Sweet Spots for Hot Spots? A Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Two Patrol Strategies

Abstract

Research QuestionCan police substantially reduce targeted patrol time without increasing crime and disorder in crime hot spots already receiving high levels of patrol, at high-risk times, to find a more cost-effective ‘sweet spot’ level of patrol staffing for each hot spot?DataMerseyside Police measured police presence every 5 min via GPS location trackers from body-worn police radios for five pairs of matched geo-fenced hot spots of crime and disorder in a larger night-time economy area. Crime and incident data were also collected in each of the ten hot spots, over two nights on each of six consecutive weekends, with matched crime data from the same 12 nights 1 year earlier, and matching GPS data from two weekend nights before the 6-week experiment.MethodsThe research design was a Maryland-Scale Level 4 test in which a group of five pairs of hot spots was randomly divided into one member of each pair receiving substantially reduced patrol time compared to the standard level received by the other member of the pair. The five experimental hot spots received at least 12–15 min of police presence every hour. Higher levels of patrol were maintained or increased in the control group consisting of the other five hot spots. Patrol time in the ‘reduced patrol’ experimental group was tracked and supervised closely with weekly individual feedback to a uniformed team of one sergeant and three constables. Another 40 uniformed officers working the larger area (including the five control group hot spots) were tracked to ensure they stayed out of the experimental hot spots.FindingsThe experiment delivered 35% less police time in treatment hot spots than in patrol hot spots. Total incidents reported by citizens to police dropped for the five ‘reduced-patrol’ experimental hot spots but not for the five high-patrol control spots. The cost of policing the experimental group was estimated at £2380, compared to £3977 for the control group, for financial cost savings of 40%.ConclusionsThe promising findings from this small-scale pilot study provide a good case for replications, using longer time periods or more hot spots for greater statistical power. If a range of patrol times per hour can be compared within matched pairs of hot spots, police commanders and patrol teams may be able to find an optimal ‘sweet spot’ of crime prevention without excess patrol for each kind of hot spot. This approach appears to offer great potential for redirecting police time to prevent even more harm in other places or with other kinds of police work.