Trudi Cooper 1 , Terence Love 3 , Fred Affleck 2 , Angela Durey 1

1. PATREC Research into Integrated Crime Prevention Strategies for Rail Station Environs: Preliminary Findings Trudi Cooper1, Terence Love3, Fred Affleck2, Angela Durey1 1 Edith Cowan University, Perth, WA, Australia2 Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia3 Design Out Crime and CPTED CentreContact person: Dr Terence Love admin@designoutcrime.org PATREC Research Forum19 September 2006

2. Problem • People gather in and around railway stations • Some people’s behaviour: • Is loud, possibly ‘anti-social’ but not strictly illegal • Perceived as threatening to others • Causes fear that deters some people (including young people) from using the rail system • How can agencies work together to address public safety concerns?

3. Why is interagency collaboration important? In rail environs, experience indicates that uncoordinated single agency responses: • Move ‘problem behaviour’ from one location to another at considerable expense • Increase youth alienation, which may increase anti-social behaviour • Lead agencies to blame others for problems

4. Research objectives • Improve perceptions of safety in rail environs • Develop collaborative relations between PTA staff, relevant local government agencies, community agencies and non-government youth workers. • Identify and test interventions to reduce conflict between: • Young people • Other members of travelling public • PTA security staff • Develop positive changes that will be sustainable • Develop transferable model of interagency collaboration

5. Four stage research project plan • Problem scoping • Plan ‘pilot’ interventions • Undertake interventions • Evaluation and final report

6. Problem scoping • Four high incident locations identified by PTA from incident statistics • Problem scoping with PTA AND agencies in each area used Soft Systems Methodology: • In-depth semi-structured interview with Senior Transit Guard (TG) Manager to gain understanding of perspectives of PTA on issues in each of the four locations. • In each of the four local government areas: Focus groups with youth workers and other relevant community organisations, to gain understanding of perceptions of issues, incidents, and causes of issues at each location (referred to as ‘local group’) • Combined data provided ‘rich pictures’ of problem contexts for each of the 4 locations

7. Map

8. Intervention planning-1 • Researchers facilitated meetings between ‘local groups’ and PTA representative(s) • Differences in purpose, priorities, interests and preconceptions of agency representatives were made explicit and acknowledged • Meeting participants examined, discussed, elaborated and corrected the information in the ‘rich picture’ for their location

9. Intervention planning -2 • Participants identified collaborative interventions • Social action facilitation was used to enable participants to : • Share and clarify goals, perspectives and priorities • Identify most pressing issues for change in each locality • Clarify parameters for local collaboration • Identify and plan actions as a group to positive improve the local situation

10. Project implementation • In each of the four locations: • Partner agencies collaborated to develop locally relevant projects in accordance with their existing work priorities • A small amount of seeding money to help with non-recurrent expenditure • Groups met regularly to: • Review progress • Identify barriers to implementation • Adjust interventions

11. Evaluation • The final report will: • Document the research • Describe the findings • Make recommendations for future directions

12. Research assumptions • Success depends on accurate & holistic understanding of cultural & environment factors that shape anti-social behaviour • Opportunities missed when individual agencies unaware of how they affect other agencies • Collaborators would have: • Apparently shared goals such as desire to ‘improve community perceptions of safety’ • Initially, different understandings of what these entail

13. Factors shaping research - 1 • OCP funding requires action research • Interagency collaboration notoriously difficult • Need to support participants avoid adopting solutions prematurely based on superficial understanding of contexts • Need to collect full breadth of knowledge available from participants

14. Factors shaping research - 2 • Need to help participants overcome feelings of hopelessness because problems seem intransigent • Strategies to assist youth development and support community safety • Agencies collaborate in discussion, but will take responsibility for, and manage, own projects

15. Research pitfalls • Potential misunderstandings about goals, priorities and roles of other agencies • Miscommunication if issues are oversimplified and viewed only from perspective of each agency’s central concerns • Group dynamics and interagency politics • Individual agencies dominate discussions or exclude others • Inaction because problem(s) seem too complex and intractable • People try to ‘shift the problem’ to another agency (related to feelings of helpless ness/ hopelessness above)

16. Research method The research combined: • Soft Systems Method for contextual data collection, analysis, choosing interventions • Group facilitation using Social Action method for supporting inter-agency collaboration, resolving group conflicts, overcoming apathy and hopelessness, and as a foundation for sustainable outcomes

17. Soft system method (SSM) • SSM used with participants to explicate: • The variety of problem issues • The relationships between agencies • Environmental issues (urban planning etc) • Organisation issues (e.g. rostering TGs) • Management and power issues • Identifying potential actors and strategies • Identifying which transformations were beneficial and possible • Identifying different perspectives and ways of looking that different participants brought to the table • Used SSM ‘rich pictures’ in problem scoping, intervention planning and evaluation

18. Social Action method • ‘Social Action’ methods were used in facilitating collaboration, action planning and and as the framework • Based on Friere’s ‘Participatory Action Research’ approach

19. Armadale • Main issue: Fear of assaults by other patrons, especially intoxicated patrons • Survey of young people’s perceptions and experiences of train travel, safety and security • Trial of collaborative project by Drug Arm to provide an on-train service for drug and alcohol affected young people Friday and Saturday nights • Liaison with the PTA community education project

20. Gosnells • Main issues: graffiti, station avoidance, rail track crossing, cultural issues, media perception of TGs • APLOs to become involved in TG cultural awareness training • New zip card distributed by youth services includes info about rights and responsibilities on trains and local youth services • Liaison with planners about future development and ‘design out crime’ initiatives • Liaison between youth agencies and PTA community education section about track safety

21. Joondalup • Main issue: assaults on TGs, importance of consistency and continuity • Informal liaison between shopping centre security, detached youth work team and TGs. • Liaison between Joondalup Youth Support Services and TG’s • New zip card distributed by youth services includes info about rights and responsibilities on trains and local youth services

22. Midland • Multiple issues: stolen identity, fines, family violence, conflict young people TGs, escalating offences, lack of Indigenous TGs • TGs have become involved with PCYC and Corridors College • Practical solutions found for stolen identity, personal details, and response to fines • Brokered three way partnership between PEEDAC, CYTS and PTA for Indigenous pre-TG course • Future issue: safe-house for young people

23. Other outcomes • Liaison between community agencies and PTA staff resolved important issues for individuals • Voluntarily involvement of some TGs with youth organisations • Provides forum to raise public concerns and enable constructive problem solving • Demonstrated responsiveness builds broad-based public support for the TG role

24. Conclusions – interagencycollaboration outcomes • Active resolution of problems has increased confidence of community organisations and is crucial to building a culture of public support for PTA staff • Agencies have greater understanding of goals and priorities of other organisations • Changes to participants’ perception of issues and approach to problem solving • Greater awareness of how decisions and operational choices positively or negatively affect work of other agencies • Research project has addressed sources of past misunderstandings

25. Conclusions – young people • Positive outcomes for young people, some concerns that young people raised have been quickly resolved by TG managers • Has increased the confidence young people have in the fairness of TGs • Communication channel will improve relationships between TGs, youth services and young people in longer term • Safety concerns of young people similar to those of older people • Young people supportive of TGs

26. Conclusions – positivepublic regard • Public regard for PTA transit guards and the work that they do is improved by: • Positive relationships with a range of community organisations • Channel to raise concerns before they create adverse publicity • Speedy resolutions of practical problems raised by youth workers and community representatives

27. Conclusions – managinginteragency collaboration • Resources and time are required to establish and maintain relationships • Requires on-going conflict resolution • Takes time to find people who want to try to address problems; are flexible in problem-solving; and are senior enough to make changes within their own organisation.

28. Recommendations • Community liaison becomes major part of role of a senior TG manager • Community liaison should be used as a direct means to positively influence public opinion, improve public support for TGs, and to counter negative publicity from hostile media and from other hostile organisations