Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Politics and International Studies

P/CVE, Crime Prevention and Risk Assessment Tools Survey

Thank you very much again for agreeing to help us by filling in this survey. 

In Part I, we are going to ask you questions related to P/CVE (preventing/countering violent extremism) policies. We divided this part into four sections: strategy and institutions, primary prevention, intervention and rehabilitation. In Part II, we are going to ask you questions related to crime prevention policies and the use of risk assessment tools in criminal justice and social care policies.

 

PART I: Preventing/Countering Violent Extremism Policy (P/CVE)

We would like to map the presence and the scope of P/CVE policy in the country of your expertise. We are aware that P/CVE activities can take place at different government levels with a different degree of governmental involvement and can differ significantly across the country. We try to take these variations into account in this survey, but welcome your comments in the comment boxes – should you feel the need to qualify your responses. The aim is to create a reasonably accurate overview rather than capturing all the existing complexities. This will help us to make broad comparisons between regions and continents. We encourage you to make use of the space for comments under each question, should you feel the need to provide additional clarifications or noting any issues of importance.

 

Strategy and Institutions Dimension

 
Question 1

Is there a counter-terrorism strategy with a designated part devoted to “soft” prevention, like counter-radicalization or counter-extremism? (For example, does the strategy talk about preventing extremism/radicalisation by building community cohesion, promoting democratic values, resolving social exclusion or providing mentoring interventions to radical individuals/groups?)

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

1A. At the level of the central government (required)
1B. At the level of federal states or devolved national authority or regional governments (required)
If you replied YES to the previous question (1B):
1C. At the local levels of government (required)
If you replied YES to the previous question (1C):
 
Question 2

Is there a separate counter-extremism (or counter-radicalization) strategy?

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

2A. At the level of the central government (required)
2B. At the level of federal states or devolved national authority or regional governments (required)
If you replied YES to the previous question (2B):
2C. At the local levels of government (required)
If you replied YES to the previous question (2C):
 
Question 3
Does the central government have a dedicated unit, or personnel, working solely on P/CVE policy (e.g., a national center, commission, department, special representative)? (required)
 
Question 4
Have there been any official reviews or evaluations of the national P/CVE policy? (required)
 

Primary Prevention Dimension

Here we ask questions about CVE measures enacted upon on the whole population (or thereabouts) to prevent risks/threats developing.

 
Question 5

Does the government fund or directly run educational, cohesion, or resilience building programs for pupils or students, which are explicitly part of P/CVE policy?

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

5A. Organised at central government level (required)
5B. Organised by at least one federal state/devolved national authority/regional government has these measures (required)
5C. Organised by at least one local government (required)
If you replied YES to two or three options above: Which of the government levels is the most active in this regard?
If relevant: Overall, to what extent would you say such programs (supported or organized by different government levels as indicated above) are widespread in the country?
 
Question 6

Does the government fund or directly run educational, cohesion, or resilience building programs to protect specific communities or groups (e.g., ethnic minorities, socially excluded areas, families, or football hooligans) from extremism and/or radicalisation?

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

6A. Organised at central government level (required)
6B. Organised by at least one federal state/devolved national authority/regional government (required)
6C. Organised by at least one local government (required)
If you replied YES to two or three options above: Which of the government levels is the most active in this regard?
If relevant: Overall, to what extent would you say such programs (supported or organized by different government levels as indicated above) are widespread in the country?
 
Question 7

Does the government fund or directly run training programs for civil/public servants so that they can recognize, assess, and deal with radicalization concerns (for non-offenders - i.e., those not currently convicted, serving prison terms, or on probation)?

7A. Organised by central government
7B. Organised by at least one federal state or devolved national authority or regional government
7C. Organised by at least one local government
 

If relevant: For the groups of public sector workers you’ve noted above, to what extent are these training programs widespread?

Type of public servants
 
Question 8

Does the government fund or directly run counter-narrative or alternative narrative projects, aimed at a domestic audience, to protect against radicalisation and/or extremism? (e.g., online or offline strategic messaging that aims at discrediting specific groups of violent extremists)

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

8A. Organised at central government level (required)
8B. Organised by at least one federal state/devolved national authority/regional (required)
8C. Organised by at least one local government (required)
If you replied YES to two or three options above, which of the government levels is the most active in this regard?
 
Question 9

Based on your professional judgement, please indicate the overall role prescribed by government for the following actors for primary prevention CVE (i.e., general prevention/resilience-building activities within the whole community/population). 

Role of sectors in prevention dimension
 

Intervention Dimension

Here we will ask questions about ‘secondary prevention’: practices directed towards communities or persons at higher risk.

 
Question 10

Does the government fund or directly run vigilance campaigns aimed at getting the public to recognize and report concerns about radicalizing/radicalized individuals (e.g., a website or leaflets with information on how to recognize signs of radicalization and how/to whom one can report such concerns)?

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

10A. Organised at central government level (required)
10B. Organised by at least one federal state/devolved national authority/regional government (required)
10C. Organised by at least one local government (required)
If you replied YES to two or three options above, which of the government levels is the most active in this regard?
If relevant: Overall, how intensive are these vigilance campaigns?
 
Question 11

Does the government fund or directly run a radicalisation referral scheme?

(A referral scheme is a program that allows the public or public/civil servants to report concerns about individuals exhibiting signs of radicalization. The organization that collects such referrals can be, for example, a social service agency, municipal department, an NGO, or the police.)

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

11A. Organised at central government level (required)
11B. Organized at the level of at least one federal state or devolved national authority/regional government (required)
11C. Organized at the level of at least one local government (required)
 

If there are referral programs (or a single program) do they feature multi-agency collaboration?

(Multi-agency collaboration includes representatives from a plurality of municipal or other government agencies, community-based organizations, and non-governmental organizations, often including education, health, social welfare, youth, sports, and sometimes police and corrections. These representatives form multiagency teams that pool resources and expertise, and share information, in order to assess referrals and provide interventions if needed.)

-
If there are referral programs (or a program), do the police have regular/routine access to non-anonymized data of persons who have been referred?
 
Question 12
Do certain groups of civil/public servants (e.g. social service, education or health care practitioners) have a legal duty to refer individuals where there is a radicalization/extremism concern? (required)
 
Question 13
Is there a formal risk assessment procedure used by any state agency or section of the government, aimed specifically at people who are thought to be at risk of becoming involved in violent extremism (but are not convicted of an extremism/terrorism related offense)? (required)
If you replied yes to Q13, what is this procedure based on? (You can reply affirmatively to all options above, in case there are more procedures in use. However, if you do not know the answer, you can leave the options blank and make sure you provided us with the name/s of the risk assessment tool(s), if relevant)
If relevant: Do any of the tools assess dynamic/changing factors (e.g., social relations, employment, substance abuse)?
If relevant: Overall, to what extent would you say is this tool(s) widespread in the country?
 
Question 14

Does the government fund or directly run intervention programs (e.g., mentoring, social or healthcare assistance, exit programs) for non-offenders in the framework of P/CVE?

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

14A. Organised at central government level (required)
14B. Organised by at least one federal state or devolved national authority or regional government (required)
14C. Organised by at least one local government (required)
If you replied YES to two or three options above: Which of the government levels is the most active in this regard?
If relevant: Overall, to what extent would you say such programs are widespread in the country?
 
Question 15

Is there a special unit which monitors and removes online extremist content from the Internet? (by requesting action from internet, web-hosting, and/or social media providers)

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

15A. Organised at central government level (required)
15B. Organised by at least one federal state or devolved national authority or regional government (required)
15C. Organised by at least one local government (required)
If you replied YES to two or three options above: Which of the government levels is the most active in this regard?
 
Question 16

Based on your professional judgement, please indicate the overall role prescribed by government for the following actors in the intervention dimension of CVE (i.e., responding to signs of risk or vulnerability in specific groups or individuals).

Role of sectors in intervention dimension
 

Rehabilitation Dimension

Here we will ask questions about ‘tertiary prevention’, broadly understood as preventative activities directed at persons already engaged in extremist/radicalized behaviours or groups.

 
Question 17
Is there a radicalization/extremism risk assessment procedures for offenders (e.g., to determine their prison regime or to assess the risk of recidivism)? (required)
If you replied yes to Q17: What is the procedure based on? (You can reply affirmatively to all options above, in case there are more procedures in use. However, if you do not know the answer, you can leave the options blank and make sure you provided us with the name/s of the risk assessment tool(s), if relevant)
If relevant: Do any of the tools assess dynamic/changing factors (e.g., social relations, employment, substance abuse)?
Overall, to what extent would you say is this tool(s) widespread in the country?
 
Question 18
Does the government fund or directly run prison-based disengagement or de-radicalization programs for offenders? (required)
If yes, to what extent would you say are such programs widespread across the country?
If relevant: Overall, these programs are …
 
Question 19

Does the government fund or directly run post-detention rehabilitation programs (i.e., disengagement/ deradicalization/social or health assistance) for offenders linked to extremism/terrorism?

(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)

19A. Organised at central government level (required)
19B. Organised by at least one federal state or devolved national authority or regional government (required)
19C. Organised by at least one local government (required)
If you replied YES to two or three options above: Which of the government levels is the most active in this regard?
If relevant: Overall, to what extent would you say such programs are widespread in the country?
 
Question 20

Based on your professional judgement, please indicate the overall role prescribed by government for the following actors in the rehabilitation dimension of CVE (i.e., dealing with offenders/ persons already engaged in extremist/radicalized behaviours or groups).

Role of sectors in rehabiitation dimension
 

PART II: Crime Prevention and the Use of Risk Assessment Indicators in Criminal Justice and Social Care Policies

 
Question 21
Does the country have a national crime prevention strategy (in some countries crime prevention might be referred to as community safety)? (required)
 
Question 22
Are there government endorsed crime prevention multi-agency structures in the country? (required)
 
Question 23

In your professional judgement, how extensive is social crime prevention throughout the country?

(Social crime prevention, sometimes known as ‘community safety’, engages with particular age groups or communities to change behaviour, provide support, and reduce chances of offending. The interventions can be made by youth workers, social services, police or other agencies.)

In the country, social crime prevention is developed… (required)
 
Question 24
Situational crime prevention involves ‘target-hardening’ or designing the environment to reduce criminal opportunity (e.g. installing CCTV cameras or removing dark alleyways from urban design). In your professional judgement, would you say that in the country: (required)
 
Question 25
Do the police formally assess the risk posed by non-offenders (i.e., persons who are believed to be at risk of committing a violent or serious offence, but are not yet convicted)? Please do not include risk assessment for potential extremism/terrorism offences here. (required)
If there is such formal risk assessment, what is it based on? (You can reply affirmatively to all options below, if there are multiple approaches to risk assessment in use)
If relevant, do any of the tools assess dynamic/changing factors (e.g., social relations, employment, substance abuse)?
 
Question 26
Is there a formal risk assessment procedure for offenders, designed to assess the risk of re-offending? Please do not include risk assessment procedures for terrorism or extremism here. (required)
If there are such risk assessment procedures, what are they based on? (You can reply affirmatively to all options below, if there are multiple approaches to risk assessment in use)
If relevant, do any of the tools assess dynamic/changing factors (e.g., social relations, employment, substance abuse)?
 
Question 27
Is there a formal risk assessment procedure used by any state agency in the field of youth delinquency, other than cases related to extremism/terrorism? (required)
If there are such tool(s), what are they based on? (You can reply affirmatively to all options below, if there are multiple approaches to risk assessment in use)
If relevant, do any of the tools assess dynamic/changing factors (e.g., social relations, employment, substance abuse)?
 
Question 28
Is there a formal risk assessment procedure used by any state agency in the field of child protection? (required)
If there is such procedure, what is it based on? (You can reply affirmatively to all options below, if there are multiple approaches to risk assessment in use)
If relevant, do any of the tools assess dynamic/changing factors (e.g., social relations, employment, substance abuse)?
 
Question 29
Is there a formal risk assessment procedure for judging clients’ potential harm (to themselves or others) used in the social service domain by state agencies? (required)
If there is such procedure, what is it based on? (You can reply affirmatively to all options below, if there are multiple tools in use)
If relevant, do any of the tools assess dynamic/changing factors (e.g., social relations, employment, substance abuse)?
 
Question 30
Privacy notice

The data obtained from this survey are handled according to the rules stipulated in the consent form, which was sent to you together with the link to this page. Please, make sure to fill in and send the consent form before you proceed with the survey.

The University of Warwick is the Data Controller of any information you have entered on this form and is committed to protecting the rights of individuals in line with Data Protection Legislation. The University's Data Protection webpages provide further information on your rights and how the University processes personal data. If you wish to submit a data subjects rights request, make a complaint or report a suspected personal data breach, please contact the University’s Data Protection Officer by email at infocompliance@warwick.ac.uk.

Let us know you agree to cookies

We use cookies to give you the best online experience. Please let us know if you agree to functional, advertising and performance cookies. You can update your cookie preferences at any time.

Cookie policy