16 October Randomised Control Trial on the London Buses Sgt Ben Linton (MPS) Tim Herbert (TfL)

Why a trial Introduce the concept of Evidence Based Policing to the Safer Transport Command Demonstrate that research can take place in operational environments without compromising performance Build on partnership working between the MPS and TfL Gain experience to assist future research Demonstrate that the tactic works

Why an RCT Relatively easy to explain Strength of findings Rigour required demanding commitment to design

Why a hotspot RCT 16 October bus stops in London – cannot police them all Builds on Op Beck conducted on the London Underground Hotspot policing works

5 Chris Koper, Minneapolis, Observed 17,000 instances of police presence at hotspots, and 4000 instances of disorderly or criminal behaviour. Measured impact of police presence on survival time – how long between police leaving and the next occurrence of crime/disorderly behaviour. Less than 10 minutes, no impact. More than 15 minutes, no added benefit 15 minutes – longest "survival" time – optimal time to police hotspots Koper

6 Renee Mitchell Police Sergeant Sacramento (California) Feb-May 2011 Crime reduction of 25% at targeted hotspots. Officer productivity increased. Cost benefit of approx $300,000. No identified negative impacts of tactic. Practical Implementation

London’s bus network 700 bus routes 19,500 bus stops Approximately 7,500 buses More than six million passengers each weekday 2014 year of the bus hats-on/year-of-the-bus hats-on/year-of-the-bus

What do we know about bus-related crime? High crime bus routes pass through high crime areas (Pearlstein & Wachs 1982; Newton 2008) Bus stops are crime generators (Roman 2005; Weisburd et al. 2012) Crime is concentrated at a small number of bus stops (Loukaitou-Sideris 1999, Newton & Bowers 2007) 0.05% (n=10) of bus stops in Los Angeles accounted for 18% of bus stop crime. 20% of all shelter damage in the Wirral occurred at 2.5% of all shelters. Crime is more common at bus stops than on board buses (Levine 1986)

Bus-related crime and disorder in London Spatially concentrated 30 bus routes accounted for approximately 20% of DIRs in bus stops were associated 27% of nearby DIRs* (n=6,204, see map) in * DIRs recorded during 2013 (n=45,324) that were matched with iBus route run data 59.5% (n=26,954) and were within 200m of a corresponding bus stop (n=23,245). 12 or more DIRs at or near a bus stop during 2013

Bus-related crime and disorder in London

Site identification ‘ Community Safety’ Driver Incident Reports enriched with iBus route run information Use F.M.E. to pass attribute data between DIRs and the nearest bus stop with a corresponding route run Identify ‘hot’ bus stops by the frequency of DIRs, their temporal stability and CAD reports

General hypothesis Directed police patrols at high crime bus stops between hours will reduce crime levels compared to business as usual

Research design Multisite randomised controlled trial across London Random assignment of sites to 3 blocks to Treatment and Control Intervention delivered by pairs of PCs and PCSOs 3 x 15-minute patrols, Monday-Friday hours at treatment sites with on board patrols along contiguous bus route runs “Business as usual” at the control sites Duration: 3–6 mths

16 October Bexley DA7 4 Take route 229 to Forresters Crescent (74278)

Supervision, monitoring and motivation 1 Inspector, 2 sergeants GPS devices issued to each pair of officers Detailed patrol patterns Weekly briefings

GPS data 16

Things We Learned Timescales. Almost 12 months from inception to data gathering. Data sharing – legal aspects and security Data processing – CPU Dedicated team – ensure consistent treatment and commitment Testing phase – longer than expected. Assuming things about data. Combined with testing phase. Biting off more than you can chew – pan-London deployments – time, radio channels, travelling, local issues. Would have been much easier to be smaller scale. Practicality – research in the real world. Partnership – with academics or partner agencies. Benefits far outweigh the legal or contractual issues. 17

Thank you