Police Statistics

An Informed Look

The Easton Police Department recently announced 2009 reported crime statistics in the form of UCR Data. Like most residents I’m interested in whether crime in my city is rising or falling and more importantly why. We should applaud Chief Palmer’s dedication to our great city and give a nod of thanks to our fine officers in blue who are on our streets and serving our community.

The hard working Joes of our city, who pay for our law enforcement efforts, deserve to understand exactly what UCR data is and more specifically what it tells us and what it doesn’t. It is a matter of intellectual transparency for policy makers to fully disclose the intent, strengths and limitations of data collection, like local crime statistics, to the public.

While it stands to reason that with a significant investment into more law enforcement resources crime should be expected to decrease, UCR data only provides one piece of the complex puzzle of crime reduction. Though the statistics have value UCR data has limitations and does not necessarily paint an accurate or thorough picture of crime in our community. According to the FBI ‘the UCR does not represent the actual amount of crime.’ There are simply too many variables that drive crime up or down that UCR data does not capture or define.

Unfortunately over the years the UCR data has become the singular tool to inform the public of the state of crime and safety in a community. The data should not be presented in a vacuum. It should be folded into as only one part of a broader and more comprehensive study of crime trends, statistics, variables, demographics, surveys and anecdotal evidence. Otherwise public policy designed to prevent crime will largely fuel a ‘law enforcement dominated approach’ (OJJDP) rather than other strategies, tactics and programs that are often more inclusive, effective and sustainable at reducing and preventing crime.


UCR data only compiles reported crime not unreported crime. According to the Police Foundation nearly 50% of crime goes unreported including 56% of larceny and 59% of sex offense crimes. It is possible, using the UCR method alone, to report a decline in reported crime while unreported crime has increased. It is one of the reasons why the FBI, the clearing house for UCR data, strongly recommends the inclusion of the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). This survey collects information from victims who are unwilling report a crime to police. UCR data is also a hierarchal coding system, meaning that if two crimes are committed at the same time, such as a rape and robbery, only the rape is reported. And like any reporting it subject to human error.


The UCR data provided to Easton residents provides limited information about crime trends. For instance our gang growth, particularly among the CRIPS, is increasing, not only in numbers but in severity of initiations. While open air drug markets seem to be diminishing in parts of the West Ward they seem to be increasing in other parts of the city. Graffiti is on the decline, due no doubt to the excellent removal efforts of EPD, but also because of a growing trend for gangs to mark territory less with graffiti and to communicate more with Twitter, social networking and visually recognizable differences. It doesn’t include the NCVS and dosen't tell us if unreported crime is rising and why. It doesn’t include surveys and anecdotal evidence of crime, particularly among youth, from our non-profit organizations or hospitals or schools—many of which are in different jurisdictions but the crime is being committed by Easton residents (primarily youth).

Those trends are crucial to how we will address crime in the future and how we shape policy around it. As an example, HopeUnseen fielded numerous calls last year for gang-related activity. Over a dozen of those calls with follow-up investigation revealed unreported crimes ranging from [alleged] assaults to burglary. HopeUnseen is certainly not alone in these experiences but the information will never be included in city-wide crime statistics or reporting. Does it take into consideration the changing demographics of the city or the elimination of a significant block of housing in South Side?

Have the activities of the Guardian Angels been cross-referenced with drops in reported crime during particular days and times? That is to say, while the Guardian Angels were patrolling, did EPD also notice drops in calls and crimes. If so doesn’t that point to the effectiveness of the Angels? Is the street outreach to youth conducted by organizations in the city responsible for a drop in crime? As an example, with the help of other non-profits I was involved with dismantling an emerging gang in the West Ward in cooperation with the police. As a result it led to less crime in the form of assaults and property damage, not to mention the number of conflict resolutions and peace-making between gangs that has been accomplished on the streets. What about the police basketball leagues? Was crime down during those times of day as compared to other years? How has the growth of our Latino community affected crime? Evidence points to the Latino population being responsible for stabilizing marginalized communities in many cases.

The UCR report also tells us nothing about costs. More police officers, more arrests mean more adjudication and potential incarceration costs of up to of $50,000 from arrest through the first year of incarceration per conviction. This old paradigm approach to crime perpetuates a cycle of raising taxes to fuel law enforcement resources, increasing arrests to drop crime while continuing to fill our prisons. Currently, Northampton County is planning on the tax payers shelling out at least $107 million dollars for yet another prison expansion.

If street outreach or patrols affect drops in crime and are at a far less cost than police tactics, then isn’t it something the tax payers of our city, particularly in this economy, want to fund over more law enforcement? Does it make more sense for the city to employ street outreach workers than police officers if the result is the same or better with a much lower price tag? If we could pay someone $25 an hour in a strategic capacity to curb crime just as effectively doesn't that make more sense than paying an officer $50 an hour in overtime?Surveys indicate that 66% of Americans favor funding rehabilitation through education and job training is the best way to reduce crime. 63% believe drug users should be treated rather than incarcerated and 85% value youth prevention and intervention over incarceration.

Other variables should be considered. Chief Palmer, while graciously crediting others and humbly acknowledging that the statistics were not due to ‘the police department alone’ did not (to my knowledge) point to specific reasons or data that would detail how other organizations or ‘social influences’ affected crime. The entire reporting process, while recognizing others, is still solely collected and disseminated through a law enforcement lens. How other organizations and social influences may have affected crime statistically is critical to understanding the affect on crime and trends in Easton. Not to know how Weed & Seed, task forces, local organizations, economic conditions, housing, school strategies, health providers, demographics and social influences affect the crime statistics severely limits the accuracy of the data and the ability to properly shape policy around it. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ) critical variables include; economic conditions, cultural factors, population stability including transient patterns, housing, urbanization, population density and demographics, judicial and probation policies, citizen crime reporting practices of citizenry, family conditions, etc.

If our statistical crime reporting method only represents the efforts of law enforcement then legislators will continue to shape policy through a law enforcement dominated approach—largely reflected in the city of Easton. Effective crime reduction is not solely the job of the police. In order to understand the effectiveness of crime reduction the inclusion and solicitation of a much broader body of evidence must be collected, digested and disseminated.


Why including the whole community in the process is necessary. I’m a big supporter of a ‘public police review and advisory board’ in our city for a number of reasons. A more comprehensive approach to crime reporting promoting greater involvement by non-profits, faith organizations, courts, judges, schools, legislators and residents is one of them. Including researchers, practitioners and sociologists who can make sense of the data to help steer public policy is another.

The degree in which policy makers include a whole body of evidence to determine crime statistics reflects their commitment to include, empower and resource the whole community in the job of crime reduction and prevention.

There is no doubt our police department is working hard. But so are residents. One of the key messages of the ‘High Point West End Initiative,’ a highly successful crime/violence reduction strategy now being adopted by communities around the country, is that communities and police departments had to ‘work smarter not harder.’ To some degree the drops in reported crime statistics reflect that in Easton. But there is a lot more room to work smarter and more progressively and creatively as many other communities are finding out. This will not only alleviate the burden from the shoulders of the police department it will place responsibility of crime reduction in the hands of the residents and organizations while empowering them with the resources to do so.

At the risk of putting in a thumb tack with a sledge hammer, I would add that from a personal perspective I prefer not to live in a community that experiences drops in crime because of an overwhelming police presence or investment. I don’t join in the chorus of ‘arrests are up and crime is down’ as though it is something we should applaud—I find it a sad statement about how we understand the nature of crime, incarceration and restoration. I want to live in a city where crime and arrest are down because we’re employing strategies and tactics that are redemptive and restorative to the end that it transforms repeat offenders out of a life of crime and keeps youth from following all too familiar paths to crime.

While it doesn’t preclude the necessity of incarcerating certain individuals, I want to see more offenders become productive citizens paying taxes rather than tax payers paying for them to be continually incarcerated. I want to see youth, of all ages, allowed in our parks because our efforts are so focused on healthy community rather than just a safe one. This of course does not solely fall at the feet of the EPD. It rests at the threshold of our legislators, judges, the good citizens of Easton, the EPD the rest of our community.

Easton could be trail blazers in the Valley setting a new precedence to crime reduction. A comprehensive understanding of crime statistics leading to strategic prevention and reduction well beyond the scope of law enforcement could begin to turn that wheel.