Scholastic Crime Stoppers.

A Cost-Benefit Perspective

Today, school violence stands at the fore front of the national and local public agenda. However, despite recent occurrences, schools are not dangerous places in the community. In fact, theft represents the major concern on campus-not violence. [1]

The implementation of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program, a proactive approach that uses students to prevent and solve crimes, constitutes one of the best and least expensive crime prevention strategies. Who has suitable crime prevention information and knows the hearts and minds of their peers but the students themselves? Scholastic Crime Stoppers is a confidential crime- and incident-reporting program in middle and high schools, which pays rewards for successful tips leading to preventing and solving campus crimes. Modeled after metropolitan and county Crime Stoppers programs across the country, agencies can implement such a program on campuses in their jurisdictions and reap huge benefits for their communities.

HISTORY OF SCHOLASTIC CRIME STOPPERS

Scholastic Crime Stoppers evolved out of the Crime Stoppers program. [2] In 1983, an officer with the Boulder, Colorado, Police Department established the first Scholastic Crime Stoppers in the United States. [3] The program allowed students to provide tips about crimes on campus to the school administration. Students could remain anonymous to alleviate fears of retaliation. To counter student apathy, the department offered monetary rewards ranging from $5 to $100 for tips proving instrumental in solving a crime. Student directors, appointed by the program coordinator for the agency, advertised, raised funds, and determined award amounts for helpful tips after reviewing information. [4] The success of the Scholastic Crime Stoppers program in Boulder spread slowly, but steadily, to other schools around the country.

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION

The successful implementation of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program depends on the commitment of the agency, the campus administrators, and the students. In addition, the support and commitment of a local community Crime Stoppers program can help the Scholastic Crime Stoppers program to succeed.

Agency Commitment

Members of a law enforcement agency seeking to establish a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program must obtain the support of their administrators. The agency member proposing the implementation of such a program should present the program's concept to the agency head and the command staff. Ideally, that member should provide administrators with information and statistics about Scholastic Crime Stoppers from other jurisdictions. Once implemented, the command staff of the crime prevention and detective divisions should stay involved in the program and keep informed of program activities and resulting statistics. The agency's successful, full-time commitment to the program occurs with the proper selection of a program coordinator. Generally, an agency's resident school resource officer (SRO) fills the coordinator's role because the officer knows the campus, the administrators, and the students. If an agency does not employ SROs, then a senior police officer from the crime prevention or detective division should fill the coordinator's position.

The coordinator should possess excellent human interaction and media relations skills, to ease communication with the campus administrators, the faculty, and the public. Such officers should be organized and work well with juveniles. Most important, to establish a trusting relationship with the students, they must respect the students' sovereignty. A large amount of patience, ethics, and integrity, as well as respect for anonymity, represent essential character virtues of these officers.

Functionally, the coordinator attends all student board meetings as a nonvoting member and informs and instructs board members about crimes that occurred and laws that students violated, as well as keeping the members abreast of legal developments, such as case law and penal statutes. During board meetings, members should make recommendations for reward payouts for successful tips. If requested, the coordinator can help with fundraisers and public relations events promoting the program. Also, the coordinator advises campus administrators and functions as a liaison between the faculty and the law enforcement agency, as well as between students and the agency. The coordinator always should keep promises made to students and faculty to maintain the established trusting relationships. Informants and victims must remain anonymous at their request. Finally, the agency should commit a well-publicized phone tip line to the program, if not done so by the campus administrators.

Campus Administrators Commitment

The commitment of campus administrators is crucial to the success of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program. The more encouragement and autonomy the students receive from these individuals, the greater the probability of a successful program. [5] While administrators should tailor the program to fit their schools' unique needs, [6] they also should focus primarily on accepting that campus crime exists and, in turn, knowing how to handle it. Actively responding to campus crime can decrease campus victimization rates in the long run and create a positive perception of campus safety by students, faculty, and the public.

Once fully committed, administrators should dedicate a well-publicized phone tip line to the program or provide another way for students to anonymously convey crime tips, such as comment boxes. The school helps the program with Scholastic Crime Stopper hot lines, message billboards, video reenactments, flyers, logos, and faculty in-class announcements. [7] The faculty effectively must disseminate information and develop an in-service workshop to train staff members and foster their awareness of the program's importance for campus safety.

Finally, campus administrators should designate an effective, well-respected faculty advisor to the program, such as an assistant principal or senior staff member. The advisor selects the first student board of directors, attends all student board meetings as a nonvoting board member, [8] and appoints successive student board members, although schools should implement a formal venue for student applications. The advisor constantly monitors the academic standing of student board members. Students who fall in academic standing, as defined by the advisor or administrators, at any time during the academic year should be dismissed from board duties. The faculty advisor functions as a liaison between the campus administration and students, keeps students abreast of campus rules and policies, and sets meeting locations and dates. The advisor also functions as liaison between parents and students and ensures that parents only have a secondary support role. [9] Any greater role can unduly influence the student autonom y of the program. The faculty advisor proves instrumental in promoting the program and raising funds for it and, finally, implements a procedure for the anonymous payout of rewards.

Student Commitment

The student board of directors of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program is the nucleus of the organization. Student board members must believe in the program's benefits and commit to the concept. They must attend all board meetings and function as ambassadors for the program, which entails a substantial time commitment. Additionally, student board members may have voting rights at the local Crime Stoppers board meetings, depending on the program's policies.

The role of the student board of directors comprises the advertising and marketing of the program, as well as raising funds through donations, bake sales, school dances, and booster club events. The board also discusses crime information and determines reward amounts, [10] but it never investigates a crime. [11] Further, the identity of informants, victims, and suspects remains confidential. [12] Informants are referred to only by their assigned code number, and board members must respect the anonymity requirement. Participating students must remain in good academic standing and stay out of trouble both on and off campus. With the help of the program coordinator and the faculty advisor, student board members devise a set of bylaws for the organization. The greatest task of the student board members is to create the awareness and philosophy among all students that their responsibilities include taking a stand against victimization by reporting all criminal activity to the proper authorities. [13] It is not jus t the role of law enforcement and campus administration. [14]

Local Crime Stoppers Commitment

The support of a local Crime Stoppers program helps ensure the long-term viability of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program. The local Crime Stoppers commitment spans from financial and educational help to moral and ethical support. For example, the local Crime Stoppers can fund appreciation dinners for student board members, donate start-up money to the student board to organize fund-raisers, and augment reward payments for successful tips beyond the Scholastic Crime Stoppers reward schedule limits. Further, it may provide guidance and advice when contacting individual and corporate sponsors. The local Crime Stoppers program should assist the campus program in obtaining nonprofit organization status recognition from the Internal Revenue Service--often a necessary precursor for corporate donations.

Ideally, the local Crime Stoppers board should invite a limited number of the Scholastic Crime Stoppers student board members to its meetings and include the coordinator and faculty advisor as nonvoting members. The Scholastic Crime Stoppers board members inform the local Crime Stoppers board about campus incidents and planned activities. In return, student board members attending these meetings receive the learning experience of a countywide or metropolitan program and of general crime prevention activities. But, board members of the local Crime Stoppers program should not attend the Scholastic Crime Stoppers board meetings because their attendance may limit the autonomy of the campus program. At the very least, students may perceive such activity as a danger, which might damage the cordial relationship between the two organizations.

If the state in which the Scholastic Crime Stoppers exists has a certification process, the program's board may decide to pursue independent certification or become certified under the umbrella of the local Crime Stoppers program. In either case, the autonomy of the campus program should never be jeopardized. The commitment of the local Crime Stoppers program cements the foundation for a beneficial partnership with the Scholastic Crime Stoppers program.

COSTS

The costs of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program to the coordinating law enforcement agency are comparatively minimal. Participating students and the campus administrators assume almost all of the costs associated with the implementation and operation of the program. For example, students volunteer their labor for board meetings, promotional events, and fund-raisers. The individual and business donations received through these fundraisers ideally cover the cost of reward payments and materials, such as banners, flyers, signs, T-shirts, and miscellaneous supplies.

Additionally, the partnering community Crime Stoppers program may help alleviate some of the costs by partially paying for material costs. In rare circumstances, it may help out with the reward payment cost.

The campus administration helps financially with material costs. The administration also alleviates the cost of promotional advertisement in local news media and the student paper, if it cannot negotiate access to free public service messages in the media. Official press releases can be substituted to minimize costs. The school provides accommodation for board meetings and facilities for anonymous tips, such as a phone tip line or comment box. It also pays any extra labor costs incurred by the faculty advisor, if the additional labor time is not volunteered.

The law enforcement agency's costs are few. The coordinator can fulfill most of the program-related tasks during duty time. The agency covers overtime and decides whether to pay for overtime or grant compensatory time. The agency decides whether to employ crime prevention or seizure funds to help the program with its material costs. Unfortunately, the agency possibly may incur wasted investigation time due to overzealous, inaccurate, or even malicious tips. [15] Moreover, if the coordinator disregards the anonymity requirement, the agency potentially may expose itself to liability costs in court cases depending on state law. A defendant's attorney may motion for full information disclosure to obtain the names of informants to verify their credibility. [16] Finally, the agency should recognize intangible psychological costs, which adversely may affect the program's effectiveness. These costs comprise the potential loss of privacy of students, parents, and faculty due to an investigation initiated because of a tip and can extend to the potential creation of an atmosphere of mistrust and suspicion on campus. [17]

BENEFITS

The multitude of benefits of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program far outweigh the anticipated costs, however. They accrue not only to the law enforcement agency but also to the campus administration and the student body. To the student body, a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program encourages school spirit, pride, and responsibility. [18] It promotes a positive image of their school. The program can reduce rates of victimization for students, who can reap the intangible benefit of an increased sense of security, as well as reduce the fear of reporting an incident or a crime. [19] When students feel that schools take steps to counter crime on campus, they develop a greater sense of control over their environment. [20] From a practical perspective, actively participating students engage in a valuable extracurricular activity and learn how the board of an organization functions. Further, the program exposes the student body to the criminal justice system and the general crime prevention philosophy of today's policin g. [21] The long-term benefit of this exposure can result in greater cooperation of students with law enforcement, even in these students' adult lives. If students' positive experiences with the criminal justice system translate into their homes, the long-term benefit of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program increases substantially through the positive multiplier effect on students' siblings and parents.

The campus administration benefits from a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program in several ways. First, the program enhances the school's image and improves campus morale. [22] Declining campus crime rates will enhance this result in the long run as well. Second, the program credibly publicizes the importance of fighting alcohol and other drug sales and use on school property. Also, it leads to a better working relationship with local law enforcement or campus police. [23] Other more indirect benefits realized by the campus administration include a decreased risk of lawsuits due to crime, a corresponding increase in liability insulation for the administration, and a potential reduction of insurance costs. [24] Finally, the program might reduce worker's compensation fraud and the turnover rates of lower wage employees. [25]

The coordinating law enforcement agency usually finds direct benefits from this program. The anonymous incident and crime reporting characteristics of the program lead to a higher reporting rate, resulting in a statistical increase in the crime rate. The higher reporting rate gives a more accurate statistical picture of the quantity and types of crimes committed on campus. This helps law enforcement fight crime and prevent future offenses. A decrease in crime rates will result in a direct benefit over time. Further, tips emanating from such a program reduce the agency's offense investigation time and can result in faster crime resolution. [26] Good public relations and cooperation with campus administrators, students, and parents become an indirect benefit of the program to the agency. The resulting public goodwill toward the agency can facilitate future agency investigations and implement future department programs and support help for their needs, such as personnel and equipment.

ROCKWALL'S EXPERIENCE

In 1991, the Rockwall, Texas, Police Department became one of the first agencies in Texas to form Scholastic Crime Stoppers programs in the middle and high schools in its jurisdiction. Using their SROs as program coordinators and faculty members as advisors, student boards of directors began programs similar to the program in Boulder. The schools' administrators established an anonymous tip line and set a reward schedule ranging from $25 to $100 for successful tips. In 1994, the police department brought the campus programs under the umbrella of Rockwall County Crime Stoppers. Although the Scholastic Crime Stoppers still remain autonomous entities, this organizational move facilitated the direction of financial, educational, moral, and ethical support toward the programs. Three student director members attend the county Crime Stoppers board meetings to learn about a countywide program and crime prevention programs in general.

The success of Rockwall's Scholastic Crime Stoppers programs resulted in neighboring jurisdictions adopting the concept for their campuses. The concept has had a national proliferation, especially since the mid 1990s when the public's concern about campus crime increased. Today, Texas has more than 200 Scholastic Crime Stoppers programs. [27]

The Rockwall Police Department evaluates its Scholastic Crime Stoppers programs through continuous feedback from students, campus administrators, faculty, and its own peace officers. Initially, the department's SROs reluctantly followed the crime prevention officers and investigators and lacked their enthusiasm. They questioned the necessity of the program because they thought it was unnecessary additional labor input. But, when they learned about the program's potential benefits and organizational structure, they took the lead in organizing the first board of directors. Their excitement grew with the success of the programs.

In some cases, agencies may have difficulty convincing the campus administration of the potential benefits of such a program. This difficulty increases rapidly if the department's jurisdiction lies in a statistically low crime area. One campus administrator's response to the department's program proposal typifies this mentality. This administrator did not want the public to think offenses occurred on campus. The department overcame this situation by responding with education, patience, and tenacity. The key to bringing administrators on board lies, with the effectiveness of the program's designated faculty advisor.

Students immediately became motivated and then grew excited when they saw the promotions of the program and the advertisement of the reward schedules and when they realized that the organizational structure leaves them in command. Years of feedback have shown that students must remain in charge of the program because they truly feel empowered to operate it and make decisions. This sense of autonomy and empowerment spreads to the rest of the campus community. In fact, many tipsters never claim their rewards. The SROs and the advisors never had a problem filling open board positions at the start of an academic year. "Voting with their feet" for the success of the programs, more students fill out applications compared to the amount of available board positions.

One of the best decisions the department made was to advise the campus programs to join under the umbrella of the local Crime Stoppers program while still retaining their autonomy. This move guaranteed the long-term viability of all campus programs. For example, Rockwall County Crime Stoppers pays for appreciation dinners for student board members and partially finances miscellaneous supplies. It also augments reward payments in severe crime and victimization cases.

The success of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program is complete with the solving of major crimes on campus. This, in turn, motivates all program stakeholders even further. For example, Rockwall's programs experienced a major boost in 1994. At the start of that school year, information provided through the high school program led to the breakup of an LSD narcotics network. According to student feedback, LSD was unavailable on campus for the remainder of the school year. In this case, to send a strong message, Rockwall County Crime Stoppers augmented the campus program's reward payment by doubling the amount for a total of $200 for successful information.

Success becomes overwhelming when the influence of a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program reaches beyond campus boundaries. Twenty-five percent of the tips provided through Rockwall's school programs deal with off-campus crime by nonaffiliated subjects. The familiarity with the program and the educational message of taking a stand against crime has gained strong resonance on and off campus. This positive effect even reaches beyond the students' households to the community at large. The department's investigators and crime prevention officers are satisfied because their workload decreases through the realization of investigative and crime prevention time savings. Overall, less crime goes unreported and more crime is solved in Rockwall's schools making its campuses safer due to lower victimization rates following the implementation of its Scholastic Crime Stoppers programs.

CONCLUSION

Successfully implementing a Scholastic Crime Stoppers program depends on the commitment of the local law enforcement agency, campus administrators, and students, who help to prevent and solve crimes. Through its message, students learn to take a stand against crime to create a safe learning environment for themselves. The strong emphasis on student autonomy empowers them to realize the many benefits of the program while simultaneously minimizing costs, such as inaccurate tips, and privacy concerns.

Scholastic Crime Stoppers represents one of the least costly and most effective proactive campus crime prevention programs. Moreover, communities can profit from them as well. When carefully implemented, the Scholastic Crime Stoppers program's benefits easily outweigh costs.

Mr. Aryani is a Vibhooti Shukla Fellow at the University of Texas' School of Social Sciences in Dallas, Texas, and a board member of Rockwall County Crime Stoppers.

Sergeant Carl L. Alsabrook commands the Community Services Division of the Rockwall, Texas, Police Department and coordinates Rockwall County Crime Stoppers.

Lieutenant Terry D. Garrett heads the Uniformed Services Division of the Rockwall, Taxas, Police Department.

Endnotes

(1.) U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education, 1999 Annual Report on School Safety (Washington, DC, 1999), 3.

(2.) Officer Greg MacAleese of the Albuquerque, New Mexico, Police Department founded the first local Crime Stoppers program in 1976 in response to a heinous homicide that he and his partner were investigating at the time. See Greg MacAleese, The Crime Stoppers Story, 1993. The name Crime Stoppers was derived from the Dick Tracy comic strip. Officer MacAleese received authorization from the late artist Chester Gould to employ the Crime Stoppers name for the program. The program was an instant success. In response to this success, other agencies implemented similar programs throughout the country. Midland County, Texas, Sheriffs Office Crime Stoppers, Crime Stoppers History, http://nonprofit.apex2000.net/mcsocs/history.htm; accessed July 9, 2001.

(3.) Officer Larry Wieda of the Boulder, Colorado, Police Department took the concept of Crime Stoppers to Fairview High School in Boulder and established the first Scholastic Crime Stoppers in the nation. High School (Scholastic) Crime Stoppers, http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/police/community/hs_crime_stoppers.htm; accessed July 9, 2001 and Crime Stoppers International, CSI, http://www.c-s-i.org/scs.htm; accessed July 9, 2001.

(4.) Supra note 3 (Wieda).

(5.) Supra note 3 (Crime Stoppers International) and Stephen R. Band and Joseph A. Harpold, "School Violence--Lessons Learned," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, September 1999, 9-15.

(6.) Supra note 5 (Band and Harpold, 15).

(7.) Supra note 3 (Crime Stoppers International).

(8.) Joe Martino, Marshall, Texas, High School, Marshall High School Crime Stoppers Procedures, 1990.

(9.) Pamela Hurt, Summary Report of the Crime Stoppers Program at Boulder High, 1990.

(10.) Ibid., and supra note 3 (Crime Stoppers International).

(11.) Supra note 8.

(12.) Supra note 9.

(13.) Crime Stoppers of Fayetteville/Cumberland County, North Carolina, Crime Stoppers School Program, http://www.faynccrimestoppers.org/school.htm; accessed July 9, 2001.

(14.) Supra note 8.

(15.) Marina Pisano, "Speak No Evil?" San Antonio Express News, May 10, 1999.

(16.) See Greg MacAleese's experience, supra note 2.

(17.) Supra note 15.

(18.) Supra notes 3 (Wieda) and 5 (Band and Harpold, 15).

(19.) Campus Crime Stoppers, Who Needs It? http://www.campuscrimestoppers.com; accessed July 9, 2001.

(20.) Jeff Bingley, University of British Columbia Campus Security Department, Volunteer for UBC Campus Crime Stoppers, http://www.security.ubc.ca/CrimeStoppers/volunteer.htm; accessed July 9, 2001.

(21.) Ibid.

(22.) Supra note 19.

(23.) Supra note 13.

(24.) Supra note 19.

(25.) Supra note 19.

(26.) Supra note 19.

(27.) Supra note 15.