U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 

Call Management and Community Policing:
A Guidebook for Law Enforcement 

Report 
Contributors: 
Tom McEwen 
Deborah Spence 
Russell Wolff 
Julie Wartell 
Barbara Webster 


Call Management and Community Policing:
A Guidebook for Law Enforcement 

February 2003 

Report Contributors: 
Tom McEwen 
Deborah Spence 
Russell Wolff 
Julie Wartell 
Barbara Webster 

This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement No. 1999-CK-WX-K007 
awarded to the Institute for Law and Justice by the Office of Community Oriented 
Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein are 
those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or 
policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 

ISBN: 1-932582-21-5 



Foreword 

Community policing has shifted police departments' 
attention toward new policing goals, such as working more 
closely with community members to solve problems and 
prevent crime. Although it seems obvious that officers must 
have blocks of time available to do the work of community 
policing, this reality often is not fully acknowledged or 
addressed. Innovative call management strategies can aid in 
freeing up officer time, yet it is not always easy to see how 
those strategies fit with community policing. In fact, many 
alternatives for handling citizen calls to the policeoefor 
example, telephone reporting units, responses by civilian 
community service officers, and more recently, 3-1-1 
systemsoewere not necessarily introduced to further 
community policing goals, but to contain operating costs or 
to handle an overload of non-emergency calls coming in on 
9-1-1 emergency lines. As police departments continue to 
address those needs, they are also seeking ways to 
accomplish additional goals under community policing and 
to measure the success of their community policing efforts. 

A primary concern in preparing this Guidebook was to 
balance ideas about "what could be" with a clear picture of 
what currently exists. To begin addressing this concern, a 
national survey of police departments was conducted. The 
survey focused on identifying existing call management 
strategies, the types of community policing activities 
actually being implemented, and the data currently available 
to police from their computer aided dispatch (CAD) 
systems and other sources. We discovered that departments 
do in fact capture a significant amount of data that can help 
them plan for and evaluate their community policing 


efforts. We also discovered various differences and 
similarities based on jurisdiction population, which were 
particularly valuable in preparing the Guidebook. 

Research for the Guidebook also involved conducting case 
studies, interviews, and document reviews to better 
understand how individual departments are making direct 
links between their call management strategies and 
community policing. As a result of these efforts, the 
Guidebook is able to provide specific examples of how 
current call management practices throughout the country 
support community policing, as well as discuss the potential 
of various strategies for improving community policing 
efforts in the future. 



Table of Contents 

Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview of Key Concepts ............................. 1
Purpose of the Guidebook ......................................................... 1
Overview of Contents ............................................................. 3
community Policing Concepts ...................................................... 5
Call Management Concepts ......................................................... 7
State of Call Management ........................................................ 12

Chapter 2: Call Intake Strategies ............................................... 15
Call Priorities and Classifications ............................................. 17
Overview of Intake Strategies ................................................... 19
3-1-1 Systems ................................................................... 19
Telephone Reporting Units ....................................................... 23
Mail-in Reports ................................................................. 25
Internet Reports ................................................................ 26
Walk-Ins to Police Stations and Storefronts ..................................... 28
Appointments .................................................................... 31
Summary ......................................................................... 32

Chapter 3: Managing Call Response ............................................... 33
Call Stacking and Delayed Response .............................................. 35
Tranferring and Referring Calls ................................................. 37
Alternative Responders .......................................................... 38
Managing Call Response from the Field ........................................... 42

Chapter 4: Considerations for Successful Implementation ......................... 43
Planning and Evaluation ......................................................... 46
Policy and Procedure Changes .................................................... 48
Call Types: Classifications and Priorities ...................................... 49
Resource Allocation ............................................................. 51
Staffing ........................................................................ 52
Acquiring Technology and Other Resources ........................................ 54
Information and Training ........................................................ 55
Getting Buy-In .................................................................. 58 


Challenges to Implementation .................................................... 59
Technology ...................................................................... 59
Policies and Procedures ......................................................... 60
Community Involvement ........................................................... 60
Citizen and Police Acceptance ................................................... 61
Special Changes for Different Service Options ................................... 62
Summary ......................................................................... 64

Chapter 5: Using the Data ....................................................... 65
Types of Information ............................................................ 68
Data on Source of Call and Responder ............................................ 69
Definitions of Call Types ....................................................... 69
Integrated Information Management Systems ....................................... 70
Analysis ........................................................................ 71
Crime and Problem Analysis ...................................................... 72
Measuring the Success of Call Management Strategies ............................. 73
Officer Access to Data .......................................................... 74
Problem-Solving in the Field .................................................... 74
Resource Allocation ............................................................. 75
Management Accountability ....................................................... 76
Interacting with the Community .................................................. 77

Chapter 6: Summary of Recommendations ........................................... 79
Call Management Steps to Enhance Community Policing ............................. 82
Additional Resources and References ............................................. 87

Appendix ........................................................................ 95
Introduction .................................................................... 97
Methodology ..................................................................... 98
Findings ....................................................................... 100
Discussion ..................................................................... 113
Conclusion ..................................................................... 117 


Chapter 1 
Introduction and Overview of Key Concepts 




Introduction and Overview 
of Key Concepts  

Purpose of the Guidebook

Call Management and Community Policing: A Guidebook 
for Law Enforcement focuses on police call management 
strategies and how they affect the practice of community 
policing. In preparing the guidebook, the Office of 
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) worked 
with the Institute for Law and Justice (ILJ) to address these 
questions: 

. 
How are police departments around the country
currently managing calls for service? How are they
handling non-emergency calls? 


. 
What are some specific examples of call
management strategies that police departments
consider successful?


. 
What issues and challenges should be addressed to
successfully implement various call management
strategies?


. 
How can police departments make better use of
data on calls received and call responses?


. 
What key steps should departments take to plan call
management strategies that enhance community
policing?




All police departments manage calls for service by making 
important decisions on call handling and dispatching. Over 
the past 30 years, most departments have come to rely 
heavily on computer aided dispatch (CAD) systems to 
ensure that officers are dispatched quickly to emergencies, 
and to help manage the tremendous volume of non-
emergency calls and requests for information that come into 
their communications centers. In addition, CAD and other 
technology improvements have made it much more feasible 
to capture and analyze data on calls for service. 
Community policing does not change this, but it does shift 
attention toward new policing goals. For example, police 
officers are expected to be more proactive, working with 
the community to solve problems and prevent crime. 
Officers must have blocks of time available to do this work. 
The introduction of innovative call management strategies 
has become increasingly important to free up officer time, 
meet other goals for responding effectively to citizens' 
requests for service, and still respond to life-threatening and 
other emergencies in the shortest possible time. 
This guidebook focuses on the direct relationship between 
community policing and managing calls for service 
effectively, and includes practical examples from police 
departments around the country. The goals of the guidebook 
are to (1) provide information on innovative call 
management practices; (2) address key issues involved in 
implementing call management strategies in a community 
policing organization; (3) offer ideas for obtaining and 
managing data on calls for service; and (4) provide resource 
information for departments that want to learn about 
promising call management practices. 



Overview of Contents

This section offers a brief overview of major topics covered 
in the guidebook. 

. 
Key Concepts. The next sections of this chapter 
discuss the two key concepts of call management 
and community policing. These sections provide 
background information and context for the more 
detailed information contained in later chapters. 

. 
National Survey. One of the first steps in preparing 
the guidebook was to obtain a clear picture of the 
"state of call management" in the country by 
conducting a survey of police departments, as well 
as interviews and site visits to selected departments. 
Highlights of the survey findings are noted at the 
end of this chapter, with other results and examples 
of promising strategies presented throughout the 
guidebook. The appendix contains a complete 
report on the survey methodology and results. 

. 
Call Intake Strategies. Call intake strategies are 
discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2. In addition 
to 7-digit numbers and 9-1-1, intake strategies 
include walk-in reporting to police stations and 
storefronts, 3-1-1 as a non-emergency telephone 
number, mail-in reports, and the Internet for 
reporting. The chapter describes how each strategy 
works and the benefits of each strategy for 
community policing. 



. 
Managing Call Response. Chapter 3 covers 
response strategies such as call stacking and 
delayed response, and transferring and referring 
calls to other agencies. It also discusses special 
teams, civilian personnel, and volunteers to handle 
certain types of calls; management of calls from the 
field; and examples of innovative call responses. 

. 
Considerations for Successful Implementation. 
Chapter 4 discusses policy and procedure changes, 
getting buy-in for new call management strategies, 
and challenges associated with implementing 
various call intake and response strategies. 

. 
Using the Data. Chapter 5 discusses using the data 
on calls for serviceoeregardless of how they come in 
to the departmentoeto enhance community policing 
efforts. 

. 
Summary of Recommendations. Chapter 6 
reviews important steps agencies should take when 
implementing new call management strategies. 

. 
References. At the end of the guidebook is a list of 
selected websites and other references on call 
management and community policing. 



Community Policing Concepts

Providing a concise definition of community policing is a 
challenge, since local law enforcement agencies describe a 
variety of activities as community policing. Many agree 
with the COPS program evaluators who said "community 
policing should look different from city to city and within a 
city, from neighborhood to neighborhood, as police respond 
to local needs and desires."1 Because cities and counties 
differ substantially in a variety of ways, there is no 
universal way in which police departments envision and 
practice community policing. However, most people 
working in law enforcement do agree on two broad 
principles that represent the foundation of community 
policing: 

. 
An emphasis on problem-solving, as envisioned in 
problem-oriented policing2 

. 
Community involvement and building partnerships 
among police, citizens, community-based 
organizations, local government, and others 

The Community Policing Consortium, an organization of 
national policing associations,3 emphasized these two 
principles in 1994 when it stated: "Community policing is, 
in essence, a collaboration between the police and the 
community that identifies and solves community 
problems."4 More recently, the Consortium has added 
"change management" as a third core component of 
community policing, along with problem-solving and 
community partnership.5 This addition recognizes the 
importance of organization-wide support for community 
policing, including support in terms of how calls for service 
are managed. 


Footnotes
1 J. Roth, et al. National Evaluation of the 
COPS Program -Title I of the 1994 Crime 
Act. U. S. Department of Justice, National 
Institute of Justice, August 2000. 

2 For background information on problem 
oriented policing, see Herman Goldstein, 
Problem-Oriented Policing. New York: 
McGraw-Hill, 1990; John Eck and William 
Spelman, Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented 
Policing in Newport News. Washington, D.C.: 
Police Executive Research Forum, 1987; and 
Michael Scott, Problem-Oriented Policing: 
Reflections on the First 20 Years. U. S. 
Department of Justice, Office of Community 
Oriented Policing Services, 2001. 

3 The Community Policing Consortium is a 
federally-funded organization composed of the 
International Association of Chiefs of Police 
(IACP), National Organization of Black Law 
Enforcement Executives (NOBLE), National 
Sheriffs'Association (NSA), Police Executive 
Research Forum (PERF), and Police 
Foundation. 

4 Community Policing Consortium, 

Understanding Community Policing: A 
Framework for Action. U. S. Department of 
Justice, 1994. 

5 
www.communitypolicing.org 
/about2.html (November 20, 2001). 



The national call management survey conducted for this 
guidebook showed that police departments around the 
country are putting these principles into practice. For 
example, more than three-fourths of departments (77 
percent) assign patrol officers to specific geographic areas, 
and more than half (55 percent) have adopted problem-
solving techniques. Only about one-third report having 
changed communications procedures for call handling as 
part of community policing, although many indicate that 
they plan to adopt new call management strategies in the 
future. 



Call Management Concepts

Police departments' ability to manage and analyze calls for 
service has been steadily improving ever since the first 
computeraided dispatch (CAD) system came on line in 
1966. A primary objective for CAD was to help 
departments get officers to the scene of life-threatening and 
other emergencies in the shortest possible time. CAD 
became increasingly important with the advent of the 9-1-1 
national emergency number, which was first introduced in 
1968 (see sidebar, "Calling the Police"). This 3-digit 
number was selected for three simple reasons: it was not an 
area code, it was easy to remember, and it was easy to find 
on the dial. 

In one sense, 9-1-1 became too successful. It resulted in a 
dramatic increase in the number of non-emergency calls 
coming in to the police. To manage the overload, 
departments assigned priorities to incoming calls based on 
the seriousness of the problem and the need for an 
immediate response. Aided by CAD's call stacking 
capabilities, police were able to more efficiently manage 
delayed responses to certain non-emergency calls. 

CAD also gave police a quick way to systematically 
analyze the calls they received, for example by type of call, 
location, day, and time. In addition, CAD's time stamp 
function made it relatively easy to calculate response times 
and the time officers spent on each call. When officers 
called the communications center and reported self initiated 
activities such as court duty and lunch, CAD captured that 
time as well. 


Text Box:

Calling the Police 

.1938. Great Britain began "9-9-9" 
service, providing residents with an 
emergency number that was easy 
to remember and easy to find on 
the dial. 

.1968. The first 9-1-1 system in the 
U.S. became operational in 
Haleyville, Alabama. 
Before that, residents called the 
police by dialing a seven digit 
number (or "O" to have a 
telephone company operator 
connect them). 

.Mid-1980s to present. Enhanced 
9-1-1 has been installed in an 
increasing number of departments, 
giving police instant access to a 
caller's telephone number and 
address. 

.1997. The U. S. Federal 
Communications Commission 
(FCC) designated 3-1-1 as a 
national, voluntary, non-toll 
number for non-emergencies. 

.2005. FCC regulations call for 
wireless services to make 
technologies available by 2005 
that allow police to identity the 
number and location of cell phone 
calls to 9-1-1. 



By analyzing CAD data, police departments were able to 
confirm what patrol officers and communications personnel 
knew from their daily experience. First, certain days, times, 
and geographic areas needed more coverage than others to 
handle the volume of calls and still provide rapid responses 
to emergencies. Resource allocation planning became 
critical for anticipating staffing needs and for ensuring that 
enough officers were on duty at the right times and in the 
right areas. Second, a high percentage of 9-1-1 callsoewhile 
they were of great concern to the calleroewere not true 
emergencies. The police response to many of these calls 
could be delayed without compromising either citizen safety 
or officers' ability to solve the crime. In fact, many non-
emergency calls to 9-1-1 did not require an in-person police 
response at all. Instead of dialing a 7-digit police numbers 
for such questions as, "Is my husband in jail?" or "When is 
the power coming back on in my neighborhood?" many 
citizens were dialing the more convenient 9-1-1 number. 


Differential Police Response

Police departments were faced with a dilemma. Many 
departments saw advantages to providing an in-person, 
sworn response to as many crime-related calls as possible. 
In fact, a significant number of departments today are still 
attempting to do this. But by the 1970s and 1980s, the tax 
reform movement resulted in reductions in traditional 
funding sources for many police departments, as well as a 
new emphasis on cutting costs throughout municipal 
government. Police were under pressure to "do more with 
less" and adopt "cutback management" strategies. These 
mandates to cut costs influenced police departments to 
examine how calls for service could be managed more 
efficiently without compromising citizen safety. 
In addition, research had shown that rapid response had 
little effect on the ability of police to solve "cold" crimes, 


and that random patrol did little to deter crime.6 Many 
departments started experimenting with alternative call 
handling strategies, collectively referred to as "differential 
police response" (DPR). 

In addition to having call takers answer certain questions 
themselves or refer callers to more appropriate agencies, 
DPR included delaying patrol officers' responses, having 
trained civilians handle certain calls, taking reports by 
telephone, asking callers to file reports at police stations, 
and sending report forms (for initial reports, addenda, or 
property lists) to be returned by mail. Evaluations of DPR 
in the mid-1980s found that 

. 
Most call handling alternatives helped police better 
manage their patrol resources and in turn reduce the 
response time to true emergencies, and 

. 
Citizens were satisfied with the alternative 
responses if certain conditions were met: the call 
taker was courteous, explained why a patrol unit 
would not be sent right away, and provided 
information about the alternative response and how 
long it would take.7 

Police continue to balance sometimes competing goals to 
respond quickly to emergencies, manage limited resources 
efficiently, solve crimes and problems, and more 
importantly, prevent crimes. At the same time, several 
major changes have had a profound effect on police work, 
including call management. One is the organizational shift 
toward community policing. This has gone hand-in-hand 
with an increased emphasis in policing and throughout 
government on accountability and such concepts as 
"seamless customer service." Finally, rapid changes in 


Footnotes, continued
6 For a summary of this research, see L.W. 
Sherman, D. Gottfredson, D. MacKenzie, et 
al. Preventing Crime: What Works, What 
Doesn't, What's Promising, Research Report, 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 
Office of Justice Programs, 1996. 

7 M. Cohen and J.T. McEwen. "Handling Calls 
for ServiceoeAlternatives to Traditional 
Policing." Research in Action, NIJ Report, 
September 1984; J.T. McEwen, E.F. Connors, 
and M.I. Cohen. Evaluation of the Differential 
Police Response Field Test. Alexandria, 
Virginia: Research Management Associates, 
1986. 



information technologies, with advances such as Enhanced 
9-1-1, cell phones, 3-1-1 non-emergency numbers, and the 
Internet have created new options as well as challenges for 
call management. 

Linking Call Intake and Response to Community Policing

Community policing retains many of the same goals as in 
the past for managing police resources efficiently. These 
goals include controlling the time officers spend handling 
calls for service and other activities, as well as managing 
"available" time (officers are in service but not on a call). 
But community policing includes additional goals for 
involving officers in problem-solving and other pro-active 
work with community members. These goals underscore the 
importance of 

. 
Freeing up significant blocks of officers' time, and 

. 
Using that available time for problem-solving 
and other work that fosters police-community
partnerships.


Police departments around the country are now 
experimenting with ways to better manage calls to promote 
problem-solving and support other community policing 
activities. They continue to identify two practical reasons 
for developing innovative call management strategies. First, 
a significant number of calls are related to crimes that were 
committed hours or days earlier, with little chance of 
identifying a suspect by responding in person right away. 
Second, other city agencies or community organizations 
sometimes are better suited for handling the matter. In these 
cases, law enforcement is helping to meet community needs 
by making referrals or transferring the call. The problem 


comes when these needs are not true police matters to begin 
with and are also coming to police attention via the 9-1-1 
emergency number. 

Call Intake and Response Strategies

This guidebook discusses call management in terms of two 
main elements, as illustrated in the graph that follows. First, 
intake strategies are the methods by which departments 
enable the public to contact or report a crime to the police. 
These methods include 3-1-1, telephone reporting, Internet, 
mail, and walk-in reporting at police stations or storefront 
operations, as well as calls to emergency 9-1-1 and 7-digit 
numbers. 

Second, response strategies involve the methods, 
personnel, and other resources needed to respond to calls 
received through the department's intake strategies. As 
discussed in Chapter 3, response strategies include various 
types of delayed responses by sworn officers, as well as 
innovations such as community service officers and 3-1-1 
systems for referral and call tracking. Several examples in 
Chapter 3 illustrate how departments have accepted 
additional challenges to help free up more time for 
problem-solving and other community policing activities. 



State of Call Management

In July 2000, ILJ conducted a nationwide survey to 
document the extent of various call intake and response 
strategies by police agencies. The survey also asked about 
community policing practices and about applications of call 
for service dataoeparticularly data captured by CAD 
systemsoeto identify and analyze problems and help measure 
the success of community policing activities. Survey 
follow-up included telephone interviews and site visits to 
several departments. 



Survey results provided insight on the extent to which 
police departments currently have various types of call 
management strategies (see Chapters 2 and 3). In addition, 
the survey showed that most departments were considering 
the implementation of at least one additional call 
management strategy in the future. The survey was also 
helpful in identifying specific departments that have 
implemented several different call management strategies 
and are also involved in many different community policing 
activities. Some of these departments are highlighted in 
examples throughout the guidebook. 

While some call handling options were similar for 
departments in jurisdictions of all sizes, other results varied 
greatly. For example, most police departments in 
jurisdictions with populations of 50,000 or more had 
telephone report units (TRUs) but were unlikely to make 
use of scheduled appointments, while the majority of 
departments in jurisdictions of less than 50,000 offered 
scheduled appointments with officers but did not have 
TRUs. The introduction of mail-in, walk-in, and Internet 
reporting was not related to jurisdiction size. 
The remainder of the guidebook describes various call 
management strategies, provides illustrations of current 
practices, and offers ideas and recommendations on how 
call management strategies can enhance community 
policing. 

Text Box:
Call Management Survey Sample 

For the ILJ call management 
survey in 2000, questionnaires 
were sent to 695 police 
departments, including all 
departments in jurisdictions with 
populations of 250,000 or more 
and a sample of departments in 
jurisdictions with populations less 
than 250,000. Nearly 70 percent of 
these departments completed the 
survey. 

Respondents were grouped into 
four categories based on the 
jurisdictions' population: less than 
25,000 (27 percent of respondents); 
25,000 to 50,000 (33 percent of 
respondents); 50,000 to 250,000 
(27 percent of respondents); and 
250,000 or more (13 percent of 
respondents). 




Chapter2 

Call Intake Strategies 




Call Intake Strategies 

Effective policing would not be possible without some 
means to prioritize calls for service and handle different 
types of calls in different ways. Although officers must be 
dispatched immediately to certain calls, events requiring an 
emergency response are only a small percentage of total 
calls for service. For many departments, the overuse of 
9-1-1 for non-emergencies and routine inquiries has been a 
driving force behind the development of new call intake 
strategies. 

This chapter first provides background information and 
findings on call priorities and classifications from the 
national survey, then focuses on specific call intake 
strategies and how they can enhance community policing. 
Response strategies are covered in Chapter 3, and Chapter 4 
discusses factors to consider when planning to implement 
various call handling options, including challenges that 
police departments have had to overcome. 

Call Priorities and Classifications

In the call management survey, departments were asked to 
provide the total number of calls received in 1999 and a 
breakdown of those calls by priority level. As a first step in 
analyzing these responses, we took a closer look at six 
departments that reported handling between about 294,000 
and 607,300 calls annually. These departments did not 
represent the total number of survey respondents with call 
volumes in this range, but they provided documents 
detailing call classifications, definitions of call types, and 
policies. Just within this small "snapshot" of departments, 
there was significant variation in the percent of calls 
classified as highest priority, ranging from a low of 0.2 



percent to a high of 19.1 percent. Similarly, in four of these 
departments, fewer than 20 call types were included in the 
highest priority code, while two departments had over 35 
call types under priority one. The main point is that policies 
classifying calls as priority 1, priority 2, etc., can be 
expected to greatly influence patrol officers' workload and 
the time they have available for self-initiated activities. 

The six departments illustrate how call classification 
policies differ among police departments but are not a 
representative sample. In fact, great care must be taken in 
making comparisons across jurisdictions because of 
variations in priority code definitions, associated response 
options, call classifications, and state laws defining crime 
types. (Call priorities and classifications are discussed in 
greater detail in Chapter 4). Over the years, the guidebook 
authors have found that on average, emergency calls 
comprise only about 10 percent of the total calls a 
department receives.8 

Although cross-site comparisons are difficult, departments' 
ability to analyze their own CAD data has steadily 
improved. The survey showed that 83 percent of 
departments routinely analyze CAD data by types of calls 
and 75 percent analyze CAD data by beats or service areas. 

Footnotes, continued
8 ILJ bases this finding on its own experience 
conducting more than 60 comprehensive 
police management, staffing, and resource 
allocation studies for local jurisdictions. 


Overview of Intake Strategies

The national survey showed that virtually every responding 
police department has implemented at least one call intake 
strategy in addition to 9-1-1 and 7-digit police numbers. 
Walk-in reporting at police stations or storefronts is the 
most frequent alternative (see survey results in sidebar). 
Although police departments have implemented these call 
intake strategies for a variety of reasons, many agencies 
now take advantage of them to support community policing. 
The sections that follow discuss how different call intake 
strategies have been applied and how they can enhance 
community policing (challenges associated with 
implementing these strategies are discussed in Chapter 4). 

3-1-1 Systems

By the 1990s, an overload of non-emergency and non-
police related calls on 9-1-1 had created serious problems, 
with 9-1-1 callers receiving busy signals or getting placed 
on hold at peak times in some cities. One solution has been 
to establish 3-1-1 as an easy-to-remember telephone number 
for contracting police about non-emergency situations. In 
October 1996, the first 3-1-1 system was launched as a pilot 
project in Baltimore, Maryland,9 and in February 1997, the 
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) designated 
3-1-1 as a national, voluntary, non-toll phone number for 
non-emergencies. 

Percent of Departments Using 
Alternative Call Intake Strategies 
Strategies*                      Percent 
Walk-ins/storefront reporting    95 
Telephone reporting              56 
Appointments with officers       42 
Mail-in                          23 
Internet reporting                6 
3-1-1                             3 

* On the survey, all strategies listed, 
with the exception of 3-1-1, were 
referred to as methods for filing 
police reports. 


Footnotes, continued
9 The Baltimore Police Department 3-1-1 
service was included in a recent evaluation 
(Lorraine Mazerolle, et al., Managing Citizens 
Calls to the Police: An Assessment of Non-
Emergency Call Systems, draft report to the 
National Institute of Justice, 2001). Baltimore 
now offers a more comprehensive system that 
integrates most city services. 



The national call management survey showed that in mid-2000, 
only 3 percent of police departments had 3-1-1 
systems for non-emergency calls. Half of these were 
jurisdictions with populations greater than 1 million. 
However, another 31 percent of responding police 
departments, mostly large agencies, said they were 
considering the possibility. Between 1996 and 2001, COPS 
Office start-up funding helped launch 3-1-1 systems in 12 
jurisdictions.10 

The two most common types of 3-1-1 systems are police 
operated systems, where 3-1-1 is promoted as a number to 
call for non-emergency police matters; and 3-1-1 systems 
operated by another city or county agency, where 3-1-1 is 
intended as a number to call for all city or county services 
(including non-emergency police matters). For example, 
Chicago and Dallas implemented 3-1-1 for citywide 
services, with Chicago describing the number as "your call 
to city hall." The police department in Las Vegas, which 
established 3-1-1 for non-emergency police services, 
encourages citizens to call 3-1-1 "when there's an urgency 
but no emergency."11 

Within these two types of 3-1-1 services, there is 
considerable variation in terms of staffing, records 
management, and follow-up. The advantage of the 3-1-1 
number for citizens is the convenience of having only a 
3-digit number to remember, rather than the 7-digit 
non-emergency police telephone number (or the 7-digit 
numbers of other local agencies). 


Footnotes, continued
10 Between 1996 and 1999, COPS 3-1-1 
grants were awarded in Baltimore, San Jose, 
Birmingham, Dukes County (Massachusetts), 
Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, Rochester, and 
South Pasadena (California). In 2000, Austin, 
Framingham (Massachusetts), and Orange 
County (Florida) received COPS start-up 
grants for "public service model" 3-1-1 
systems. 

11 Baltimore publicized the "urgency but no 
emergency" slogan as well when it began 3-1-1, 
but with the expanded service, the city's 
web site states that "3-1-1 is now Baltimore's 
call to City Hall." 




Operationally, the telephone company converts the 3-1-1 
number to a 7-digit number. For police managed systems, 
this would usually be the non-emergency 7-digit number 
normally dialed to reach the police department. Depending 
on how and why the jurisdiction implemented 3-1-1, the 
intake strategies vary. 

Police departments with 3-1-1 numbers usually have a 
designated group of call takers to receive 3-1-1 calls while 
another group is devoted to 9-1-1 calls.12 An alternative is to 
have the same call takers handle both types of calls and 
identify the emergency line with a distinctive ring or light 
on the phone. The introduction of 3-1-1 has no effect on the 
CAD system. Call takers enter the same information into 
the CAD system as before, and the system then takes 
appropriate actions for handling the non-emergency event, 
such as assigning a lower priority to the dispatch or routing 
the call to a telephone report unit. If the 3-1-1 call, such as 
a stray dog, might be more appropriately handled by 
another agency, such as animal control, the caller can be 
transferred directly or referred to the appropriate agency. 



Footnotes, continued
12 In Chicago, the service center for 3-1-1 (a 
citywide service) is housed separately from the 
emergency communications center, but 3-1-1 
staff includes police officers on light duty as 
well as civilians. 


Enhancing Community Policing

The primary reason most jurisdictions implement a 3-1-1 
strategy is to reduce the number of non-emergency calls and 
information requests coming in to 9-1-1. Another goal of 3-1-1 
is to quickly connect citizens with appropriate agencies 
to serve their needs. The 3-1-1 number also has the 
potential to benefit community policing in other ways. 
For example, 

. 
It can alert other agencies to citizen problems for 
which they, rather than the police, have mandates to 
assume primary responsibility. 

. 
It eases the burden on police personnel who answer 
emergency calls. 

. 
It can facilitate communication between community 
members and agencies by attempting to connect 
citizens with the right agency, department, or 
person the first time. 

. 
It can improve accountability for follow-up. Some 
3-1-1 systems provide callers with a "tracking 
number" so they can check on the status of their 
service requests. 

. 
It can promote coordination of city services.
Regardless of which agency staffs the 3-1-1 line,
planning the service and operating it effectively
requires significant police involvement. 


In Dallas, where 3-1-1 is a city service,13 call takers noted 
that 3-1-1 reduced the number of times citizen callers were 
transferred when trying to reach various city departments. 
In addition, the 3-1-1 call takers felt they were 
knowledgeable and helpful regarding all city services, and 
that by knowing the bigger picture, they could deal with an 
extensive range of citizen problems. 



Footnotes, continued

13 The Dallas 3-1-1 system is operated by the 
Fire Division. 



The 3-1-1 number can also serve as a data collection tool. 
The call system captures information that can help police 
and municipal government identify and analyze crime and 
disorder problems, as well as other types of complaints ( for 
example, broken fire hydrants, power outages, and 
potholes). This can serve as a starting point for determining 
a plan of action. 

For 3-1-1 data to be valuable in identifying and analyzing 
problems, however, it is important to carefully plan what 
information the system will collect. For example, in one 
police-managed 3-1-1 system, the only calls entered into a 
computer system were those where an officer was 
dispatched or police reports were taken. The 3-1-1 calls 
referred to other city agencies were not entered into the 
system, eliminating any possibility of systematically 
analyzing those calls.14 In addition, a CAD system that 
captures 3-1-1 calls may not differentiate how calls enter 
the system. 

Telephone Reporting Units

More than half of the surveyed police departments (56 
percent) have telephone reporting units (TRU). The national 
survey showed TRU were operated by police in 93 percent 
of jurisdictions with populations of 250,000 or more and in 
77 percent of jurisdictions with 50,000 to 250,000 residents. 
In contrast, 43 percent of departments in jurisdictions of 
25,000 to 50,000 and only 29 percent in jurisdictions of less 
than 25,000 had TRU. TRU staff take reports over the 
phone on incidents that do not require an officer to be 
dispatched. A call may reach TRU in various ways, 
depending on the agency. The unit may have a direct 
number, a call taker may route the call to the unit, or the 
reporting party's contact information may be passed on to 
TRU to call the individual back. Although agencies vary as 


Text Box:
Teleserve Cadets in Knoxville 

In addition to sworn personnel 
permanently assigned to the unit 
and those on temporary 
assignments or restricted duty, 
police cadets staff the Knoxville 
Police Department's Teleserve 
Unit. In 2000, cadets took 42 
percent of the reports coming into 
Teleserve. Using cadets not only 
allows patrol resources to stay in 
the field but also provides 
individuals who are pursuing a 
career in law enforcement a way to 
become familiar with the 
department's policies, organization, 
and personnel. 

Footnotes, continued
14 Lorraine Mazerolle et al., Managing 
Citizens Calls to the Police: An Assessment of 
Non-Emergency Call Systems, draft report to 
the National Institute of Justice, 2001. 





Text Box:
MPDC Telephone Report Unit 
The Metropolitan Police, District 
of Columbia (MPDC) operates a 
Telephone Report Unit (TRU) that 
handles reports for the following: 
"damage to or destruction of 
property, stolen vehicles or 
bicycles, lost property, stolen/lost 
tags, injury reporting (except those 
occurring on public space), animal 
bites, all thefts from auto, Theft II's 
and those Theft I's which do not 
exceed $1,000 in property loss, 
certain hit and run accidents, 
larcenies from mail, and additional 
information on all reports." 
MPDC General Order No. 401.10 
end text box


to what call types are routed to TRU, the common thread is 
that the incidents are non-emergency situations with limited 
chances of apprehending a suspect at the scene. TRU can be 
a particularly efficient response to handling lower priority 
calls for service. 

One advantage of any specialized unit is that the personnel 
develop an increased efficiency and mastery of the task. 
Some agencies staff TRU with patrol officers on limited 
duty (due to injury), who bring to the job considerable 
report taking and field experience. Other agencies find that 
staffing TRU with trained, experienced civilians can be 
even more cost-effective. Civilian personnel are often 
motivated by the responsibility involved in taking reports 
from community members and can be trained to provide 
thorough, well-written reports. 

Enhancing Community Policing

Minor incidents handled by TRU do not require field 
responses by patrol officers and can be more quickly and 
efficiently handled by TRU personnel. Delegating non-
emergency, non-suspect incidents to TRU frees up patrol 
resources, providing officers with more time and 
opportunities for community-oriented, proactive work. 

Citizen satisfaction with TRU (and other intake strategies) 
tends to depend on how the alternative is explained to the 
caller. Department policies typically state that if a citizen 
insists on seeing an officer, one will be sent. In many 
situations, though, citizens may appreciate having their 
needs met more quickly via TRU. The average time for an 
officer to handle a call is 30-45 minutes; and for minor 
incidents reported during busy times, citizens may have to 
wait several hours for an officer to arrive. For example, if 


the caller simply needs to file a report for insurance 
purposes, TRU can be an excellent alternative. Before 
implementing a TRU, departments may want to survey 
citizens about various levels of service; for example, if 
residents can file a report over the phone within an hour or 
receive a patrol response within four hours, which service 
would they rate higher? 

Finally, TRU reports are almost always captured by a 
department's records management system. (Chapter 5 
discusses how data can help provide a more complete 
picture of non-emergency requests for police service). 

Mail-in Reports 

Some departments have developed processes for 
distributing special report forms that citizens can complete 
and mail back to the department. With mail-in reporting, 
citizens can mail an incident report form to report a crime 
or quality of life issue, provide intelligence or anonymous 
tips, file a complaint about police performance, or provide 
supplemental information to the police about a prior 
incident. Citizens can do this anonymously or provide 
contact information. 

Enhancing Community Policing 

When callers have time to provide supplemental 
information after an initial report, they can be more 
thorough in identifying property and providing descriptions. 
Because the national survey did not ask follow-up questions 
about mail-in reports, it is not clear how many contain 
valuable details and how many provide only minimal 
information (e.g., reports on minor traffic accidents filed for 
insurance purposes). However, mail-in reports should not be 
overlooked as a potential source of information for 


Text box:
Mail-in Reports in Knoxville 

The Knoxville, Tennessee, Police 
Department reports that giving 
citizens the option of mailing in 
information when they are less 
upset or have time to provide more 
details puts the citizens more at 
ease. It is one way of showing that 
the police are interested in doing a 
thorough job, as well as 
accommodating the caller's needs. 



Text Box:
Citizens' Online Incident ReportForm, Arlington County 
The Arlington County, Virginia, 
Police Department uses several call 
intake methods for non-
emergencies, including an Internet 
reporting form 
(www.co.arlington.va.us/police) 
The form includes several pull-
down menus. For example, options 
under "type of offense" include 
destruction of property, fraud, 
simple assault, eight types of theft 
(vehicle license plate, bicycle, cell 
phone, etc.), and threatening or 
harassing phone calls. 
Before citizens can submit the 
form, they must check a box 
indicating they are aware that it is 
a crime to submit a false report. 
Several fields for providing contact 
information must also be 
completed. 
end text box


problem-solving. In addition, tips and intelligence received 
through mail-in reports can contain background information 
about a neighborhood or other factors, helping officers 
analyze problems more thoroughly. Feedback about police 
performance can be beneficial for training and education 
purposes. Of course, anonymous information must always 
be verified. 

Internet Reports 

A law enforcement agency's website or email address can 
be available for citizens to report crime and disorder, 
provide feedback on police performance (compliments or 
complaints), or provide investigative information. An 
agency may have forms for citizens to fill out and submit, 
or simply an email address. Personal email and online 
reporting systems do not guarantee anonymity and may 
preclude anonymous tips, except from individuals who 
believe the channels to be secure or untraceable. If an 
agency is receiving online information, it can be stored in a 
database (through forms) or simply in a file for later 
retrieval. 

Internet reporting was in place in only 6 percent of police 
departments responding to the national survey. The 
technology of police agencies is often influenced by the 
technological sophistication and support of the surrounding 
communityoestate and local government, private industry, 
universities, etc. For example, the San Jose, California, 
Police Department, located in the heart of Silicon Valley, 
has had online reporting for several years, receiving 25-30 
online reports daily.15 


Footnotes, continued
15 According to the San Jose Mercury News 
(12/19/99), several California jurisdictions 
began Internet reporting services prior to San 
Jose, including Sacramento, Santa Rosa, and 
Salinas. 


Enhancing Community Policing

Despite the rapid growth of Internet communications, 
relatively few people access the Internet for reporting 
incidents and information to the police. Use of this 
technology can be expected to increase as people become 
more familiar with computers and online resources, and as 
police departments make greater use of online 
opportunities. The Internet allows residents to file a crime 
report any time of day or night and take whatever time they 
need to explain what happened in their own words. 
However, the "digital divide" is still a reality in today's 
economy. Although citizens can access the Internet from 
many public locations (libraries, community centers, cyber 
cafes, etc.), those who have personal computers in their 
homes obviously have an advantage. 

Community policing and problem-solving can be enhanced 
by online reporting's capability to rapidly exchange 
documents with detailed information, data, and pictures. 
Community leaders, among others, may find the Internet a 
convenient way to exchange information with the police. 
The Internet also offers possibilities with respect to crimes 
that are typically underreported. For example, people who 
have witnessed or have knowledge of gang related crimes 
may be apprehensive about having a police officer come to 
their home, but may be willing to file a report online. 
Quality of life issues can also be reported quickly and easily 
over the Internet. The more information the police have, the 
more readily they can identify, analyze, and respond to 
problems. 



Text box:
Police Storefronts in Greensboro 
Greensboro, North Carolina, Police 
Department storefronts, 
implemented with input from 
neighborhood block captains, 
community activists, and city 
council, were customized for each 
district. They put the department 
closer to the community, increased 
police availability, and were found 
to be more inviting, leading to 
more community involvement and 
participation in policing issues. 
end text box


Arlington County, Virginia, Police Chief Edward Flynn has 
expressed hope that his department's new online reporting 
will encourage citizens to report more crimes. "We are 
challenged as an industry to create time for our officers to 
be proactive with community problems," Chief Flynn has 
stated. "The less time we spend chasing our tails and taking 
false alarm calls or minor crime reports, the more time we 
have for prevention."16 

Internet reporting is relatively new. In the near future, 
however, it is likely that departments experienced with this 
option will shed more light on citizen satisfaction with 
Internet reporting, the extent to which citizens take 
advantage of it, and for what purposes. 

Walk-Ins to Police Stations and Storefronts 

Almost every police department accepts crime reports from 
people who walk in to the police station or a district 
substation. Many departments have expanded their walk-in 
reporting options by opening storefront facilities and other 
types of police service centers, sometimes in cooperation 
with other government agencies. 

Storefronts in this country initially became popular in retail 
areas in cities and in suburban "strip" shopping centers. 
Vacant retail space, which often invited crime, could be 
converted to provide a visible police presence as a deterrent 
to crime. As interest in community policing grew, the 
Japanese system of operating neighborhood kobans17 also 
influenced the development of police storefronts in this 
country. 



Footnotes, continued
16 The Washington Post, Alexandria-Arlington 
Extra, P. 3, January 24, 2002. 

17 Koban is a Japanese word for "mini-
station." In Japan, a koban is usually staffed 
by two police officers and located in a 
residential neighborhood. 



Today, police storefront facilities provide services in a 
variety of neighborhood settings, including shopping malls, 
restaurants, apartment complexes, and community centers. 
They tend to be small and often are not permanently staffed. 
Storefronts have been set up by police for several purposes: 

(1) provide a visible police presence in a community; (2) 
hold community meetings and encourage informal 
interaction between police and residents; (3) house police 
services, such as distributing crime prevention information 
or conducting youth programs; and (4) serve as office space 
and a meeting place for officers. Residents may also visit 
storefronts to report crime or suspicious persons, ask law-
related questions, or discuss other issues with the police. 

Some years ago, several studies of the impact of storefronts 
on reducing crime and victimization produced mixed 
results.18 In contrast, a recent case study in Savannah, 
Georgia, describes how four storefront offices appear to 
have contributed to significant reductions in crime.19 In 
addition, storefronts are often requested by residents, and 
there are positive citizen evaluations associated with them.20 

Enhancing Community Policing 

A storefront setting has many potential benefits for 
community policing. It is usually set up with the particular 
needs and culture of the neighborhood in mind and is often 
more accessible by public transportation than the precinct 
station. These factors may encourage people to stop in, 
particularly those who are not comfortable with the more 
formal setting of a traditional precinct or district facility. 
Storefronts provide opportunities for police to foster and 
maintain contacts with residents; develop better rapport 
with members of the public; and build partnerships. They 
also encourage community leaders to meet with police 
informally. 



Footnotes, continued
18 See M. A. Wycoff and W. Skogan, 
"Storefront Police Offices: The Houston Field 
Test," in D. Rosenbaum, editor, Community 
Crime Prevention: Does It Work? Beverly 
Hills, CA: Sage, 1986; W. Skogan, Disorder 
and Decline, NY: Free Press; J. H. Skolnick 
and D. H. Bayley, New Blue Line, Free Press, 
1986; C. Uchida, B. Frost, and S.O.Annon, 
Modern Policing and the Control of Illegal 
Drugs: Testing New Strategies in Two 
American Cities, Research Report, 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 
National Institute of Justice, 1992. 

19 C. Coles, "National COPS Evaluation 
Organizational Change Case Study: Savannah, 
Georgia," one of 10 case studies conducted by 
the John F. Kennedy School of Government, 
Program in Criminal Justice Policy and 
Management, Harvard University, published 
online at 
www.ncjrs.gov/nij/cops_casestudy/savannah2.h 
tml (December 2002). 

20 L. Sherman, D. Gottfredson, D. MacKenzie, 
et al. Preventing Crime: What Works, What 
Doesn't, What's Promising, Research Report, 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 
Office of Justice Programs, 1996. 


Text box:
"COPS Shops" in Spokane 
The Spokane, Washington, Police 
Department currently has ten 
"COPS Shops" (Community 
Oriented Policing substations) 
operating in different 
neighborhoods throughout the city. 
Police personnel, parole officers, 
and community volunteers staff the 
shops. Each shop can develop 
programs based on that 
neighborhood's needs. At one shop, 
Neva-Wood, there are over 160 
projects and programs, including 
Block Watch, Restorative Justice, 
Juvenile Justice, Fax Back, NOPS, 
and Graffiti and Fingerprint 
training. 
end text box


In addition, larger police or multi-agency service centers 
may offer some of the neighborhood-oriented features of 
storefronts while providing a wider range of services. In 
line with community policing goals, these centers involve 
police collaborations with other criminal justice agencies, 
social services, public works, and others who seek to make 
their services more responsive to community needs. For 
example, in Spokane, Washington, parole officers from the 
state Department of Corrections work in COPS Shops (see 
sidebar) along with police personnel and local volunteers. 


Appointments 

Another call intake strategy involves citizens making 
appointments with officers to report crime and other 
information. If the incident is not an emergency and the 
caller would like personal contact, appointments often can 
be made to meet with specific police personnel, such as the 
beat officer. Generally, this is offered as a convenience to 
the caller, with the appointment scheduled at the caller's 
home, place of business, or a police facility. It can also be a 
convenience for officers, allowing them to schedule 
responses to minor calls when time permits. 
Citizens usually request appointments by calling a general, 
non-emergency number, although appointments can be 
offered as a response option for people calling 9-1-1 with 
certain types of complaints. A citizen may also have a direct 
number to a detective for arranging appointments related to 
an ongoing investigation. Finally, some departments have 
set up voice mail for individual officers, and some have 
provided officers with cell phones. As part of community 
policing, officers may encourage citizens to call them 
directly and hand out business cards listing their office, 
voice mail, or cell phone numbers. 

Enhancing Community Policing 

Appointments can be convenient for both citizens and 
officers and can show the police agency's willingness to be 
accommodating, which can help build positive relationships 
between police and citizens. Encouraging community 
members to interact more with police can, in turn, improve 
problem-solving efforts. Community leaders and individuals 
who have specific quality of life complaints or who are 
concerned about persistent crime problems need personal 
time with police. Appointments can help police and citizens 
discuss these issues in detail at a time when interruptions 
are less likely. 

Text Box:
Appointments: Call Management 
Survey Results 
As a reporting method, 
appointments were much more 
likely in jurisdictions with fewer 
than 50,000 residents than in larger 
jurisdictions. Approximately half 
of departments in cities and 
counties of 25,000 to 50,000 (49 
percent) and in jurisdictions with 
less than 25,000 population (53 
percent) report that they schedule 
appointments, compared to 34 
percent of departments in 
jurisdictions of 50,000 to 250,000 
and 19 percent in jurisdictions of 
250,000 or more. 
In the survey comments, a number 
of respondents listed voice mail, 
pagers, and cell phones as call 
intake options that their 
departments were considering. 
end text box



Summary

In the survey comments related to call intake strategies, a 
number of departments mentioned preventive steps taken to 
reduce the number of 9-1-1 calls for certain problems. 
These included passing alarm ordinances to encourage 
businesses to adjust or replace faulty alarm systems; using 
"Reverse 9-1-1" to communicate information or alerts to 
selected areas of the community; and conducting public 
education campaigns, along with providing clearer directory 
listings, to encourage use of existing 7-digit police non-
emergency numbers.21 Another way to reduce calls is to 
address conditions that create problems as part of a 
department's community policing efforts. Examples of this 
are included throughout the guidebook. 

This chapter discussed call intake strategies with which 
departments have considerable experience, as well as others 
(such as 3-1-1 and Internet reporting) that have evolved 
more recently. The focus here has been on how the 
strategies are employed and their benefits for community 
policing. The next chapter (Chapter 3) provides similar 
information on managing call response, followed by a 
discussion in Chapter 4 of issues that should be addressed 
to successfully implement various call intake and response 
strategies. 


Footnotes, continued

21 Another option is seen in the Los Angeles 
Police Department (LAPD). The number 
800.ASK.LAPD is a non-emergency 
information line, which directs callers to 
operators handling non-emergency calls for 
service. The city also maintains a 3-1-1 
number for non-public safety citizen calls. 



Chapter 3 

Managing Call Response 




Managing Call Response 

Managing implies making thoughtful decisions based on 
knowledge, experience, and priorities. Police executives 
must manage the call for service responseoethink about it, 
study it, and reach decisions based on data analysis, recent 
history, employee input, and community acceptance. 

This chapter discusses call stacking and delayed response 
and the process of transferring or referring calls to other 
agencies. It also provides information on civilian 
employees, special teams or units, volunteers and others as 
alternative responders to calls for service and discusses the 
management of call responses from the field. 

Call Stacking and Delayed Response

Call stacking is a process that the CAD system performs in 
which non-emergency, lower priority calls are ranked and 
held or "stacked" so that higher priorities are continually 
dispatched first. The objective of call stacking is to reduce 
cross-beat dispatches and allow the unit in the area of 
responsibility to handle as many calls in that area as 
possible. This has significant advantages for community 
policing, which in the majority of departments involves 
assigning patrol officers to specific geographic areas such 
as beats or neighborhoods. As officers spend more time in 
their beats, they gain opportunities to become familiar with 
conditions, problems, and resources in those areas. Cross-
beat dispatches reduce those opportunities by taking officers 
out of their assigned areas, as well as adding to the time 
required to respond to calls. 



Call stacking occurs in two types of situations. The first is 
when the patrol unit in the area of responsibility is busy and 
a lower priority call arrives in the communications center. 
Rather than recommending a unit from an adjacent beat, the 
CAD system holds the call until the primary unit becomes 
available. Many CAD systems alert the dispatcher after 
holding the call for a period of time (for example, 30 
minutes). The dispatcher can then make a decision on 
whether to dispatch an adjacent unit or continue to stack the 
call. Another option, discussed later in this chapter, is to 
refer the call to a field supervisor. 

The second situation that creates call stacking is when every 
unit in the city (or command area) is busy on calls and 
another call comes into the communications center. If the 
call is low priority, the same process occurs in that the call 
has to be held until a unitoehopefully the unit in the area of 
responsibilityoebecomes available. If all units are busy and a 
high priority call comes in, the dispatcher may send out a 
plea for "any units available." 

With delayed response, lower priority incidents do not get 
an immediate response. They can be held until a quieter 
time during the shift, e.g., waiting until later in the evening 
to get past the busy time of 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. or, 
alternatively, they can be held until the next shift, e.g., 
passing the call from the evening to the day shift when 
complainants are more likely to be available. 

Because CAD automates call prioritization and call 
stacking, departments can manage limited resources much 
more efficiently than in the past. Some departments still 
attempt to provide an in-person, sworn response to all calls 
as soon as possible, whether or not their CAD system stacks 
calls. In contrast, departments may not have their CAD 


systems stack calls but may still have policies for providing 
delayed responses. For most busy departments, though, call 
stacking and delayed response to certain calls have become 
the norm. As a lieutenant in one department noted, call 
stacking aids community policing because "it puts officers 
at critical places at critical times." In addition, it can help 
make larger blocks of time available to patrol in between 
high priority calls. One challenge for police management is 
to determine the extent to which officers are using those 
blocks of time for problem-solving and other community 
policing activities. 

Nearly 60 percent of police agencies responding to the 
national call management survey have call stacking/delayed 
response to handle certain call types. Although there were 
no major differences among departments serving 
jurisdictions with populations of 25,000 or greater, 
departments in jurisdictions of less than 25,000 were much 
less likely to have these strategies (36 percent, compared to 
approximately two-thirds of departments in other 
jurisdictions). 

Tranferring and Referring Calls 

Under community policing, public safety is viewed as a 
local government and community-wide responsibility, not 
simply a police responsibility. Coordination of local 
government services is vital. Developing an organized 
system of referring citizen calls to the appropriate agency 
has the potential to accelerate service delivery and allow 
police to focus on crimes and problems they can affect. In 
many departments, call takers work from comprehensive 
lists of government and other community agencies. Their 
experience and knowledge can help callers connect to the 
right agency. 


Text box:
Percent of Calls Responded to By 
Type of Responder
 
Responder                     Percent of Calls 
Patrol Officers               87 
Community Policing Team/Unit  4 
Uniformed Civilians           2 
Special Team/Unit             6 
Volunteers                    1 
end text box


The national survey showed that overall, 59 percent of 
departments transfer non-police calls to other, more 
appropriate agencies. Approximately 70 percent of 
departments in jurisdictions with populations of 50,000 or 
more transfer calls, compared to 59 percent in jurisdictions 
of 25,000 to 50,000 and 42 percent in jurisdictions of less 
than 25,000. These differences are understandable, since 
larger jurisdictions generally have an array of agencies and 
organizations that can handle referrals. 

Transferring and referring calls can also reduce the number 
of calls erroneously directed to the police. If 
communications personnel carefully explain to callers 
which agency can better meet their needs and why, callers 
may remember the next time a similar situation occurs. 
These explanations may also prevent feelings of frustration 
when a caller is transferred or asked to hang up and dial 
another number. The 3-1-1 systems previously described 
have similar objectives for reducing red tape by directing 
callers to the appropriate agencies for services. 

Alternative Responders 

The departments surveyed were also asked about the 
personnel who respond to calls for service. The sidebar 
table illustrates that although some departments employ 
alternative responders, patrol officers handle an 
overwhelming majority of calls. But some departments have 
community-oriented policing teams, uniformed civilians, 
special teams and units, and even volunteers to respond to 
certain calls. These departments note that alternative 
responders can allow patrol officers to devote more time to 
thoroughly addressing emergency calls, as well as free up 
patrol time for problem-solving and other proactive police 
work. 



The following sections provide descriptions of non-patrol 
responders and some of their duties in departments 
throughout the country. 

Community Policing Teams 

Many departments began community policing with 
specialized teams, although some have eliminated them in 
favor of making all patrol officers community police 
officers. Departments that have community policing teams 
often see advantages in providing communities with an 
experienced and consistent group of officers for problem-
solving. The team approach also limits the number of 
officers who need specialized training in problem-solving 
and related techniques (for example, data analysis, group 
facilitation skills). Historically, a drawback to community 
policing teams has been resistance from officers who 
perceive them as elite squads. For example, depending on 
the department, they may not handle routine calls for 
service or may have greater flexibility in setting their own 
schedules. In short, community policing teams have 
advantages and disadvantages that must be weighed by each 
department. 

In general, community policing teams are not responsible 
for traditional responses to citizen calls to 9-1-1, although 
they may take certain types of calls and reports. More often, 
they work closely with communities to identify and respond 
to specific neighborhood issues, such as graffiti problems; 
and they may work in conjunction with patrol officers on 
problem-solving projects to address almost any type of 
crime or condition related to crime. 

Text Box:
Types of Calls Handled by Civilians 
Depending on the department, 
civilians handled calls in the field, on 
the phone, or at a storefront or station. 
National survey respondents noted a 
variety of duties for which civilian 
personnel are responsible, including 
these: 
.Calls not involving dangerous 
situations, suspects, or follow-up 
(cold calls) 
.Traffic accidents (no injury), traffic 
control, parking issues, abandoned 
vehicles 
.Vehicle lockouts, building checks 
.Burglary, theft, lost and found 
property 
.Vandalism, criminal mischief 
.Runaways 
.Paperwork relays and services, 
subpoena service, funeral escorts 
.Animal complaints 
.Bicycle stops, park patrol 
End text box



Civilian Personnel

Examples of civilian, or non-sworn, personnel responding 
to dispatched calls include community service officers 
(CSO), traffic controllers, and cadets. Civilian personnel, 
who cost less than patrol officers, can be employed 
successfully to handle calls for service that require a report 
but not the presence of sworn (and armed) legal authority. 
Various departments have trained civilians to respond to 
traffic accidents, staff a TRU, process mailed or emailed 
reports, or handle incident reports or collect evidence in the 
field (see sidebar on page 39, "Types of Calls Handled by 
Civilians"). In these instances, civilian personnel collect the 
pertinent information and notify patrol or detectives as 
appropriate. 

Specialized Teams or Units 

Specialized teams and units also enhance community 
policing. They can be a resource for patrol, or alternate 
responders themselves. In addition to special units that are 
permanent parts of the organization (for example, homicide, 
fraud), specialized teams or units can be created on an as-
needed basis. For example, if there is a persistent problem 
in a neighborhood or citywide, such as street narcotics 
hotspots, a specialized unit might be created to better 
manage the problem and large call volume. School 
Resource Officer (SRO) teams are another example. Where 
SROs are assigned to work at specific schools, they are 
available to respond to incidents there, as well as handle 
other appropriate calls (for example, general complaints 
about crime in and around the school). 



The consistent response to calls and community complaints 
by specialized teams has several advantages for community 
policing. Team members gain insight into conditions that 
contribute to crimes and problems, and they can identify 
community members who want to become part of the 
solution. By working together with patrol officers assigned 
to the area, a more focused, collaborative response can be 
developed. 

Volunteers 

Volunteers can offer specialized skills and knowledge to 
police departments. Many departments appreciate 
volunteers' service in programs like Neighborhood Watch, 
and they may have volunteers to handle clerical tasks like 
filing. But some departments use volunteers in other 
important roles, including call response. One example is the 
Chaplains Corps in Knoxville, Tennessee (see sidebar). 
Another example is the San Diego Police Department's 
volunteer programs,22 which make a major contribution with 
respect to freeing up officer time for community policing. 
To give just a few examples, SDPD volunteers are involved 
in fingerprinting and in lifting selected latent prints, 
responding to emergencies with officers and assisting 
victims, taking cold crime reports, and working with 
officers on various problem-solving projects. 

The more ingenuity and time a department puts into finding 
responsibilities for volunteers, and the more training the 
department can provide, the more helpful those volunteers 
will be. Clearly, sharing responsibility with citizen 
volunteers can be an important step toward meeting 
community policing goals for partnerships and problem-
solving. 

Text box:
Chaplains Corps in Knoxville 
The Knoxville, Tennessee, Police 
Department makes excellent use of 
some residents' specialized skills. 
Volunteers in Police Services 
(VIPS) program volunteers do a 
range of work in the department 
and community. Since 1994, VIPS 
has also included a Chaplains 
Corps. Currently, 40 chaplains, 
representing every major religion, 
share on-call duties to assist with 
death notification, crisis 
intervention, and stress 
management. Members of the 
corps save patrol time, while also 
assuming some of the more 
stressful responsibilities required 
of police. 
end text box

Footnotes, continued
22 SDPD volunteer programs include the 
Reserve Police Officer Program, Retired 
Senior Volunteer Program, Volunteers in 
Policing, Crisis Intervention Unit, and 
Emergency Management Volunteers. 




Traditionally, calls for police service are received in and 
dispatched from a communications center. Phone operators, 
call takers, and dispatchers decide whether calls require 
officers to respond or whether they can be handled in some 
other way (referral to another agency, TRU, etc.). Where 
dispatching an officer is the indicated response, this is done 
according to unit availability and location. 

Some agencies have increased the responsibility of the field 
supervisors in call management. Instead of communications 
having complete responsibility for the call, dispatchers 
inform field sergeants of calls pending, empowering them 
to "own the calls." They can review calls and have authority 
to upgrade, downgrade, or cancel the calls. The sergeant 
may also contact callers directly, or have an officer make 
the contact, to gather information and prioritize the calls. 
Once familiar with the situation, the officer or sergeant can 
inform the caller of viable options. For example, the caller 
might be told that dispatching a patrol officer to a residence 
for vandalism may take six hours, whereas the report can be 
filed immediately by phone or at a storefront. 

The major benefits of having field supervisors manage calls 
are that they are held more accountable for, and become 
more knowledgeable about, activity and problems in their 
geographic area. By being more aware of calls their area, 
they are better informed when they make decisions about 
problems and lead their officers' efforts. Currently, patrol 
sergeants in Reno, Nevada, are managing calls, but must 
access station computers to view calls from the CAD 
system. In the near future, supervisors will be able to 
manage calls with mobile data computers in their vehicles. 


Chapter 4

Considerations for Successful Implementation 




Considerations for 
Successful Implementation 

Community policing has not always been the driving force 
behind adoption of particular call management strategies. 
Other priorities, such as the need for more efficient 
allocation of patrol resources, may have been the impetus. 
For example, even before contemplating community 
policing, Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, like many 
law enforcement agencies, created a TRU to reduce the 
workload for patrol officers. Once community policing 
became a priority, the department recognized that available 
patrol time created by the TRU allowed officers to pursue a 
variety of problem-solving and community policing 
activities. 

This chapter addresses the following key areas, which 
police departments must consider to help ensure successful 
implementation of new call management strategies: 

. Planning and evaluation 
. Policy and procedure changes, especially policies 
related to 

-Call classifications and priorities 

- Resource allocation and staffing 

-Acquiring technology and other resources 

-Public information and training

. Department-wide buy-in and community
participation
. Challenges to implementation.

 



Some of the topics discussedoefor example, planning and 
evaluation, training, and staffingoeapply to almost any new 
strategy, and most considerations are important whether the 
department's community policing activities are extensive or 
more limited. However, the focus of the discussions is on 
introducing new call management strategies toward 
achieving organizational goals for enhanced community 
policing and problem-solving. 

Planning and Evaluation 

Efficient and effective call management requires a 
systematic approach and a team effort. Several important 
planning steps need to be taken before figuring out how a 
strategy will operate technically or who will do what. First, 
from patrol officers through chief executive, there must be a 
shared vision. A vision is broader and more idealistic than a 
goal, but it can and should be spoken and written down. For 
example, the goal might be to operate a TRU, but the vision 
might be "a city where citizens are safer because all calls to 
police are handled efficiently" or "a proactive police 
department where the communications workload is under 
control and officers have time to solve persistent crime 
problems." 

Advice for developing a shared vision can be found in 
almost any book on strategic planning, but it is not always 
taken seriously. When it comes to linking call management 
and community policing, though, it should be. If call takers 
and dispatchers were not directly involved in planning for 
community policing, they may not understand what field 
operations wants to accomplish in the blocks of time 
available between calls. Similarly, officers may not be 
aware of various technical or cost issues involved in call 
management. Citizens may not know how much time 
communications staff spend on non-police matters called in 


to 9-1-1 and how this can affect their safety. To succeed, the 
new strategy will require concerted efforts, a willingness to 
perform new duties, and unselfish participation. A shared 
vision will help achieve the department-wide buy-in and 
community support that is vital for successfully 
implementing any new call management strategy. 

It is also important to think about evaluating a new strategy 
during the planning stage, before the strategy is up and 
running. Evaluation does not have to be complicated or 
intimidating, but it does raise this question: How will you 
know that your goals and objectives have been 
accomplished? Before community policing, the answer 
might have been, "when the average response time to 
priority 3 calls is 30 minutes," or "when officers have an 
average of one hour a day of available time." You would 
know this had been accomplished by analyzing call data on 
dispatch, arrival, and completion times, and you would plan 
to collect that data. 

These may still be important objectives. But in linking the 
new strategy to community policing, departments also need 
to address additional questions. For example: What 
community-based tasks are officers are now pursuing with 
this new available time? How satisfied are citizens with the 
new strategy? How will you know? The "how will you 
know" question has important implications for the planning 
stage. Would it help to create new call classifications for 
"self-initiated activities" (for example, "community 
meeting," and " problem-solving project")? Will you want 
to add new questions to the next citizen survey (for 
example, "Have you ever tried the TRU option?" "How 
satisfied were you with the response?"). 



Text box:
Incident Management Units, 
Merseyside, England 
The Merseyside Constabulary, in 
England, created Incident 
Management Units (IMU) as a key 
component in its shift to problem-
solving policing. They recognized that 
a change in call management 
strategies was vital in order to 
implement POP department-wide. The 
primary purposes of IMUs are: 
.Filter incoming messages 
.Track non-urgent calls 
.Support the more effective 
deployment of resources 
.Facilitate the early 
identification of problems, 
especially repeat incidents. 
All messages, calls to the police, 
correspondence, complaints, items 
raised by the community, and 
essentially anything requiring a police 
response, will be graded and directed 
through the IMU. Non-emergency 
calls received on the emergency line 
get logged and forwarded to IMU. 
Channeling all calls and 
correspondence through one location 
ensures that accurate scanning can 
take place and patterns of incidents 
can be identified and analyzed. 
end text box


Chapter 5 on "Using the Data" offers more information on 
how data analysis can help measure the success of call 
management strategies. The main point here is to avoid 
being caught short, without the data that can demonstrate 
success and also point to areas that need improvement. 

Policy and Procedure Changes

In addition to creating new policies directly related to the 
new call management strategy, departments may need to 
change other policies that are affected by it. For instance, if 
a TRU is implemented, patrol officers will no longer be 
handling certain call types in the field (a major policy 
change). The department will also need a new procedure to 
ensure that officers learn about crimes that the TRU 
processed. Patrol officers need this crime information 
because they are no longer personally involved with taking 
certain types of crime reports. One department's policy, for 
example, states that after a report is taken by telephone, the 
TRU will send a message "to the police district and 
detective division where the incident occurred. This keeps 
the police district and detective division informed as to 
crime patterns that may develop. It also gives patrol units 
information that may be beneficial in the prevention of 
crime." 

With new call management strategies, the more common 
policy and procedure changes are related to call types and 
priority classifications, resource allocation, and the 
acquisition of technology. Finally, all stakeholders, 
including department and community members, should be 
informed of policy and procedure changes and trained to 
handle any tasks that have changed. 



Call Types: Classifications and Priorities

Because most calls for police service are not emergencies, 
how a call type is classified and prioritized is critical to call 
management. Regardless of whether the call comes through 
9-1-1, a seven-digit line, 3-1-1, or as a walk in, calls should 
be classified by subject matter and type of response needed 
(see page 48 sidebar, "Incident Management Units, 
Merseyside"). 

Call subject matter is defined by the caller's descriptions 
and aided by question-and-answer protocols from call 
takers. For example, if critical information is not 
volunteered by the caller, such as presence of weapons, 
extent of injuries to persons, etc., call takers are prompted 
by protocols to ask for such information. 

Call classification schemes reviewed for this guidebook 
ranged from 20 different classifications in some agencies to 
60 different classifications in others. By nature, many call 
classifications are broad because, at this early stage before 
officers or others have assessed the scenes, agencies have 
limited verifiable information. For example, classifications 
such as "suspicious persons" and "loud noise" are common. 
In departments with larger classification schemes, the call 
types are broken down more specifically. For example, 
vandalism may be broken down into graffiti and destruction 
of property. Distinctions like these can aid in problem-
solving.23 



Footnotes, continued
23 For background on the value of better call 
classification schemes for developing police 
responses to problems, see H. Goldstein, 
Problem Oriented Policing, New York: 
McGraw-Hill, 1990; and J. Eck and W. 
Spelman, problem-solving: Problem Oriented 
Policing in Newport News, Washington, D.C.: 
Police Executive Research Forum, 1987. 



Priorities are then assigned to calls for service based on the 
department's judgment about the emergency nature of the 
call (e.g., harm to a person imminent; crime in progress), 
response time, need for back up, and other local factors, if 
any. While call priority schemes vary across the country, 
many have four or five levels, as shown in the abbreviated 
illustration that follows. 

Table:
Table Headers: Priority, Designation, Response, Numbers of Units 
1, Emergency, Immediate; lights and siren; 
exceed speed limit, 2 
2, Immediate, Immediate; lights and siren; 
maintain speed, limit, 2 if requested 
3, Routine, Routine, 1 
4, Delayed, Delay up to one hour; routine, 1 
5, TRU, Delay up to two hours, TRU 

It is also common for departments to have nine or ten 
levels, with some of the priority numbers reserved for self-
initiated activities. 

In a police organization committed to community policing, 
the community should play a role in setting and reviewing 
police call priorities and response policies. The community 
has a vested interest in how quickly officers are dispatched, 
the extent to which police expedite through neighborhoods, 
the extent to which multiple units are dispatched or stay at 
the scene, whether calls are handled by alternative means, 
and related issues. 



In some departments, field sergeants have authority to 
assign and adjust call priorities as they deem necessary. Call 
classifications and priorities are sometimes changed after 
further information is obtained regarding the status of the 
caller and incident. 

Resource Allocation 

Call and incident report information is vital for resource 
allocation. Agencies have traditionally used call data, such 
as location, number of units responding, response times, 
length of time on scene, etc. to allocate patrol resources. 
When applying call management techniques in a 
community policing environment, departments should 
examine additional factors. The national survey asked 
departments to indicate whether they used or planned to use 
several measures for resource allocation. The results 
revealed that only one resource allocation measure, 
evaluating self-initiated activities, is currently being done 
by a majority of police departments. In fact, as the 
following table indicates, many agencies are not even 
planning to review out of area dispatches or analyze either 
TRU or call stacking data. More information on call 
management strategies and resource allocation is provided 
in the next chapter on "Using the Data" (Chapter 5). 


Table: Percent of Departments Using Resource Allocation Measures 
Table Headers: Measures, Currently doing, Plan to do, No plan to do 
Evaluating self-initiated activities, 58%, 27%, 15% 
Analyzing time spent at a location or on problem, 46%, 34%, 20% 
Analyzing TRU activity, 27%, 21%, 52% 
Reviewing out of area dispatches in regard to beat responsibility, 24%, 23%, 53% 
Performing call stacking analysis, 19%, 28%, 53% 



Staffing

Departments also need to examine the expertise, training, 
and job responsibilities of the persons assigned to the 
various response strategies. It is important to assign staff to 
positions in which they feel invested and that are 
compatible with their skills. For example, some agencies 
staff TRU with sworn officers on temporary limited duty. 
Although TRU may not be their first choice of assignment, 
these officers have the skill to take reports over the phone. 
In addition, officers on limited duty often appreciate the 
opportunity the TRU provides to stay in direct contact with 
citizens and crime situations. But if they do not really enjoy 
the assignment, they may display a lack of enthusiasm that 
can be detected by callers. 

As noted in Chapter 1, evaluations of differential police 
response (DPR) consistently found that citizen satisfaction 
was dependent on the courtesy of the call taker, including 
the call taker's willingness to explain the reason for the 
alternative response and how long it would take. As 
innovative call management strategies are implemented, the 
new policies, procedures, and job descriptions should 
clearly state the department's expectations for courtesy in 
dealing with the public. 

Agencies also need to examine resources to ensure that the 
number and type of staff are adequate. In addition to 
personnel directly responsible for implementing the 
strategy, support staff or other resources may be necessary. 
For example, the Reno, Nevada, Police Department wanted 
visitors to its storefront facilities to include people whose 
first language was not English. The department contracts 
with a service that storefront CSOs (and other department 
members) can call any day or time for translations into 21 
different languages. Paying close attention to who will 


benefit from the strategy and how it will actually be applied 
helps develop an accurate staffing plan and adequate budget 
(for equipment and facilities as well as staff resources). If 
possible, a new strategy should be field tested before full 
implementation begins. 

It is also important to recognize that part of a strategy's 
utility depends on its hours of operation. For example, the 
department might expect people to visit a storefront after 
their own workday ends. As a result, it may want to keep 
the storefront open into the evening or even 24 hours a day, 
which will require staffing two or three shifts.24 The 
department will need to determine how many people should 
work each shift, and then regularly analyze data on the 
volume of the facility, modifying the staffing plan if 
necessary. 

Another consideration is the emphasis that community 
policing places on geographic responsibilityoeassigning the 
same personnel to the same service area or beat for 
extended periods to get to know the community. For a 
storefront to be most effective in community policing, staff 
need to be familiar with the neighborhood, people, and 
problems. This is true regardless of whether CSOs, officers, 
or volunteers staff the storefront. 

An Internet reporting system requires different types of 
staffing considerations. In addition, the numbers and types 
of staff will depend on the way it is implemented. In some 
systems, messages are sent via email, and someone must be 
assigned responsibility for reading and answering the 
messages or forwarding the information to appropriate 
department members. Someone else may be needed to enter 
the information into a computer application for storage, 
reference, or analysis purposes.25 Other Internet reporting 


Footnotes, continued
24 Some cities house the police storefront at 
the fire station, so that it can be open 24 hours 
per day for emergencies without necessitating 
the police department staffing it at all times. 

25 A mail-in reporting system also requires 
staff to receive, process, and input reports and 
information. 


Text box:
Information Technology Acquisition 
Major information technology 
acquisitions require a thorough, 
detailed process that includes a needs 
assessment, precise descriptions of 
technical and user requirements, 
requests for proposals, and a 
systematic way to evaluate available 
products. The whole process needs to 
be coordinated with the agency's 
overall technology plan. 
For an in-depth discussion of 
information technology acquisition for 
law enforcement, see ILJ's RFP 
Guidebook and case studies of IT 
acquisitions by policing agencies 
(available at www.ilj.org). 
end text box

systems allow for information to be entered into a pre-set 
form that transfers the information into a departmental 
database. If the information transfers to a database, staff or 
a contractor will need to create and manage the database. In 
both cases, the department needs to identify someone in 
charge of trouble-shooting technological problems. 

Acquiring Technology and Other Resources

Implementing new call management strategies often 
includes acquiring new technology. This can be one of the 
most challenging and costly aspects of call management 
changes. The acquisition of other resources, such as an 
office or a building for a storefront, can also be a significant 
cost item. 

Technological innovations for call management may include 
a new CAD (that includes call stacking applications), 
Internet access (for online reporting), laptops in patrol 
vehicles (for field reports), or a new phone system with 
automated, menu-driven answering and routing. Various 
technologies can be applied to accomplish different 
community policing goals. For example: 

. 
Online reporting to improve the community's 
accessibility to the police 
. 
Telephone reporting to free up officer time for 
problem-solving, and 
. 
Laptops to allow officers to spend more time in the 
field and remain visible to the community. 

Regardless of the strategy, new information technology (IT) 
acquisitions should fit with the department's overall IT 
plans, needs, and capabilities (see sidebar, "IT 
Acquisition"). 
As an alternative form of TRU, outsourcing for telephone 


reporting services is an option that departments may want to 
consider (see sidebar, "Contracting Out for a TRU in 
Reno.") 

There are several things to consider when outsourcing the 
telephone reporting process. 
. 
Vendor must be reliable and be able to produce 
timely, quality reports. 
. 
Departments should conduct background checks on 
vendors. 
. 
Vendor's reports should be customized to meet the 
department's needs. 

. 
Data from the vendor's reports should transfer 
effectively into the agency's computer system for 
management analysis. 

. 
Department must develop safeguards to ensure the 
confidentiality and security of the information. 

. 
Department should conduct quality control
monitoring, including reviewing sample audio
tapes.


Information and Training

It is important to gain support for innovative call 
management strategies by providing information, education, 
and training. These efforts must be directed internally to all 
department members and externally, to encourage 
appropriate application of the strategy. Internally, police can 
send out department announcements and handouts, develop 
roll call briefing videos, and take advantage of in-service 
training. In addition to patrol and communications 
personnel, crime analysts, investigators, and others should 
also be informed of policy changes, with particular 
emphasis on how the new strategy affects their own work. 

Text box:
Contracting Out for a TRU in Reno 
The Reno, Nevada, Police Department 
outsourced the operation of its 
telephone reporting unit. A private 
vendor handles many types of non-
emergency calls. 
An evaluation of this service found 
that the cost of report taking was 
reduced dramatically, and a customer 
satisfaction survey showed positive 
results. 
end text box




An agency's implementation plan for a new call strategy 
should also include marketing the strategy to the 
community. The same marketing approach may not work in 
all communities. Departments must become more 
sophisticated in marketing new call management plans to 
increase community awareness and obtain acceptance and 
support, especially in underserved or minority communities. 
For example, if a department plans to open a storefront in 
an Hispanic neighborhood, flyers, posters, and website 
information must be written in Spanish to reach the widest 
audience. 

Some types of media may be called upon more frequently 
than others by particular populations. Older residents tend 
to subscribe to and read newspapers; younger residents get 
most of their news from TV; and middle to upper income 
residents more often have access to the Internet. In short, 
the department needs to tailor its marketing approach and 
message according to specific demographic groups to have 
the most impact. 

In addition to informing the public, the department needs to 
educate residents by explaining the goals and reasons for 
the new call management strategies. This involves 
explaining to citizens the advantages of new call procedures 
and advising them of any changes they may experience. For 
example, to educate the public about new 3-1-1 procedures, 
examples may be provided of the types of crimes, 
situations, or concerns for which 3-1-1 should be dialed, 
along with reminders to call 9-1-1 for emergencies. Public 
education messages should also explain that the new 3-1-1 
service or TRU could unburden 9-1-1 so that police have 
more resources to handle true emergencies. Public 


education campaigns can reduce dissatisfaction among 
callers by letting citizens know that a delay in response 
does not mean their call is not important. 

Public education does not need to be restricted to formal 
means. Informally, officers, call takers, CSOs, and other 
department members can disseminate information to the 
community. For example, when an officer responds to a 
residence on a delayed (minor) call, she can explain to the 
citizens that they could have received faster service by 
calling TRU. Department representatives should also attend 
community meetings and distribute information to 
community leaders, who can, in turn, inform other residents 
and groups. 

Departments need to address training on two levels when 
implementing a call management strategy specifically in 
support of community policing. First, the department must 
train those personnel assigned to work with the strategy on 
how to implement it, the proper channels of 
communication, and the particular goals associated with the 
strategy. Second, community policing also requires training 
in problem-solving, and this training should not be limited 
to officers who solve problems in the field. A wider array of 
personnel (e.g., dispatchers) can become valuable channels 
of information to patrol, if trained in this area. 



Getting Biy-In

One of the keys to implementing change in any 
organization is to get buy-in and commitment from all of 
the groups and people who will be affected by the outcome. 
Most police departments would not mandate a major change 
in officer uniforms without the support and buy-in of 
officers. Likewise, new call management strategies and 
information technology changes should not be implemented 
without support and commitment from the people most 
affected. When implementing a call management strategy, 
the major stakeholders are usually management, 
communications personnel, patrol officers, and the 
community. Other members of the department, such as 
analysts, investigators, and data systems staff, may also be 
affected depending on the strategy. 

Work on the goal of obtaining buy-in and commitment 
should begin in the initial idea and planning stages. Once 
some people are on board, it is always easier to get more. 
People want to know how their jobs will be affected. Will 
they have to learn new skills? Change their work hours? 
Create new products? Interact with different people? No 
one likes to be told of major change. By soliciting input 
early on, people will be more likely to cooperate with, or 
implement, the change. What should be done depends on 
the strategy, number of people affected, and size of the 
department. At a minimum, it is vital to make people aware 
of the strategy's goals and intended benefits and keep them 
informed throughout the process. This can be done through 
department announcements, roll call discussions, staff 
meetings, or accessing the department's email or website. 
Input should also be obtained on perceived needs and other 


ideas from a cross representation of all ranks and units 
within the department, as well as members of the 
community. Focus groups can be held to involve smaller 
groups; surveys may be needed to reach a larger population. 

Challenges to Implementation

When implementing call management strategies, like any 
change, police departments will inevitably face some 
challenges. Many departments throughout the country have 
already dealt with these issues and should be consulted for 
lessons learned. The sections that follow focus on concerns 
in four areas: technology, policies and procedures, 
community involvement, and citizen and police acceptance. 
In addition, challenges associated with specific strategies 
are noted. 

Technology

Technology challenges involve hardware, software, and 
databases. Departments must develop comprehensive plans 
for computer hardware and software acquisition and 
implementation, and for training developers. While most 
agencies have some level of CAD, RMS, or other system 
that collects call data, the challenge is to integrate and 
coordinate decentralized systems. Disparate systems need to 
collect data in compatible ways so that data migrations from 
one system to another can be successful. Data systems also 
need to identify the source of reports according to intake 
strategy and the responding unit. 

The important overall concept is that no matter how a 
request comes in, the data need to be captured and analyzed 
to get an accurate picture of demands for police service. 
This concept is addressed in greater detail in Chapter 5, 
"Using the Data." 


Policies and Procedures

Agency policies and procedures, whether new or modified, 
must coincide with call management strategy goals. In the 
planning stages, departments must determine what types of 
reports will be handled by which strategy, what the 
response will be and by whom, and details of the process. 
For example, in Reno, Nevada, the call takers' protocol was 
changed to allow them to suggest alternate reporting 
methods to callers for specific call classifications. 

Community Involvement 

One of the challenges of community involvement, a key 
component of community policing, is to get a cross-section 
of the community involved, so that support is not limited to 
the neighborhoods that already have a history of working 
with the police. Often, community members who would 
derive the most value from certain call management 
strategies are the least involved in providing input because 
of language, cultural, or other barriers. 

Community needs also have to be balanced with public 
safety resources. If a neighborhood wants a storefront open 
24 hours a day, the department must weigh the perceived 
need versus available resources and costs. A compromise 
may be reached to open the storefront 12 hours a day during 
the times when residents most need the services, and to 
publicize Internet, TRU, or other reporting options. Keeping 
the community involved in developing and implementing 
call strategies may require new outreach efforts, some of 
which may be time-consuming, but these efforts are 
important for making the strategies work as planned. 



Citizen and Police Acceptance

For many departments responding to the national survey, 
alternatives such as TRU have become an accepted way of 
providing services. As noted earlier, these departments 
typically have a policy stating that if a citizen insists on a 
response by an officer, one will be sent. However, some 
departments said they were not considering new call 
management alternatives because they felt citizens would 
not accept them, their call volume was low enough to 
permit personal responses by officers to most calls, or they 
did not want officers to "lose touch" with citizens. Yet even 
these communities may have to make difficult decisions in 
the future about managing calls. Many small and rural 
jurisdictions, as well as larger cities and counties, are facing 
budget shortfalls combined with demands on the police to 
work on homeland security efforts. Citizens today may be 
more willing than in the past to file routine reports by 
phone or with CSOs, for example, if it helps give police the 
resources they need for other priorities. 

Another challenge relates to the call handling duties of 
special teams, such as community policing teams. When 
departments limit community policing team officers' 
responsibilities for responding to routine calls for service, 
those officers can devote a great deal of their time to 
problem-solving and related activities. On the other hand, 
departments historically have experienced resistance to this 
approach and have had to combat perceptions of community 
policing teams as elite squads. This challenge is complex, 
affects organizational acceptance of community policing 
generally, and must be resolved by individual departments. 
The main point here is to fully recognize the potential 
consequences as well as benefits of call handling and call 
response strategies with respect to this issue. 



Special Challenges for Different Service Options

There are also several challenges unique to storefronts, 
Internet and mail-in reporting, TRU, and 3-1-1. These are 
discussed below. 

Storefronts 

Implementing a storefront as a call management strategy 
involves staffing and funding challenges. Agencies must 
first be clear on the storefront's purpose: Is it primarily a 
location for officers in the community to write reports, meet 
with each other, and take a break; or is it intended as a 
place where residents can go for police-related services? As 
noted earlier, the answer has a direct bearing on the 
storefront's hours of operation, space requirements, and 
staffing. Storefronts for officers are not consistently staffed, 
but community storefronts must be customer-service 
oriented and present staffing challenges. While departments 
typically staff community storefronts with sworn officers or 
civilian personnel, some are finding that trained volunteers 
can also be effective. 

Funding for storefront offices may be supplemented by 
community donations or businesses that donate space and 
possibly equipment. "Full service" police or multi-agency 
centers can be costly to implement, both in terms of office 
and meeting space and the need to connect computers to the 
department's network. 


Internet Reporting 

Internet reporting, the newest and most technologically 
advanced call management strategy, presents unique 
challenges. Some of the issues that should be decided for 
Internet reporting prior to implementation include the 
following (the last four items apply for mail-in reports as 
well): 

. What will the user interface look like? 

. Who will receive the reports and in what capacity? 

. Will reports go directly into an existing computer
system or does a new one need to be created? 

. How will the information be analyzed and
distributed?

. What are the confidentiality issues? 


Telephone Report Units 

Like storefronts, TRU present staffing challenges. During 
the planning stages, analysis of call for service data will be 
especially important for anticipating the volume and type of 
calls that might be handled by the TRU. In addition, 
staffing issues must be resolved, such as the following: 

. What should be the hours of operation and how
many staff are needed to handle calls in a timely
manner?

. Who should staff the TRU (sworn officers on
limited duty, civilians, or both)? Is it feasible for
cadets or volunteers to handle some of the
workload?

. What staff resources are currently available? Is the 
TRU a budget priority for the department? 

Another significant challenge in administering TRU is the 
call routing technology. Departments must determine 



whether existing 9-1-1/CAD can transfer calls, whether 
TRU will be centralized (located within or outside of the 
communications center), or if there will be a separate, direct 
telephone number for citizens to call. 

3-1-1 Non-emergency Telephone Number 

A unique challenge in implementing any type of 3-1-1 
system is coordination with multiple local government 
services.26 If the system is managed by the police 
department and promoted as a service for non-emergency 
police matters, the staffing and technology issues are more 
easily managed. If a citywide 3-1-1 system is implemented, 
the additional challenge is politicaloegetting department 
heads to agree on a system and process. In any case, the 
below issues must be addressed. 

. Will there be separate call takers who only answer 
calls coming in on 3-1-1 and 7-digit lines? 

. Will the 3-1-1 call data go into CAD? 

. How will the calls be transferred and tracked? 

. How will citizen satisfaction with the service be 
measured?
 
Summary 

Police managers need to identify priorities and select the 
call management strategy that will best accomplish the 
department's objectives. Appropriate resources must be 
allocated to make a new strategy work. Without these 
commitments, there is an increased likelihood that any one 
challenge will prevent the strategy from being adopted, or 
from being successful if it does go forward. Although some 
of the above challenges appear extensive, they can be 
managed or overcome with enough planning, analysis, and 
commitment. 


Footnotes, continued
26 The COPS Office and individual states have 
provided funding to local jurisdictions to 
implement 3-1-1. Several studies and 
evaluations have been conducted related to 
these projects. 


Chapter 5 
Using the Data 




Using the Data 

Information on citizen calls for service is critical to the 
entire police organization. Analyzing call data can help 
police agencies increase their understanding of crime, 
disorder, and quality of life problems; develop and evaluate 
call responses based on a comprehensive picture of 
community needs; and allocate resources more efficiently 
and effectively. 

Over the last 20 years, CAD systems have undergone a 
series of improvements, including expansion to handle 
multiple unit dispatches, mobile digital terminals in patrol 
units, citywide emergency communication provisions, and 
applications linking to police records management systems. 
Even so, many challenges remain in terms of capturing and 
analyzing information on all requests for service and using 
that data to enhance the department's call management 
strategies and community policing efforts. This chapter 
addresses the following issues: 

. 
Types of information and the need for additional 
data to support community policing. 

. 
Data analysis concepts related to solving problems 
and measuring the success of call management 
strategies. 

. 
Officer access to data. 

. 
Issues related to problem-solving in the field, 
including freeing up and managing officer time, 
resource allocation, and management accountability. 

. 
Using data to assess and encourage community
involvement.


Text box
Using Data to Modify TRU 
Procedures in Knoxville 
In Knoxville, Tennessee, auto theft 
reports were generally taken in 
Teleserve (TRU). Through data 
analysis, a pattern was identified in 
one area of the city, revealing that 
drug addicts were exchanging their 
cars for drugs and then reporting the 
cars stolen. Deciding that it was too 
easy for these people to make false 
auto theft reports over the telephone, 
the Knoxville Police Department 
temporarily altered its auto theft 
reporting procedures so that officers 
were dispatched to take reports from 
that particular area. 
end text box



Types of Information 

Each call management strategy can be designed to capture a 
variety of beneficial information. Ideally, the data on each 
call for serviceoewhether it comes in through 9-1-1 or some 
other meansoeshould transfer directly into an agency's 
master database. For example, information from 3-1-1 calls 
should be captured in the CAD system; and TRU reports, as 
well as report information collected at storefronts, should be 
included in the department's records management system 
(RMS). 

Regardless of the report source, departments can collect 
data on location, type of call, date and time received, means 
of response, responding officer (or civilian), and disposition 
(i.e., report taken, arrest made, etc.). CAD systems capture 
these and other data, including time of dispatch, arrival, and 
completion; and final call type when this is reported by the 
responding officer. In addition, CAD applications record 
information about self-initiated activities by patrol officers, 
including time and type of activity (car stop, suspicious 
person stop, etc.). CAD captures this information not only 
for patrol officers, but also for any other personnel in the 
fieldoesergeants, detectives, traffic units, canine units, and 
others. 

The reports produced from these data are a good example of 
how a CAD system can provide support to community 
policing without any changes to the system itself. 
Departments often analyze data on type of call and call 
location in planning for a new strategy such as a TRU or 
storefront. But to determine whether a strategy is effective 
in handling non-emergency calls, and to enhance 
community policing and problem-solving, several 
information needs should be addressed. 


Data on Source of Call and Responder

As departments implement call management strategies, they 
will need to know what calls or reports are coming in via 
which strategy, and they will need an easy way to determine 
who responded to the call. These data can assist in 
allocating resources, and they can also aid in evaluating a 
strategy's effectiveness. For example, if storefronts were 
implemented to receive walk-in reports from citizens, and 
the data show that a high percentage of reports were being 
handled by storefront personnel, the strategy would be 
successful in accomplishing that objective. Some 
departments in the national survey could determine who 
took the call or report on an individual basis from complaint 
numbers, but most had no way of quickly determining TRU 
versus field report or patrol officer versus CSO. 

Definition of Call Types

Precise definitions of call types can also enhance 
community policing and problem-solving. Departments 
need to review call type categories periodically to be sure 
they accurately reflect current community issues and to help 
measure policing activities. Some agencies define call 
classifications too broadly or put too many calls into an 
"other" category. Breaking these down into sub-categories 
could produce data that is much more beneficial for 
problem-solving. For instance, if all noise calls are recorded 
as "loud noise," it is difficult to distinguish construction 
noise from loud parties from barking dogs. This is 
significant because these are different problems that warrant 
potentially different solution strategies. 



Final Call Type. A related issue is the need for data on 
"final call type." The national survey showed that the vast 
majority of departments (88 percent) analyze call for 
service data by type of call as recorded at dispatch, but only 
64 percent capture the final call type based on officer 
assessment. Relying only on the initial assessment can give 
a misleading picture of the types of incidents officers are 
actually responding to. 

Self-Initiated Activities. Police departments also need to 
review the classifications they have for self-initiated 
activities. A good way of capturing and measuring patrol 
time spent on community policing is to have officers call in 
special codes for dispatchers to enter into CAD. These can 
include codes such as " problem-solving project" or 
"community meeting." The exact codes will depend on a 
department's particular community policing objectives and 
the types of activities associated with them. For example, 
one department responding to the survey developed codes 
for "citizen assist," "foot patrol," "community policing 
meeting," and "community policing, schools." Another 
department had codes for "eye on the elderly program," 
"foot patrol," and " problem-solving project." Codes for 
community policing activities in other departments included 
"bicycle patrol," "gathering information," "abandoned 
building check," "community contact," and others. 

Integrated Information Management Systems

Technology today offers many new possibilities for 
collecting and managing police-related information. From 
simple databases through complex, interactive applications, 
departments are gathering more information than ever 
before. Some agencies, however, have a variety of 
independent computer systems, with no means of linking 
data between systems. When this is the case, a solution 


should be implemented to combine the data into a single 
database or establish connectivity between systems. The 
advantage of this latter approach is that it allows the 
systems to remain intact while providing the means to 
merge data. 

Analysis 

Strategic planning for call management begins with data 
collection, but it relies heavily on analysis to understand the 
data. Careful data analysis is also critical to effective 
problem-solving and community policing. National survey 
results, as reflected below, show that most police agencies 
do analyze call data. But it is common for action-oriented 
people, including police, to skip over pieces of the analysis 
task and move quickly from identifying a crime pattern or 
problem to trying to resolve it.27 

Table: Percent of Departments Using Call Data for Analysis
Table Column Headers: Measures, Currently doing, Plan to do, No plan to do 
Identifying top problem locations, 92, 7, 1 
Reporting/analyzing frequency of call types, 84, 13, 3 
Conducting "hot spot" analysis, 66, 23, 12 
Identifying repeat callers, 65, 17, 18 
Reporting/analyzing calls by problem types, 71, 16, 13 
Reporting/analyzing calls by problem locations, 75, 17, 8 




Footnotes, continued
27 For a COPS Guidebook on problem 
analysis, see Timothy S. Bynum, Using 
Analysis for Problem-Solving: A Guidebook 
for Law Enforcement. U. S. Department of 
Justice, Office of Community Oriented 
Policing Services, 2001. 




Text box
Using Internet Reports 
to Identify Problems 
Police in Lansing, Michigan, and 
San Diego, California, both use 
Internet websites to provide the 
public a means to report 
neighborhood problems and request 
extra patrol. Lansing's "On Your 
Street" (www.lansingpolice.com) 
and San Diego's "Citizen Request 
Form" (www.sannet.gov/police) 
allow users to report quality of life 
issues by completing a form online. 
Similarly, the Kansas Bureau of 
Investigation's "Tip Sheet" 
(www.accesskansas.org/kbi) allows 
the community to report suspicious 
drug activity anywhere in the state. 
end text box



Crime and Problem Analysis

Analysis sheds light on the who, what, when, where, how, 
and why factors of the crimes or problems being studied. To 
be comprehensive, agencies will want to analyze many 
different characteristics of crime and problems, and they 
will need many different data sources. For example, in 
addition to analyzing call data specifically related to drugs, 
it is important to consider the factors and circumstances that 
support a local drug market. Call for service data on graffiti, 
vandalism, or broken street lights in the area could provide 
a more complete picture. Housing department data on 
absentee landlords and abandoned buildings might also be 
needed. In addition, it is important to obtain an historical 
perspective by reaching back and analyzing comparative 
data: What was the neighborhood like five years ago? 
Agencies can also obtain and analyze information from a 
variety of sources within the departmentoecrime analysts, 
patrol officers, investigators, communications personneloeas 
well as other organizations and community members. 

Analysis includes arranging data in easily understood 
formats, but it also involves offering interpretations and 
perspectives that will aid decisionmaking. While the "gut 
feelings" of experienced officers are important, agencies 
need to show that their analysis has been thorough to gain 
support for changes in policy and practice. 

Developing comprehensive and coordinated databases helps 
provide rich information for problem-solving. Departments 
must ensure that call information from all sources enters the 
databases. Most agencies collect adequate information when 
incident information is captured on report forms. However, 
in the majority of calls for service, officers do not prepare 
reports; they just provide disposition codes to dispatchers. 
Where reports are not prepared, agencies must ensure that 


CAD information (and information from other sources) is 
also available on these activities; it will be important for 
identifying and tracking problems. In addition, some 
agencies encourage citizens to access the Internet to report 
quality of life issues that may not be crimes (see sidebar, 
"Using Internet Reports to Identify Problems"). 

Measuring the Success of Call Management Strategies 

Police agencies should also call upon several data sources 
and techniques to analyze issues that are important for 
effective and efficient call management. For example, data 
collection and analysis can help determine why the 
community was not taking advantage of various police 
services like storefronts or online reporting. Data on 
numbers and types of reports taken measure the level of 
service, but these numbers do not answer the "why" 
question. The storefront's hours of operation may be a 
factor, the online reporting form may be too complicated, or 
the service alternative may not have been well publicized. 
The department may need to conduct follow-up techniques 
such as surveys or focus groups to find out. These types of 
assessments can indicate whether the strategy can be 
modified, or whether a different response should 
implemented. The assessment might also suggest a need to 
re-analyze the problem that the strategy was intended to 
address. Whatever the issue, responses or changes in 
strategy should be informed by dataoebased on the results of 
the analysis. 


Text box
Reporting "Petrol Drive-Offs" in 
Beenleigh, Australia 
The importance of efficient resource 
allocation and the use of an alternative 
response is highlighted in the 
Beenleigh, Australia, Calls for Service 
Project. The problem for the police 
department was frequent petrol drive-
offs (people filling auto gas tanks and 
leaving without paying). The 
department calculated an expenditure 
of $53 per police response. The 
average loss per gasoline station 
owner was $25 for the tank of gas. 
The loss did not outweigh the cost of 
the police response. 

The new strategy implemented was to 
have gas attendants immediately fax 
incident and offender details when the 
thefts occurred. The benefit was two-
foldoethe department saved money and 
the immediate provision of the 
offender description increased the 
likelihood of apprehension. 
end text box


Text box
False Alarm Calls in Salt Lake City 
The Salt Lake City, Utah, Police 
Department (SLCPD) solved a costly 
20-year old problem using call 
management strategies in its problem-
solving efforts. SLCPD identified that 
99 percent of alarm calls, representing 
12 percent of dispatched calls, were 
false alarms. Each call consumed up 
to 40 minutes of patrol time. The city 
passed a verified alarm response 
ordinance and the SLCPD conducted 
training for private security. Private 
security now performs the critical duty 
of initial verification into the alarm. 
Benefits of the new strategy included: 
.Alarm call response by SLCPD 
reduced by 90 percent 
.Workload reduced in 
communications, alarm unit, city 
treasury, and courts 
.Backlog of calls reduced 
.More than 9,000 officer hours (in 
one year) redirected to other calls 
and activities. 
end text box


Officer Access to Data

If officers are expected to identify, analyze, and track 
problems, they must be given access to the department's 
data on calls and problems. In some agencies, depending on 
size, crime analysts may be available to provide data and 
analysis for officers. In others, officers need to learn to 
access department data and conduct some rudimentary 
analysis themselves. In both situations, the starting point 
involves both centralizing the information and making it 
accessible. 

As discussed earlier, if call and other data are maintained in 
a variety of decentralized databases, analysts, but especially 
officers, will often lack information that may be pertinent. 
For example, some agencies collect very little information 
on abandoned vehicle calls; most are handled by phone and 
sometimes by contractors (tow companies). However, 
detailed information on the history of the vehicle may be 
needed by an officer working a problem-solving project 
related to stolen cars. 

Problem-Solving in the Field 

Effective call management strategies streamline handling, 
processing, and responses to calls for service. The 
innovative application of call management strategies can 
allow patrol officers to have more time in the field to 
engage in community policing and problem-solving. 
Departments need to help officers manage this time. In 
addition, community policing's focus on geographic 
deployment involves an increased emphasis on holding 
managers accountable for solving problems in their service 
areas. 



All departments interviewed for this guidebook felt that the 
agency's call management strategies, whether telephone 
reporting or field CSOs, freed up patrol officer time. There 
were differences among those departments in terms of how 
much available time was generated and what officers were 
doing with it. The challenge is that most available (freed 
up) patrol time comes in unplanned blocksoe15 minutes 
during the shift's first two hours; 22 minutes in the next two 
hours; etc. Without management's help, it is difficult for 
patrol officers to accomplish much problem-solving with 
such intermittent available time. 

The more proactive officers are able to take advantage of 
time between calls to work on some types of community 
policing and projects, such as establishing or maintaining 
community contacts, doing specific directed patrol, and 
interacting with crime analysts. Agencies that encourage 
problem-solving may have alternative responders and other 
call management strategies to provide patrol officers blocks 
of uninterrupted time in the field, during which they are not 
responsible for answering radio calls and can work on 
projects. A remaining challenge for police management in 
many agencies is to determine more precisely the portion of 
that time that is actually being devoted to problem-solving 
and other community policing activities. 

Resource Allocation 

Police agencies benefit by analyzing call management data 
for resource allocation decisions. Resource allocation, 
particularly in patrol, has become much more "scientific" in 
recent years. In large agencies, small shifts in patrol 
resources can equate to thousands of dollars. Effectively 



and efficiently matching resources to crime and problem 
workload requires accurate analysis of call management 
data. No national standards exist on determining police 
staffing. Analyzing workload provides the most accurate 
resource allocation decisions, and the most accurate picture 
of patrol workload comes from call for service data in CAD 
systems. 

As the number of call management strategies increases, 
resource allocation becomes more challenging. In order to 
determine effective strategies, departments should examine 
call data broken down by: 

. 
Priority and type of call (because of different ways 
of handling different calls) 

. 
Source of call (9-1-1, 3-1-1, Internet, storefront, 
etc.) 

. 
Geographic location 

. 
Time of day and day of week 

. 
Units assigned (include TRU) 

. 
Types of personnel (basic patrol units, supervisors, 
volunteers, etc.) 

. 
Amount of time devoted to calls (including 
backups) 


Management Accountability

Call data can also be analyzed to assess management and 
supervisory accountability. Nearly two-thirds of the police 
departments responding to the national survey analyze call 
data to assess management accountabilityoefor example by 
looking at numbers and types of calls in the manager's 
geographic area of responsibility. A good example of using 
call and report data for accountability is the success of 
Compstat in some police agencies.28 Instead of solely 



Footnotes, continued
28 The Compstat approach originated in New 
York City and has been adapted and modified 
in other departments. It includes management 
accountability meetings where data (crime 
reports, arrests, calls for service, etc.) is 
presented and discussed. 


looking at crime or arrest numbers, analyzing calls for 
service of a particular type, such as noise complaints, 
provides a more complete picture of the issues that concern 
citizens enough to call the police. Comparing the data 
before and after a police intervention can help determine if 
measures taken by officers were effective in reducing 
problems. 

In addition, management, supervisors, and officers can be 
held accountable for the successful implementation of a 
particular call management strategy. If telephone reporting 
is supposed to free up time for officers to do problem-
solving, call data can show whether this is actually 
occurring. Call data can also help to identify the success of 
teams or special units assigned to problems. For example, 
the combination of vandalism and graffiti complaints, 
arrests, and tip information to a graffiti hotline can assist in 
assessing the effectiveness of a special anti-graffiti task 
force. 

Interacting with the Community

Call for service data can also be valuable in conducting 
victim call-backs and surveys to measure police-community 
interactions, an integral part of community policing. 
Community participation in surveys, focus groups, and beat 
meetings is important not only for problem-solving projects 
or volunteer programs, but for implementing successful call 
management strategies. The community can become 
involved in call management strategies in several ways. 

. 
The community can indicate a need or desire for a 
new strategy. 

. 
The community can be involved in developing the 
strategy. For example, when prioritizing calls, the 
community's main concerns may be different from 
what the department perceives them to be. 


. 
The community can become part of the strategy, for 
example, by participating in a problem-solving 
activity or by serving as a volunteer. 

. 
The community will be using or be affected by each 
strategy. If citizens accept and use alternative call 
management strategies, they are actively 
contributing to the overall goal of community 
policing. 

. 
The community interacts with the police department 
by providing feedback, both positive and negative. 

Community participation in evaluations and surveys needs 
to be seen as valuable input by the department. Soliciting 
information about citizens' views and experiences can 
encourage their involvement in finding solutions to 
problems. Results from the national survey revealed that 
police agencies are attempting to measure the pulse of the 
community through surveys and other data collection and 
analysis. For example, 57 percent of departments conduct 
citizen satisfaction surveys, and another 23 percent are 
planning these surveys. In addition, 38 percent of police 
agencies analyze various measures of fear of crime, and 
another 29 percent are planning to collect this information. 


Chapter 6 
Summary of Recommendations 



Summary of Recommendations 

When police agencies examine call management strategies 
to support community policing, executives should review 
the information and challenges in this guidebook and 
address key issues in the planning stages. This chapter 
provides a summary of activities that can help agencies 
systematically move through the process of adding one or 
more call management strategies to support community 
policing. 

Before beginning step 1 below, agencies should develop 
and review some key background information. In this 
preliminary stage, a number of questions need to be 
addressed. 

. 
What are the department's philosophy, mission, and 
goals? 

. 
What are the existing call management strategies? 
Why were they implemented and how well are they 
working to meet agency goals, especially those 
associated with community policing? 

. 
What new call management strategy or strategies 
would best serve the department's community 
policing and problem-solving needs? 

. 
Who are the stakeholders for the planned strategies 
and what are their interests? 

. 
What resources are needed to implement the 
strategy? Will these resources come from the 
current budget, future budget, grants, donations, 
other? 



Call Management Steps to Enhance Community Policing

1. Conduct a Needs Assessment
The development of a specific call management strategy 
should be based on an agency's needs rather than employee 
sentiment or political pressure. The first step is to conduct a 
comprehensive needs assessment, obtaining input from 
various work groups inside the agency, other local 
government agencies, and the community. Means of 
obtaining input include surveys, interviews, focus groups, 
and community meetings. 

The agency also needs to conduct a thorough analysis of 
call for service data to determine trends and workloads. 
After personal experience and statistical information are 
examined, departments will have a more comprehensive 
and detailed understanding of call management needs and 
strategies best suited to address them. 

2. Create a Representative Planning Team
Some call management changes can be far reaching and 
affect the entire police department. In planning such 
change, organizations should include a representative group 
of employees, including communications, crime analysis, 
patrol, and others, to help steer the process. This planning 
team should also meet periodically with community groups. 
Involving staff in the change process helps generate a 
variety of ideas and encourages commitment to the process 
and outcome. 

3. Choose the Most Appropriate Strategy
Develop call management alternatives, weigh the 
alternatives, and choose a call management strategy based 
on the department's strategic goals. These are different from 


tactical goals, which are important for day-to-day policing. 
Strategic goals are broader agency and local government 
goals, and the call management strategies selected should 
have these broader goals in mind. Certain call management 
strategies are better suited for different jurisdictions because 
of department philosophy, community characteristics, and 
available resources. Consider all these factors before 
launching a new call management strategy. 

4. Budget Adequate Resources
Budget adequate resources for technology, personnel, 
marketing, and training so that call management strategies 
can be implemented effectively. Identify resources inside 
and outside the agency before beginning implementation. 

5. Recognize the Importance of Training
Organized training is needed on the new call management 
policies and procedures and also on problem-solving. 
Department personnel and the community need to be 
educated on the strategy's purposes and goals. Departments 
should take this change opportunity to further develop and 
refine problem-solving practices. Personnel who represent 
problem identification and analysis sources, such as 
communications, TRU, crime analysis, and others, should 
also receive training in how they can contribute to and 
support the process. 

6. Market the Strategy
Extensive marketing of the new call management strategy 
will have an impact on its acceptance by staff and the 
public, and in turn, affect its success. Don't just depend on a 
newspaper article to assume the public knows about the 
strategy. Make sure information and education about the 
strategy reaches any particular groups (e.g., those with 
English as a second language) who are targeted by the 


strategy. Conduct focus groups with different populations 
the strategy is intended to reach. Learn about people's 
concerns and understand what messages will attract their 
attention. Use a variety of advertising media to publicize 
the changes: flyers, direct mail, web site, newspaper 
articles, signs, community meetings, and more. 

7. Evaluate the Strategy
Prepare during the planning stage to collect the information 
that will be needed to evaluate the strategy periodically. 
Data will be needed to evaluate efficiency (e.g., the number 
of calls handled per hour by responder before and after 
implementation) and effectiveness (e.g., citizen 
satisfaction). Some key questions to address include the 
following: 

. 
Is the strategy meeting the intended goals? 
. 
Is the strategy meeting the needs of the community? 
If not, why not? 
. 
Have there been any unforeseen consequences, 
positive and negative? 

. 
Is there redundancy in the strategies? For example, 
are the same people who reported incidents by mail 
just as willing to complete an Internet report? If so, 
you may be able to eliminate mail-in as a reporting 
strategy; automated reporting relieves staff from 
time-consuming data entry. 

. 
Are staff taking advantage of the strategy to its
fullest extent? If not, is it a training issue,
technology issue, personnel resources, etc.?

. 
What is the department doing better because of the 
strategy? 


8. Be Willing to Change and Innovate
Although police departments cannot control change, such as 
community development and growth, agencies can control 
organizational responses to change. As changes occur in 
communities, e.g., annexations, new multi-family housing 
developments, and new shopping areas, the community's 
perceptions of its safety and problems change as well. 

Community policing calls for flexibility, problem-solving, 
and participation by community members and a broad 
cross-section of department members in developing 
solutions to problems. These principles clearly apply as 
police agencies and communities work together to create 
call management strategies that improve public safety. 



Additional Resources 
and References 

Resources

. American Association for the Advancement of 
Community Oriented Policing. www.aaacop.org 

. Community Policing Consortium. 
www.communitypolicing.org 

. United Kingdom Home Office. 
www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/index.htm 

. National Center for Community Policing. 
www.cj.msu.edu/~people/cp/ 

. National Institute of Justice. www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij 

. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 
U.S. Department of Justice. www.cops.usdoj.gov 

. Association of Public-Safety Communications 
Officials (APCO) International. www.apcointl.org 

. National Emergency Number Association (NENA). 
www.nena.org 

References 
Arreola, P., and E.N. Kondracki. "Cutback 
Management, Cost Containment and Increased 
Productivity," Police Chief, 59(10) (Oct 1992): 
110oe112, 115oe118. NCJ 139451 

Baltimore Police Department. Baltimore Police 
Department Communications Division 311 Non-
Emergency Telephone Number First Annual 
Program Evaluation (October 1996/September 
1997). Baltimore, Maryland: Author, 1997. NCJ 
175320 



Brown, L.P. Community Policing: A Practical Guide 
for Police Officials. Perspectives on Policing. 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 
National Institute of Justice, September 1989. 

Cahn, M.F., and J.M. Tien. Alternative Approach in 
Police ResponseoeWilmington Management of 
Demand Program, Wilmington Bureau of Police. 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 
National Institute of Justice, 1981. NCJ 80490 

Chandek, M.S. Technology to Enhance Community 
and Problem Oriented Policing. Ann Arbor, 
Michigan: Regional Community Policing Institute, 
Michigan State University, 1999. 

Cohen, M., and J.T. McEwen. Handling Calls for 
ServiceoeAlternatives to Traditional Policing. 
Research in Action, NIJ Report. Washington, D.C.: 
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice. September 1984. 

Cordner, G.W. "Getting Serious About Community 
Involvement," American Journal of Police, 12(3) 
(1993): 79oe88. NCJ 151304 

Crime Desks and Help Desks: A Survey. Home Office 
Police Research Group, Briefing Note. London, 
England: United Kingdom Home Office, February 
1995. 

Diez, L. Use of Call Grading: How Calls to the 
Police Are Graded and Resourced. Police Research 
Series Paper 13. London, England: United 
Kingdom Home Office Police Research Group. 



Eck, J., and W. Spelman. Problem-Solving: Problem-
Oriented Policing in Newport News. Washington, 
D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 1987. 

Ekblom, P., and K. Heal. International Summaries: 
Police Response to Calls from the Public. 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 
National Institute of Justice, 1982. NCJ 92598 

Garden Grove Police Department. Differential Police 
ResponseoeTraining Guide. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 
1983. NCJ 102962 

Givens, G. "Concept To Involve Citizens in the 
Provision of Police Services," American Journal of 
Police, 12(3) (1993): 1oe9. NCJ 151300 

Goldstein, H. Problem Oriented Policing. New York: 
McGraw-Hill, 1990. NCJ 122899 

Greensboro Police Department. Differential Police 
Response. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Justice, National Institute of Justice, n.d. NCJ 
89918 

Hoover, L.T. ed. "Assessing Alternative Responses to 
Calls for Service." In Quantifying Quality in 
Policing, L.T. Hoover, ed. Washington, D.C.: Police 
Executive Research Forum, 1996: 153oe166. NCJ 
158093 



Hoover, L.T. ed. Police Program Evaluation. 
Huntsville, Texas: Bill Blackwood Law 
Enforcement Management Institute of Texas, 
Criminal Justice Center, 1998. NCJ 174118 

Hoover, L.T. ed. Quantifying Quality in Policing. 
Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research 
Forum, 1996. NCJ 158093 

Hough, M., and P.A.J. Waddington. "Calling The 
Police: The Interpretation of, and Response to, 
Calls for Assistance from the Public," British 
Journal of Criminology, 35(3) (1993). NCJ 146884 

Jolowicz, C., and T. Read. Managing Demand on the 
Police: An Evaluation of a Crime Line, Police 
Research Series Paper No. 8. London, England: 
United Kingdom Home Office Police Research 
Group. 

Jolowicz, C., and T. Read. Telephone Demand on the 
Police: The 90's Picture? Briefing Note, London, 
England: United Kingdom Home Office Police 
Research Group, May 1995. 

Kennedy, D.M. Strategic Management of Police 
Resources. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1993. NCJ 
139565 

Klosiewicz, R.S. "Police Administration New Castle 
County, DelawareoeA Special ProblemoeBurglar 
Alarm Study." Master's thesis, University of 
Delaware, 1980. 



Knee, S.L., and L.G. Heywood. Differential Police 
Response to Citizen-Initiated Calls for 
ServiceoeExec Summary (Part 1). Washington, D.C.: 

U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of 
Justice, 1983. NCJ 95260 

Larson, R.C. Future of Police Emergency Response 
Systems. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1985. NCJ 
99829 

Larson, R.C. Rapid Response and Community 
Policing: Are They Really in Conflict? Ann Arbor, 
Michigan: National Center for Community 
Policing, Michigan State University School of 
Criminal Justice Publication, 1990. NCJ 134978 

Managing Citizens Calls to the Police: An 
Assessment of Non-Emergency Call Systems. NIJ 
Grant # 98-IJ-CX-0067. Unpublished Report, 
October 2001. 

Manning, P.K. Symbolic Communication: Signifying 
Calls and the Police Response. Cambridge, 
Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1988. NCJ 127029 

Mastrofski, S.D. "Varieties of Community Policing," 
American Journal of Police, 12(3) (1993): 65oe77. 
NCJ 151303 



Maxfield, M.G. "Service Time, Dispatch Time, & 
Demand for Police Services Helping More by 
Serving Less," 1980. (Revised version of paper 
originally prepared for ORSA/TIMS Joint National 
Meeting Milwaukee, WI, Oct 1979) NCJ 76504 

McEwen, J.T., E.F. Connors, and M.I. Cohen. 
Evaluation of the Differential Police Response 
Field Test. Alexandria, Virginia: Research 
Management Associates, 1986. 

Minnesota Department of Public Safety. 
Reimplementation of Differential Police Response. 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 
National Institute of Justice, 1986. NCJ 102963 

Murphy, C., and G. Muir. Community-Based 
Policing: A Review of the Critical Issues. West 
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Canada Solicitor General 
Communications Group Programs Branch, 1985. 
NCJ 133665 

Ommen, T.L. What Will Be the Police Response to 
Non-Emergency Calls for Service by the Year 2000? 
Sacramento, California: California Commission on 
Peace Officer Standards and Traiing, 1988. NCJ 
118740 

Sacks, S.R., R.C. Larson, and C. Schaak. 
"Minimizing the Cost of Dispatch Delays by 
Holding Patrol Cars in Reserve," Journal of 
Quantitative Criminology, 9(2) (June 1993): 
203oe224. NCJ 144418 



Schneider, P.J. "Proposal for an Evaluation of a Tele 
Serve Unit in the Houston Police Department." 
Houston, Texas: Houston Police Department, 1983. 

Scott, M. Problem Oriented Policing: Reflections on 
the First 20 Years. U.S. Department of Justice, 
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 
2001. 

Stevens, D. "American Police Resolutions and 
Community Response," The Police Journal, 72(2) 
(1999). 

Sumrall, R.O., J. Roberts, and M.T. Farmer. 
Differential Police Response Strategies. U.S. Dept 
of Justice, 1981. 

Waggoner, K. "Creative Solutions to Traditional 
Problems," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 66(8) 
(August 1997): 8oe12. 

Weedon, J. "How Is the Balance To Be Struck 
Between Prevention and Detection in the Police 
Response to Crime?" Police Journal, 63(1) (1990): 
34oe48. NCJ 124510 

Worden, R.E. "Toward Equity and Efficiency in Law 
Enforcement: Differential Police Response," 
American Journal of Police, 12(1) (1993): 1oe32. 
NCJ 149990 


Appendix



Appendix 

Introduction

This report provides details on the methodology and results 
of a national survey of police call management strategies 
and community policing activities. The survey was 
conducted as background research for preparing the 

Guidebook on Call Management for Community Policing. 
The survey and Guidebook were completed by the Institute 
for Law and Justice (ILJ) under a cooperative agreement 
with the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 
(COPS Office), U. S. Department of Justice. 

In publishing the Guidebook, the COPS Office wanted to 
show how a range of strategies for managing calls for 
service could help police agencies (1) free up more officer 
time for problem-solving and other community policing 
activities without compromising emergency responses or 
citizen satisfaction, and (2) make better use of call for 
service and other data to plan and measure the success of 
their community policing efforts. When work on the 
Guidebook began, the community policing literature 
contained discussions of these concepts, as well as some 
examples of related agency practices. However, very little 
research had been done on what police departments 
nationwide were actually doing to manage calls for service, 
or on the link between call management practices and 
community policing. 



Because this information was lacking, the national survey 
was an essential starting point for preparing the Guidebook. 
The survey was designed to address such key questions as 
these: 

. 
To what extent are police agencies currently using 
various alternatives to providing immediate, sworn 
responses to non-emergency calls for service (e.g., 
call stacking/delayed response, telephone reporting 
units (TRUs), mail-in and walk-in reporting, 3-1-1 
systems, Internet reporting)? 

. 
To what extent are police agencies using data 
captured by their computer aided dispatch (CAD) 
systems and other sources to help plan and measure 
the success of their problem-solving and other 
community policing efforts? 

. 
What types of activities and organizational changes 
commonly associated with community policing are 
actually being implemented? 

. 
How do call management practices and community 
policing activities vary with the size of 
jurisdictions? 

. 
What can be learned about promising and 
innovative call management practices currently 
being employed to enhance community policing? 

Methodology

The survey sample was drawn from a database that had 
been used in previous projects, containing contact 
information for almost all of the police departments in the 
country (but not sheriff's offices). The sample of 695 
included all departments serving jurisdictions with 
populations of 250,000 or greater and a random sample of 
departments with jurisdiction populations less than 250,000. 



A 24-item survey questionnaire was developed with input 
from ILJ staff, COPS Office staff, and reviewers with 
backgrounds in CAD, differential police response, and 
community policing and problem-solving. The 
questionnaire included both closed and open-ended items. 
Because the survey was designed to serve two different 
projects,29 questions were asked about departments' 
computer aided dispatch (CAD) system, as well as their call 
management strategies and community policing activities. 

The survey was mailed to the 695 police departments in 
May 2000. A second wave was mailed in August 2000 to 
departments that had not yet responded. By the end of 
October 2000, 467 surveys (67 percent) had been returned 
to ILJ and 420 surveys (61 percent of the 695) were 
available for analysis.30 In addition to analyzing response 
frequencies for all survey items, crosstabulations were used 
to provide insight into how call management strategies and 
community policing activities vary based on jurisdiction 
size. Respondents were grouped into the four population 
categories shown in Exhibit 1. 



Exhibit 1: Survey Respondents by Population of Jurisdiction
N = 420 

Population of Jurisdiction, Percent of Respondents 
Under 25,000, 26 
25,000 - 50,000, 32 
50,000 - 250,000, 29 
250,000 or more, 13 


Thirteen jurisdictions with populations greater than 1 
million completed the survey (3.1 percent of all 
respondents). 


Footnotes, continued
29 At the time of the survey, ILJ was 
conducting a related National Institute of 
Justice project, "CAD Support for Community 
Policing," in which surveys needed to be sent 
to the same police agencies. ILJ staff and the 
funding agencies agreed that there was enough 
overlap of purpose to combine the 
questionnaires. 

30 Although the survey instructions asked 
departments without CAD systems to 
complete the community policing items in the 
questionnaire, 46 surveys were returned blank 
with the notation that the department did not 
have a CAD system. These were consequently 
dropped from the analysis. 


Findings 

The extent to which call management strategies directly 
support community policing could not be established by 
analyzing the questionnaire responses. However, 
departments did provide examples of how call management 
strategies help them achieve community policing goals. In 
addition, departments were encouraged to attach 
information concerning different call type classifications, 
community policing policies, and call management policies, 
and approximately half of the respondents did so. 
The survey findings presented in this section are divided 
into two major categories: (1) findings on call management 
strategies, and (2) findings related to community policing 
activities. 

Call Managemetn Strategies

Departments were asked to identify the percentage of all 
calls for service handled by each of six categories of 
responders (patrol officers, community policing team 
members, uniformed civilians, specialized units (e.g., 
detectives), volunteers, and others). Exhibit 2 shows that, as 
might be expected, a large majority of calls (87 percent) are 
handled by patrol officers. 


Exhibit 2: Percent of Calls Responded to by Type of Responder 

Responder - Percent of Calls 

Patrol Officers - 87
Special Team/Unit - 6
Community Policing Team/Unit - 4
Uniformed Civilians - 2
Volunteers - 1
Other - 1



The questionnaire also asked about the use of call 
stacking/delayed response to handle certain types of calls. 
Overall, 59 percent of departments reported using these 
techniques. There were no significant differences in 
responses for jurisdictions with populations over 25,000; 
however, jurisdictions with populations less than 25,000 
were significantly less likely to use call stacking/delayed 
response (only 36 percent, compared with two-thirds of 
jurisdictions with populations of 25,000 or greater). 

Similarly, 59 percent of police departments said they 
transfer certain calls that come in on a police number to 
other, more appropriate agencies. The likelihood of 
transferring calls to other agencies increased significantly 
with the population of the jurisdiction. In jurisdictions with 
fewer than 25,000 residents, 42 percent of police 
departments said they transfer calls, compared to 59 percent 
of departments in jurisdictions of 25,000 to 50,000; 68 
percent in jurisdictions of 50,000 to 250,000; and 72 
percent in jurisdictions with populations of 250,000 or 
greater. Transferring calls is most likely a more viable 
option in larger jurisdictions because they have a greater 
number of agencies and organizations available to handle 
these calls. 

Departments were also asked to indicate what types of 
methods they provide for citizens to file police reports, in 
addition to having an officer or other police representative 
take a report at the scene or call location. Exhibit 3 shows 
the percent of departments that employ each of the 
following reporting methods: walk-ins/storefront reporting, 
telephone reporting unit (TRU), scheduled appointments 
with officers, mail-in reporting, and Internet reporting. The 
result for walk-in/storefront reports is high (95 percent) 
because the questionnaire did not distinguish between 


reports taken at the police station or substations (which 
most departments accept) and walk-in reporting at 
storefronts. 

Exhibit 3: Percent of Departments Using Alternative Reporting Methods
Reporting Method - Percent of Departments 
Walk-ins/storefront reporting - 95
Telephone Reporting Unit - 56
Appointments with Officers - 42
Mail-in - 23
Internet Reporting - 6


For two alternative reporting methods, there were 
significant differences depending on the size of the 
jurisdiction (see Exhibit 4). The use of TRUs increased 
dramatically as the jurisdiction size increased. This is most 
likely because departments in larger jurisdictions generally 
have more personnel available to staff a TRU, as well as 
enough calls for service to justify its use. In contrast, the 
use of scheduled appointments with officers was much less 
common in larger jurisdictions, suggesting that officers in 
larger jurisdictions have less time available for 
appointments or less control over their daily schedules. The 
use of mail-in reporting, walk-in reporting, and Internet 
reporting was not related to jurisdiction size. 


Exhibit 4: Use of TRUs and Scheduled Appointments by Size of Jurisdiction
Size of Jurisdiction, Percent Using TRUs, Percent Using Appointments
Less than 25,000, 29, 53 
25,000 - 50,000, 46, 49 
50,000 - 250,000, 77, 34 
250,000 or more, 93, 19 




Nearly half of departments (49 percent) indicated that they 
have discussed implementing one or more of the alternative 
reporting methods not currently in use in their agency. 

Of the responding departments, only ten (three percent), 
reported that their departments currently use 3-1-1 as a non-
emergency number. Half of those departments were in 
jurisdictions with populations greater than one million, and 
the other five were in jurisdictions whose populations 
varied from 16,000 to 230,000. 

Thirty-one percent of departments not currently using 3-1-1 
for non-emergencies indicated that they have discussed the 
possibility. There was tremendous variation depending on 
the size of the jurisdiction, however. Less than 20 percent of 
departments in jurisdictions smaller than 25,000 or between 
25,000 and 50,000 said they had considered 3-1-1. This 
increased to 43 percent of departments in jurisdictions 
between 50,000 and 250,000 and 78 percent in jurisdictions 
larger than 250,000. 

Community Policing 

The survey asked two types of questions related to 
community policing. First, a set of questions asked 
respondents to indicate whether they are currently doing, 
plan to do, or have no plans to do various types of data 
analysis that might aid in measuring community policing 
efforts. These questions asked about measures related to 
problem-solving, resource allocation, community 
involvement and satisfaction, support for special units, and 
management accountability. Second, respondents were 
asked about the extent to which their departments are 
involved in twelve different activities that are typically 
associated with community policing. 


Problem-Solving Measures

Call for service and other data can be valuable both for 
identifying problems and measuring the success of problem-
solving efforts. Survey respondents were asked about their 
use of nine different measures that might support problem-
solving. As shown in Exhibit 5, almost 92 percent of 
departments identify top problem locations, and 84 percent 
report and analyze the frequency of certain call types (alarm 
calls, drug complaints, accidents, etc.). Two-thirds of 
departments identify repeat callers, two-thirds conduct "hot 
spot" analysis, and more than half capture and use 
information on premise history (61 percent) and predict 
emerging problem locations/areas (58 percent). Fifty-one 
departments (twelve percent) perform all nine types of 
analysis listed in the questionnaire under problem-solving 
measures. This tweleve percent includes departments of all 
sizes, with almost half (22 departments) located in 
jurisdictions of 50,000 to 250,000 population. 


Exhibit 5: Percent of Departments Using Problem-Solving Measures*
Measures, Currently doing, Plan to do, No plan to do 
Identifying top problem locations, 92, 7, 1 
Reporting/analyzing frequency of call types, 84, 13, 3 
Conducting "hot spot" analysis, 66, 23, 12 
Identifying repeat callers, 65, 17, 18 
Capturing and using premise history, 61, 27, 12 
Predicting emerging problem locations/areas, 58, 32, 10 
Assessing problem-solving efforts through change in number of calls, 50, 29, 22 
Determining which officers are performing problem-solving efforts, 44, 30, 26 
Assessing problem-solving efforts through displacement, 32, 28, 40 
 
* Totals may not equal 100 percent due to rounding. 



Jurisdiction size was related to whether departments are 
using three of the nine problem-solving measures. Larger 
departments are more likely to conduct "hot spot" analysis, 
assess problem-solving efforts through analysis of changes 
in call volume, and assess problem-solving efforts by 
analyzing displacement. Exhibit 6 shows the use of 
problem-solving measures by jurisdiction size. 


Exhibit 6: Percent of Departments Using Problem-Solving Measures by Jurisdiction Population*
Measures, 250,000 or More, 50,000-250,000, 25,000- 50,000, Less than 25,000 
Identifying top problem locations, 98, 90, 92, 91 
Reporting/analyzing frequency of call types, 94, 90, 78, 80 
*Conducting "hot spot" analysis, 82, 72, 63, 55 
Identifying repeat callers, 69, 65, 62, 68 
Capturing and using premise history, 69, 65, 60, 54 
Predicting emerging problem locations/areas, 65, 60, 56, 55 
*Assessing problem-solving efforts through change in number of calls, 60, 60, 45, 40 
Determining which officers are performing problem-solving efforts, 56, 46, 43, 39 
*Assessing problem-solving efforts through displacement, 40, 40, 29, 24 

* Jurisdiction size was statistically significant at p<.05 



Resource Allocation Measures 

The questionnaire asked departments to report on their use 
of five measures related to resource allocation: analyzing 
time spent at a location or on a problem, evaluating self-
initiated activities, performing call stacking analysis, 
analyzing TRU activity, and reviewing out-of-area 
dispatches with regard to beat responsibility. The results are 
shown in Exhibit 7. Only the evaluation of self-initiated 
activities is currently done by a majority of police 
departments (58 percent). 


Exhibit 7: Percent of Departments Using Resource Allocation Measures*
Measures, Currently doing, Plan to do, No plan to do 
Evaluating self-initiated activities, 58, 27, 15 
Analyzing time spent at a location or on problem, 46, 34, 20 
**Analyzing TRU activity, 46, 19, 35 
Reviewing out of area dispatches in regard to beat responsibility, 24, 23, 53 
Performing call stacking analysis, 19, 28, 53 

* Totals may not equal 100 percent due to rounding.
** These figures represent the percentage of departments that reported they have a TRU. Of the 234 who so
indicated, 214 (91%) also indicated the degree to which they analyze TRU activity.



Only five percent of responding departments said they use 
all five resource allocation measures listed in Exhibit 7; in 
fact, over half of departments (53 percent) indicated they 
have no plans to review out of area dispatches or analyze 
call stacking data. 

Jurisdiction size was related to the use of three resource 
allocation measures: analysis of TRU activity, review of 
out-of-area dispatches, and call stacking analysis. The latter 
two activities are still performed by fewer than half of 


departments in the largest jurisdictions. The differences in 
TRU analysis are more striking, with departments in larger 
jurisdictions much more likely to analyze TRU activity. As 
noted earlier, 58 percent of respondents (234 departments) 
reported having a TRU, and 214 of those departments 
answered the question about analysis of TRU data. Their 
responses show that 84 percent of departments in 
jurisdictions of over 250,000 analyze TRU activity, 
compared to 54 percent in jurisdictions of 50,000 to 
250,000; 25 percent in jurisdictions of 25,000 to 50,000; 
and seven percent in jurisdictions with 25,000 population or 
less. 

Community Involvement/satisfaction Measures

Many police departments appear to be actively involved in 
measuring community involvement in policing initiatives 
and citizen satisfaction with policing services. Exhibit 8 
shows the extent to which respondents report using five 
measures of community involvement/satisfaction. In fact, 
analyzing measures of fear was the only activity not being 
done by a majority of departments. Eighteen percent of 
respondents (77 departments) report using all five measures 
listed in Exhibit 8, with no significant difference in these 
responses based on size of jurisdiction. 


Exhibit 8: Percent of Departments Using Community Involvement and 
Satisfaction Measures*

Measures, Currently doing, Plan to do, No plan to do 
Providing referrals to non-police agencies, 93, 4, 3 
Doing victim follow up, 76, 13, 10 
Capturing community meeting times and locations, 67, 15, 18 
Conducting satisfaction surveys, 57, 23, 19 
Analyzing measures of fear, 33, 29, 38 
* Totals may not equal 100 percent due to rounding. 


Jurisdiction population appears to be important only with 
regard to capturing community meeting times and locations. 
Eighty-four percent of departments in jurisdictions with 
populations of 250,000 or more perform this activity, 
compared to only 56 percent of departments in jurisdictions 
smaller than 25,000. 

Support for Special Units

The overwhelming majority of survey respondents provide 
support to special units by reporting and analyzing calls by 
problem locations (75 percent) and problem type (71 
percent), as shown in Exhibit 9. Sixty-three percent of 
departments reported using both types of measures to 
support special units, with no significant differences based 
on jurisdiction population. 

Exhibit 9: Percent of Departments Providing Support for Special Units*
Measures, Currently doing, Plan to do, No plan to do  
Reporting/analyzing calls by problem locations, 75, 17, 8 
Reporting/analyzing calls by problem types, 71, 16, 13 
 
* Totals may not equal 100 percent due to rounding. 




Departments in jurisdictions with populations greater than 
50,000 more often analyze by problem type than those in 
smaller jurisdictions, as can be seen in Exhibit 10. 

Exhibit 10: Support for Special Units by Jurisdiction Population
Size of Jurisdiction, Analysis by Problem Type, Analysis by Problem Location 
Less than 25,000, 62, 65 
25,000 - 50,000, 62, 71 
50,000 - 250,000, 84, 82 
250,000 or more, 87, 89 
250,000 or more, 93, 19 


Management Accountability

An important part of community policing is the extent to 
which management-level personnel analyze data that can 
aid in determining whether current efforts and personnel are 
productive. For example, examining changes in the numbers 
and types of calls for service can assist managers in 
assessing whether strategies are working; and analyzing 
complaint calls can serve as one measure of success with 
respect to building community partnerships. Of responding 
departments, 60 percent use numbers and types of calls for 
the purpose of management accountability and 65 percent 
capture and analyze complaint calls. There were no 
significant differences in responses based on jurisdiction 
size. Half (49 percent) of departments currently use both 
measures, again with no significant differences based on 
size of jurisdiction. 

Combined Measures

Our analysis showed that two percent of respondents (eight 
departments) report that they perform all of the analysis 
activities listed in the questionnaire with respect to 


problem-solving measures, resource allocation measures, 
community involvement and satisfaction measures, support 
for special units, and management accountability. Of these 
eight departments, five serve jurisdictions with populations 
between 50,000 and 250,000, while two are in jurisdiction 
of over 250,000 and one serves a jurisdiction of less than 
25,000. 

Community Policing Activities 

The questionnaire asked respondents to report the extent to 
which their departments were involved in each of twelve 
activities that are often associated with community policing. 
A number of the activities suggest significant changes in 
organizational structure (e.g., decentralizing detectives, 
opening substations), while others (e.g., conducting 
community surveys) would not require major organizational 
change. Respondents were asked to indicate whether they 
were performing each activity to a great extent, moderate 
extent, limited extent, or not at all. The results are shown in 
Exhibit 11. 


Exhibit 11: Percent of Departments Engaging in Community Policing Activities
Activities, Great extent, Moderate extent, Limited extent, Not at all 
Gave geographic responsibility to patrol, 51, 26, 16, 8
Have a citizens police academy, 48, 10, 13, 29 
Conduct beat/neighborhood meetings open to the public, 32, 35, 21, 12 
Opened neighborhood substations, 26, 19, 18, 37 
Adopted problem-solving techniques, 22, 33, 31, 14 
Developed information systems to support problem-solving, 17, 31, 37, 16 
Conduct citizen surveys on a regular basis, 17, 23, 37, 24  
Decision-making occurs in lower ranks, 16, 45, 36, 4 
Developed evaluation criteria for determining success of community policing, 14, 22, 43, 22 
Decentralized detectives, 10, 11, 18, 61 
Changed communications center procedures on how citizen calls are handled, 9, 24, 36, 31 
Eliminated one or more ranks, 5, 7, 13, 75 


No department indicated that it was performing all tweleve 
activities listed to a great extent. In fact, giving geographic 
responsibility to patrol was the only activity that a majority 
of departments (51 percent) reported doing to a great extent. 

Responses with respect to two itemsoechanging 
communications center procedures for call handling and 
developing evaluation criteria for community policingoeare 
of particular interest in light of the study's focus on call 


management strategies and analysis of call for service data 
to support community policing. Only one-third of 
respondents report having changed communications center 
procedures to a moderate extent (24 percent) or great extent 
(nine percent). The percent of departments that have 
developed community policing evaluation criteria is only 
slightly higher (36 percent), with 14 percent having done 
this to a great extent and 22 percent to a moderate extent. 

The survey results indicate that the extent to which many 
community policing activities are conducted is related to the 
population of the jurisdiction. As shown in Exhibit 12, this 
is true for 8 of the 12 community policing activities listed in 
the questionnaire. (Exhibit 12 includes data only on 
performance of community policing activities to a great 
extent). The four activities for which there was no 
significant difference based on population were: giving 
geographic responsibility to patrol, decision making in 
lower ranks, developing evaluation criteria for success, and 
eliminating one or more ranks. 

It is not surprising that smaller jurisdictions would not find 
some of the activities useful or feasible (e.g., opening 
substations, decentralizing detectives). For other activities, 
however, jurisdiction population was not expected to be so 
influential. For example, 42 percent of departments in the 
largest jurisdictions, but only eleven percent in jurisdictions 
of less than 25,000, have adopted problem-solving 
techniques to a great extent. These differences were not as 
pronounced, however, with respect to use of problem-
solving techniques to a moderate extent (reported by 40 
percent of departments in the largest jurisdictions, 
compared to about 25 percent in jurisdictions of less than 
25,000). 


Exhibit 12: Percent of Departments Performing Community Policing Activities by Jurisdiction Size
Activities Conducted to a Great Extent, 250,000 or More, 50,000-250,000, 25,000-50,000, Less than 25,000 
*Have citizens' police academy, 77, 55, 44, 31 
Gave geographic responsibility to patrol, 67, 53, 45, 47 
*Conduct neighborhood meetings, 54, 40, 30, 14 
*Opened neighborhood substation, 53, 29, 24, 13 
*Adopted problem-solving techniques, 42, 26, 17, 11 
*Decentralized detectives, 40, 10, 5, 1 
*Developed information systems to support problem-solving , 33, 18, 15, 9 
*Changed communicationcenter procedures, 29, 7, 4, 8 
*Conduct citizen surveys, 23, 19, 17, 10 
Developed evaluation criteria for determining success of community policing, 22, 15, 13, 9 
 Decision-making occurs in lower ranks, 21, 15, 16, 13 
Eliminated one or more ranks, 6, 5, 5, 3 

* Jurisdiction size was statistically significant at p<.05 


Discussion 

The overall goal of this survey was to determine what call 
management strategies are currently being used by police 
departments throughout the country, how many departments 
have these strategies in place, and how the strategies are 
being used. The survey also aimed to identify departments 
with innovative call management strategies and those that 
are using these strategies to support their community 
policing efforts. 



The size of the jurisdiction a department served was 
expected to be an influence on the types of call 
management strategies employed, as well as on many of the 
types of community policing activities being performed. For 
example, it is logical that stacking/delayed response 
techniques are employed much less frequently in 
jurisdictions of less than 25,000 population, since they are 
unlikely to have the large volume of calls that would make 
call stacking necessary. The use of telephone reporting units 
(TRUs) and scheduled appointments with officers was also 
related to jurisdiction population. Most of the largest 
jurisdictions (93 percent) had TRUs but were unlikely to 
schedule appointments (only 19 percent); about half of 
departments in jurisdictions of fewer than 25,000 (53 
percent) scheduled appointments, but only 29 percent had 
TRUs. 

It is interesting that for some activities, jurisdiction size was 
not a significant factor, indicating that there are reporting 
methods and activities that all departments can consider. 
Internet reporting, while used by only six percent of 
departments overall, was no more likely to be offered in a 
large jurisdiction than in a small one and may be driven 
more by demographics other than population size. 
Departments in areas where residents have easy access to 
the Internet and are accustomed to using it may be more 
likely to provide Internet reporting methods. As Internet use 
continues to increase, this reporting strategy will require 
further examination, particularly to see whether the public 
actually takes advantage of Internet reporting where police 
departments make it available. 

The most common alternative reporting method was walk-
in/storefront reporting (reported by 95 percent of 
departments). Because the questionnaire did not 


differentiate between walking into the police station or a 
substation to make a report and reporting at a storefront 
office, we could not determine the extent to which 
departments offer storefront reporting alternatives (although 
several examples of this are featured in the Guidebook). 
The viability of storefront offices for reporting purposes 
should be examined in more detail. 

One strategy of interest to municipal government in recent 
years is 3-1-1, which is intended to serve the dual purpose 
of keeping 9-1-1 lines free for emergency calls and 
directing appropriate non-emergencies to the agencies best 
suited to handle them. Analysis of 3-1-1 call data may also 
prove valuable for identifying and addressing citizen 
concerns before they escalate into serious problems. Only a 
few departments responding to the survey reported 
operating 3-1-1 systems, although 31 percent said they had 
discussed the possibility. It was not surprising that a large 
majority of that 31 percent were departments in 
jurisdictions of 250,000 or more. However, there is some 
suggestion that 3-1-1 may be practical for smaller 
jurisdictions, since half of the departments that had already 
implemented 3-1-1 were in jurisdictions with fewer than 
250, 000 residents. 

The responses to survey questions about community 
policing measures indicate that a significant majority of 
departments capture various data that could be valuable for 
evaluating success. For example, 92 percent identify top 
problem locations; 84 percent report and analyze the 
frequency of certain call types (alarm calls, drug 
complaints, etc.); 66 percent identify repeat callers; and 66 
percent conduct "hot spot" analysis. Similarly, nearly three-
fourths of departments support special units by analyzing 
calls by problem type and location. These results are 


encouraging, although the survey could not determine the 
extent to which these analyses are specifically aimed at 
enhancing community policing. Departments were less 
likely to identify which officers were performing problem-
solving activities, to assess problem-solving efforts through 
changes in numbers of calls, or to analyze displacement. 
These were also the activities that the greatest percentage of 
departments said they had no plan to do in the future. 

A significant number of police departments are employing 
measures to help assess community 
involvement/satisfaction. For example, more than half of 
departments are conducting victim follow up (76 percent), 
tracking community meeting times/locations (67 percent) 
and conducting citizen surveys (57 percent). There were no 
significant differences in these activities based on 
jurisdiction population. 

With respect to departments' involvement in the twelve 
community policing activities listed in the questionnaire, 
only one activityoegiving geographic responsibility to 
patroloewas being done to a great extent by a majority of 
departments (51 percent). Some of the activities (e.g., 
decentralizing detectives) were not expected to be 
widespread, either because they require significant 
organizational change or they are not practical for smaller 
jurisdictions. However, we did expect to see more 
involvement in some activities, particularly the adoption of 
problem-solving techniques, which has received a great deal 
of attention in recent years. In fact, the adoption of 
problem-solving techniques and performance of seven 
additional activities were significantly related to jurisdiction 
population, with larger departments more likely to conduct 
those activities. However, development of criteria for 
measuring the success of community policing was not 


dependent on jurisdiction population and appears to be an 
area where more work is needed across the board; only 37 
percent of departments have developed such criteria to a 
moderate or great extent. 

Conclusion

The survey had a high response rate and was largely 
successful in providing a picture of the types of call 
management strategies and community policing activities 
currently being used in the nation's police departments. It 
also was useful in identifying specific departments that have 
a variety of call management strategies in place and are also 
engaging in more than an average number of community 
policing activities. These departments are the source of the 
examples presented throughout the Guidebook. The survey 
analysis could not determine precise linkages between call 
management strategies and community policing activities. 
However, it provided valuable information on the 
foundations that departments have already built and 
confirmed that many departments are capturing data that 
can help them plan and measure problem-solving and other 
community policing activities in the future. 


FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 

1100 Vermont Avenue, NW 
Washington, D.C. 20530 

To obtain details on COPS programs, call the 

U.S. Department of Justice Response Center at 800.421.6770 

Visit COPS Online at the address listed below. 

e05031968 Updated Date: July 10, 2003 
ISBN: 1-932582-21-5 


www.cops.usdoj.gov