The Bustle of Horses on a Ship: Drug Control in New York City Public Housing

For decades, violence, drugs and public housing have been closely linked in political culture and popular imagination. In 1990, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) made funds available to public housing authorities to combat drug and crime problems. This program, the Drug Elimination Program (DEP) combined several strategies under one administrative umbrella: police enforcement, drug treatment, drug prevention, youth and gang outreach, community organizing, integrated health and social service agencies, and tenant mobilization projects. In New York, the Housing Authority spent $165 million on DEP in its 330 public housing sites between 1990 and 1996. Yet there has been little research on this large investment, either in New York City or nationwide. In this study, we examined the effects of the DEP intervention at three levels of complementary theoretical relevance: the public housing development itself, the neighborhood in which public housing is situated, and the police precinct that surrounds each public housing project. We used spatial analyses and hierarchical regressions to estimate DEP effects on drug and crime in public housing sites and their surrounding neighborhoods. We show that crime and drug problems were reduced significantly in the immediate neighborhoods and police precincts surrounding the public housing sites, but crime and drug problems in public housing sites were unaffected by DEP interventions. The absence of effects within public housing reflects the details of the DEP strategies, with its disproportionate allocation of funds to policing strategies compared to demand reduction and informal social control programs. DEP police efforts were nominally focused on public housing sites, but in reality were diffused in the NYPD\u27s broader administrative units to provide resources that benefited law enforcement generally. Seen this way, DEP was an important and strategically valuable supplement to the NYPD\u27s strategic response to a particularly acute violence and crime epidemic, but did little to alter the basic social organization of crime and drugs within public housing sites. We argue for an intervention model that promotes collective action between residents and legal actors, interactions that promote citizen compliance and cooperation with police. The police depend heavily on the voluntary cooperation of citizens to fight crime, and DEP created disincentives for cooperation. This social norms approach would invite policing of drug problems in the context of a legitimacy-focused approach that promotes citizen-based regulation of crime and disorder

Crime in Public Housing: Clarifying Research Issues

In recent years, crime and public housing have been closely linked in our political and popular cultures. Tragic episodes of violence have reinforced the notion that public housing is a milieu with rates of victimization and offending far greater than other locales. However, these recent developments belie the complex social and political evolution of public housing from its origins in the 1930s, through urban renewal, and into the present. Stereotypes abound about public housing, its management, residents, and crime rates. In reality, variation is the norm, and it is these variations that affect crime. The study of crime in public housing is in its earliest phase, and there is much to learn. A few studies suggest that crime rates are higher in public housing complexes than in their immediate surroundings; other studies suggest quite the opposite. Still others suggest a process of diffusion and exchange of violent crimes between public housing and the surrounding neighborhood contexts

Changes in energy content of lunchtime purchases from fast food restaurants after introduction of calorie labelling: cross sectional customer surveys

Objective To assess the impact of fast food restaurants adding calorie labelling to menu items on the energy content of individual purchases

The Bustle of Horses on a Ship: Drug Control in New York City Public Housing

For decades, violence, drugs and public housing have been closely linked in political culture and popular imagination. In 1990, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) made funds available to public housing authorities to combat drug and crime problems. This program, the Drug Elimination Program (DEP) combined several strategies under one administrative umbrella: police enforcement, drug treatment, drug prevention, youth and gang outreach, community organizing, integrated health and social service agencies, and tenant mobilization projects. In New York, the Housing Authority spent $165 million on DEP in its 330 public housing sites between 1990 and 1996. Yet there has been little research on this large investment, either in New York City or nationwide. In this study, we examined the effects of the DEP intervention at three levels of complementary theoretical relevance: the public housing development itself, the neighborhood in which public housing is situated, and the police precinct that surrounds each public housing project. We used spatial analyses and hierarchical regressions to estimate DEP effects on drug and crime in public housing sites and their surrounding neighborhoods. We show that crime and drug problems were reduced significantly in the immediate neighborhoods and police precincts surrounding the public housing sites, but crime and drug problems in public housing sites were unaffected by DEP interventions. The absence of effects within public housing reflects the details of the DEP strategies, with its disproportionate allocation of funds to policing strategies compared to demand reduction and informal social control programs. DEP police efforts were nominally focused on public housing sites, but in reality were diffused in the NYPD\u27s broader administrative units to provide resources that benefited law enforcement generally. Seen this way, DEP was an important and strategically valuable supplement to the NYPD\u27s strategic response to a particularly acute violence and crime epidemic, but did little to alter the basic social organization of crime and drugs within public housing sites. We argue for an intervention model that promotes collective action between residents and legal actors, interactions that promote citizen compliance and cooperation with police. The police depend heavily on the voluntary cooperation of citizens to fight crime, and DEP created disincentives for cooperation. This social norms approach would invite policing of drug problems in the context of a legitimacy-focused approach that promotes citizen-based regulation of crime and disorder

Crime in Public Housing: Clarifying Research Issues

In recent years, crime and public housing have been closely linked in our political and popular cultures. Tragic episodes of violence have reinforced the notion that public housing is a milieu with rates of victimization and offending far greater than other locales. However, these recent developments belie the complex social and political evolution of public housing from its origins in the 1930s, through urban renewal, and into the present. Stereotypes abound about public housing, its management, residents, and crime rates. In reality, variation is the norm, and it is these variations that affect crime. The study of crime in public housing is in its earliest phase, and there is much to learn. A few studies suggest that crime rates are higher in public housing complexes than in their immediate surroundings; other studies suggest quite the opposite. Still others suggest a process of diffusion and exchange of violent crimes between public housing and the surrounding neighborhood contexts

Few Hospital Palliative Care Programs Meet National Staffing Recommendations.

The predominant model for palliative care delivery, outside of hospice care, is the hospital-based consultative team. Although a majority of US hospitals offer palliative care services, there has been little research on the staffing of their program teams and whether those teams meet national guidelines, such as the Joint Commission's standard of including at least one physician, an advanced practice or other registered nurse, a social worker, and a chaplain. Data from the 2012-13 annual surveys of the National Palliative Care Registry indicate that only 25 percent of participating programs met that standard based on funded positions, and even when unfunded positions were included, only 39 percent of programs met the standard. Larger palliative care programs were more likely than smaller ones to include a funded physician position, while smaller programs were more reliant upon advanced practice and registered nurses. To meet current and future palliative care needs, expanded and enhanced education, as well as supportive financing mechanisms for consultations, are needed

Few Hospital Palliative Care Programs Meet National Staffing Recommendations.

The predominant model for palliative care delivery, outside of hospice care, is the hospital-based consultative team. Although a majority of US hospitals offer palliative care services, there has been little research on the staffing of their program teams and whether those teams meet national guidelines, such as the Joint Commission's standard of including at least one physician, an advanced practice or other registered nurse, a social worker, and a chaplain. Data from the 2012-13 annual surveys of the National Palliative Care Registry indicate that only 25 percent of participating programs met that standard based on funded positions, and even when unfunded positions were included, only 39 percent of programs met the standard. Larger palliative care programs were more likely than smaller ones to include a funded physician position, while smaller programs were more reliant upon advanced practice and registered nurses. To meet current and future palliative care needs, expanded and enhanced education, as well as supportive financing mechanisms for consultations, are needed