Web site: www.ncjrs.org

Clearinghouse staff are availableMonday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to7 p.m. eastern time. Ask to be placedon the BJA mailing list.

Bureau of Justice AssistanceInformation

For more indepth information about BJA, its programs, and its fundingopportunities, requesters can call the BJA Clearinghouse. The BJAClearinghouse, a component of the National Criminal Justice ReferenceService (NCJRS), shares BJA program information with state and localagencies and community groups across the country. Informationspecialists are available to provide reference and referral services,publication distribution, participation and support for conferences, andother networking and outreach activities. The clearinghouse can bereached by:

❒ MailP.O. Box 6000Rockville, MD 20849–6000

❒ Visit2277 Research BoulevardRockville, MD 20850

❒ Telephone1–800–688–4252Monday through Friday8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.eastern time

❒ Fax301–519–5212

❒ BJA Home Pagewww.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

❒ NCJRS Home Pagewww.ncjrs.org

❒ E-mailaskncjrs@ncjrs.org

❒ JUSTINFO NewsletterE-mail to listproc@ncjrs.orgLeave the subject line blankIn the body of the message,type:subscribe justinfo [your name]

U.S

. Dep

artm

ent

of J

usti

ce

Off

ice

of J

ustic

e Pr

ogra

ms

Bur

eau

of J

usti

ce A

ssis

tanc

e

Was

hing

ton,

DC

205

31*NCJ~197109*