Communities and Neighborhoods –Interventions which target larger geographic units such as census
tracts, police beats or sectors, "communities", or "neighborhoods." 

Click here for a PDF of all Matrix studies divided by slab (X-axis category).

Author	Intervention	Result	Rigor	Y- Axis	Z- Axis
Barthe & Stitt (2011)	Increased patrol presence in an area following an abduction/homicide associated with declines in person and property calls in target area relative to comparison site		M	G	R
Berk & MacDonald (2010)	Broken windows approach to deal with homeless encampments associated with meaningful reduction in violent, property, and nuisance crimes		M	F	P
Boydstun (1975)	More field interrogations associated with fewer outdoor crimes		M	G	P
Caeti (1999)	Beats in which police used hot spots and zero tolerance had greater crime reductions than those in which police used POP and increased visiblity		M	G	P
Clapp et al. (2005)	DUI prevention program and increased law enforcement led to decrease in self-reported DUI at the target university, whereas rates at the comparison campus remained stable.		M	G	P
Cohen & Ludwig (2003)	Targeted patrol against gun crime reduced shots fired by up to 34% and gun-related assault injuries by up to 71% on days the program was in action		M	G	P
Connell et al. (2008)	Officer-initiated community policing program associated with a significant reduction in violent and property crimes in the targeted area, but not in comparable areas in the county		M	G	P
Giacomazzi (1995)	Community crime prevention program leads to overall decrease in crime and increase in resident quality of life		M	F	HP
Josi et al. (2000)	Larceny and burglary drop in beats with increased traffic stops compared to routine patrol		M	F	P
Koper et al. (2010)	Multi-agency partnership focused on enforcement, prosecution, and community improvement associated with reduction in crime and violence		R	F	P
Krimmel & Mele (1998)	Targeting stolen vehicle dump sites leads to reduced auto theft		M	F	P
Lasley (1996)	Street closures associated with drop in violent crime drops, but not property crime using two year time-series		M	F	HP
Laycock (1991)	Burglary declines 62 percent after door-to-door visits to gain community intelligence and increase property marking		M	F	HP
Lindsay & McGillis (1986)	Burglary reduced for 18 months after initiation of community policing and neighborhood watch program		M	F	HP
Mazerolle et al. (2003)	Beat policing associated with a reduction in overall neighborhood crime rates and a reduction in calls for police service over a long period.		M	G	P
Papachristos et al. (2007)	Group of Project Safe Neighborhoods initiatives associated with greater declines in homicide in the treatment neighborhoods compared to control neighborhoods		M	F	HP
Pate & Skogan (1985b)	Program to increase the quantity and quality of police-citizen contacts and to reduce disorder was successful in improving evaluations of police service and in reducing perceived levels of social disorder		M	G	P
Press (1971)	Police manpower increased by 40 percent in one precinct and outdoor crimes decreased compared to control precinct		M	G	R
Reiss (1985)	More arrests for "soft crimes" associated with a decline in crimes against persons and property in the central business district		M	G	P
Sherman et al. (1995)	Directed patrol to increase gun detection leads to significant increase in gun seizures and decline in gun-related crime.		M	F	P
Skogan et al. (1995)	After 18 monthly police-community meetings, reductions in some crimes and victimization using some measures but not others		M	F	HP
Smith (2001)	92 percent reduction in crime in the target area during a crackdown. Crime reduction persisted in some parts of the neighborhood 6 months later		M	G	P
Tita et al. (2003)	Violence declined during and after the pulling levers intervention		M	F	P
Trojanowicz (1986)	Foot patrol areas had fewer crimes than control areas		M	G	P
Tuffin et al. (2006)	POP program resulted in positive changes in crime, perceptions of antisocial behavior, and feelings of safety after dark.		M	G	HP
Weiss & McGarrell (1996)	Focus on vehicle stops led to decrease in reported burglaries and auto vehicle thefts.		M	G	P
Wycoff et al. (1985)	Door-to-door police visits associated with reduced victimization		M	G	HP
McCabe (2009)	One of two narcotics enforcement initiatives was successful in reducing crime		M	F	P
McGarrell et al. (2001)	Directed patrol to focus on suspicious activities and locations, reduced violent gun crime. In contrast, a general deterrence strategy, focused on maximizing vehicle stops, did not have an effect.		M	G	P
Nunn et al. (2006)	Covert drug trafficking interdiction associated with an overall crime decline in target area, but an increase in drug-related calls for service		M	F	P
Pate & Skogan (1985a)	Proactive disorder arrests associated with significant reductions in total Part I crimes, personal crimes, and burglary.		M	G	P
Bennett (1990)	Lower socioeconomic status areas that tended to be higher in crime had less surveillence and less effective neighborhood watch programs		M	G	HP
Kelling et al. (1974)	No difference in crime by beat based on the number of police cars assigned to random patrol.		M	G	R
Novak et al. (1999)	No decline in burglary or robbery following proactive disorder enforcement		M	F	P
Pate et al. (1985)(Houston)	Monthly newsletter with crime data failed to reduce victimizations of recipients		VR	G	P
Pate et al. (1985) (Newark)	Monthly newsletter with crime data failed to reduce victimizations of recipients		VR	G	P
Pate et al. (1987)	Community block watch has no impact on crime		R	G	HP
Police Foundation (1981)	No difference in crime by number of foot patrol officers assigned		M	G	R
Sviridoff et al. (1992)	Crackdown on crack market, but no change in violent crime rate		M	F	P
Wycoff & Skogan (1993)	No decrease in victimization after increase in police-community meetings in target district		M	G	HP
Weisburd et al. (2008)	Risk-focused policing program targeting juvenile risk factors has no influence on self-reported delinquency		VR	F	HP

Result: =successful intervention; = mixed results; = nonsignificant finding; = harmful intervention

Rigor: M = moderately rigorous; R = rigorous; VR = very rigorous

Y-axis: F = focused; G= general

Z-axis: R = reactive, P = proactive, HP = highly proactive