The What Works Centre for Crime Reduction: An evaluation

1. The What Works Centre for Crime Reduction: An evaluation Gillian Hunter, Tiggey May, Mike Hough July 2017

2. The WWCCR The What Works Centre for Crime Reduction (WWCCR) is led by The College of Policing with support from a consortium of universities. Its work has involved: • Systematically reviewing available research on the effectiveness of interventions to reduce crime; • Summarising that evidence in terms of its strength and quality, cost, impact, why it works, where it works and any issues with implementation; • Providing stakeholders with knowledge, tools and guidance to help them apply research evidence and target resources more effectively.

3. Focus of the evaluation The evaluation - 2014 to 2017 aimed to: • Assess the impact of the WWCCR, incl. whether it had engaged stakeholders, produced clear and easy to use tools and guidance, and improved the understanding and application of research; • Chart over time main outputs of the WWCCR, modes of dissemination and user reactions; • Identify changes in the use of research evidence, especially in strategic decision-making; • Provide feedback to the College and academic partners over the course of the evaluation.

4. Some achievements • Identification & mapping of over 300 systematic reviews in area of crime reduction; • Design of EMMIE coding system to rate and rank the evidence to help make it more accessible to practitioners; • Development of the Crime Reduction Toolkit, providing easy access to the crime reduction evidence; • 12 new systematic reviews on crime reduction interventions incl. alley-gating, retail tagging and mentoring; • Guidance on analysing costs of interventions; • Development of training package on understanding evidence-based approaches.

5. Our evaluation methods We conducted in-depth interviews – in 2014 and 2016 with 57 Chief Officers from 28 forces in England and Wales 20 Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) 10 Community Safety Partnership Managers (CSPs) We posted an online survey on the College website in 2014 and 2016 Alerts were issued to UK associations, federations and networks and direct emails about the survey were sent to chief officers, PCCs and CSPs We mapped the products and developments of the WWCCR We conducted case studies incl. of force evidence champions and Force- promotion of evidence-based practice

6. Changes over the three years Comparing interview accounts in 2014 and 2016 we found in 2016: • Greater involvement in research, more examples provided of research informing decisions, perception of research evidence as now more important to practice; • More police and PCC research collaboration with universities (locally & regionally), largely resulting from Police Knowledge Funding; • More reports of dissemination of research evidence to operational staff, including via intranet space for promoting research/links to products of the WWCCR; hand-held devices for officers to provide easy access to the internet; ‘research cafes’ to initiate discussion about local problems and possible solutions; force training on evidence-based practice; • Examples of more junior ranks initiating activities to develop force engagement with research; • More interest in the Crime Reduction Toolkit and how that might be developed.

7. Changes in evidence use by senior officers: % “never or rarely” using Notes: Max sample sizes were 655 in 2014 and 67 in 2016, with varying but very low rate of attrition in different questions; * and ** denote statistical significance at 5% and 1% respectively.

8. Change in perceived organisational support for EBP: % agreeing Notes: Max sample sizes were 655 in 2014 and 67 in 2016, with varying but very low rate of attrition in different questions; * and ** denote statistical significance at 5% and 1% respectively.

9. Challenges No change since 2014 in perception of the main practical barriers to greater engagement with research: • Lack of time to keep up to date with the evidence base; • Limited resources to promote greater engagement with research and to build capability. ”We’re pretty pressured day to day just keeping things going and running forward. Actually having space to sit down and think about what works, what doesn’t work, what we’d like to do and how we could do it, would be real luxury.”   “I’m still really, really keen on it, and I’ll push it as much as I can in force. But, it’s going to be a long battle against the backdrop of the austerity cuts.” • Some confusion about what the ‘evidence’ in evidence-based practice can mean – only randomised control trials or including boarder range of research methods.

10. Messages to the College of Policing • Promote and publicise where evidence-based practice has been successfully applied through ‘live examples’ of its impact on policing practice; • Research needs to be locally relevant to engage practitioners; • Greater clarity about the meaning of evidence-based practice and the emphasis on the method being appropriate to the question being asked; • The College has a crucial role in coordinating how evidence-based practice is introduced across the police service and the extent to which other bodies in policing and crime reduction are focused on the importance of research.

11. Next steps • Focus on developing and sustaining the WWCCR, including the Crime Reduction Toolkit as new evidence becomes available. • More primary research about effectiveness of crime reduction but also about other police functions to ensure that evidence-based practice can continue to develop and thrive. • Building capability amongst police officers - this should be a consequence over the longer-term of the qualifications and training curriculum in policing. • Consider the future products and potential of the various policing and academic partnerships.