Evaluation of Camera Use to Prevent Crime in Commuter Parking Facilities within the Washington Metro Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Parking Facilities, 2004-2009 (ICPSR 32521)

Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)

Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection

Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose

The specific goals of the study were to:

1. Identify the environmental characteristics and management practices of WMATA's parking facilities and how they may create criminal opportunities;
2. Analyze those characteristics and practices in relation to the incidence, prevalence, and distribution of crimes in WMATA's parking facilities using historical crime data;
3. Work with MTP to identify and implement promising strategies to reduce car crime and prioritize those strategies with regard to their anticipated effectiveness;
4. Implement one selected strategy in half of WMATA's 50 commuter lots through a blocked randomized experimental design; and
5. Evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention through a difference-in-differences (DiD) analysis and a cost-benefit analysis.

Study Design View help for Study Design

This project consists of three main research components: (1) identification of the magnitude of car crime in commuter parking facilities and possible strategies for prevention of such car crime; (2) identification and implementation of a crime prevention strategy; and (3) evaluation of the strategy's effectiveness. In partnership with the MTP staff, the research team created a blocked randomized experimental design involving 50 matched pairs of commuter parking facilities in which a combination of live and dummy digital cameras were deployed, along with accompanying signage, at the exits of one randomly selected facility from each pairing. After a period of 12 months following camera implementation, the research team analyzed the impact of the cameras on crime occurring in and around Metro's parking facilities.

Research processes involved the collection and analysis of crime data from MTP and jurisdictions in which WMATA operates, as well as the physical and environmental characteristics of Metro's parking facilities. These data, along with conversations with MTP on the feasibility of various interventions, informed the choice of intervention (recordable digital cameras) and the random selection process employed to determine which facilities would receive the intervention. After a 12-month intervention period, the effectiveness of the intervention was examined through a variety of statistical tests including a Difference-in-Differences (DiD) analysis.

The stations visited had several common characteristics. All of the stations had bus bays located near the entrance, storage areas for bicycles, and Kiss and Ride accommodations enabling drivers to drop off passengers near the Metro entrance without parking their vehicles. In addition, all but one of the stations had metered parking spaces located near the all-day parking facilities. For classification purposes, the facilities were placed in one of three categories: (1) garages; (2) surface lots; and (3) combination facilities, which have a parking garage that is partially or completely surrounded by a surface lot that shares the same set of vehicle entrances and exits.

In total, researchers conducted observations at 52 facilities: 32 surface lots, 15 garages, and five combination facilities. At the time of the site observations, the capacities of the WMATA-owned parking facilities ranged from 194 spaces to 5,069 spaces. During the site visits, 35 percent of the facilities were completely full (100 percent of spaces utilized), 46 percent of the facilities were mostly full (80-99 percent of spaces utilized), and 19 percent of the facilities were less than 80 percent full.

To provide context on the operations of Metro parking facilities, administrative data on Metro operations were collected from MTP and other offices within Washington Metro Area Transit Authority (WMATA). These data included hours of parking facility operation and staffing, parking facility utilization, and policing practices. This information, in conjunction with the crime data and site observations, helped to inform the overall understanding of each parking facility's criminal opportunities.

Sample View help for Sample

The research team generated a list of matched pairs based on the following characteristics: surrounding area crime rate (i.e. high, medium, low), lot/garage capacity, AM/PM payment policy, facility type (e.g. garage, lot or combination facility)and Metrorail line (e.g. red, green, orange). In conducting the site observations, researchers visited a total of 35 different stations on the WMATA's red, orange, yellow, green, and blue lines. The majority of the stations (26) had only one parking facility each, while the remaining nine stations had multiple parking facilities.

Time Method View help for Time Method

Universe View help for Universe

Crime in 50 of Washington Metro Area Transit Authority's parking facilities occurring in 2004 and 2005.

Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation

Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)

Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection

Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables

There are 87 datasets for this study, with approximately 18 files per parking location and two sets of files that contain multiple parking locations combined. All datasets contain the same three variables described below. Each dataset represents the number of crimes reported during the month/year for various crime types (including crime categories with several crime types combined).

The variables in the dataset include:

• TARGET represented the number of crimes occurring in the specified area that received the intervention during the given month/year.

• TO_DATE represents the month and year the crime occurred (MM/DD/YYYY), with the day set to "1" for all cases.

• COMP represents the number of crimes occurring in the specified area that were used as a control area for comparison purposes.

The types of crimes were: auto theft without attempts, auto theft with attempts, attempted auto theft, and car-related crime. All crime, property crime, larceny and violent crime were included for only the analysis of all stations combined. Car-related crime included motor vehicle theft, attempted motor vehicle theft and theft from automobiles (including theft of merchandise within cars and theft of auto parts and accessories.

The site observation instrument contained 60 questions that applied to all types of facilities, twelve questions specific to parking garages, and three questions specific to parking lots.

Facilities were "blocked" on certain characteristics/clusters of characteristics to maximize the equivalence of the groups. Blocking is a term used to describe matching of groups within similar scores on particular variable(s) so that treatment and control groups each containing units with similar characteristics on the blocking variable(s). Random assignment with matched pairs of WMATA parking lots was employed.

Initially, all 52 independent parking facilities was anticipated for inclusion in the study (located at 35 Metro stations), allowing the random assignment of 26 facilities to the treatment and 26 facilities to control. However, it was subsequently learned that one of the facilities would be closing before the end of 2006, thus eliminating the possibility of post-treatment analysis of crime and reducing the sample size to an odd number of facilities. The research team therefore excluded another facility from the randomization process.

Original Release Date View help for Original Release Date

2015-02-27

Version History View help for Version History