Understanding Community Policing: A Framework for Action.


MENU TITLE: Understanding Community Policing
Series: BJA
Published: August 1994
92 pages
192,125 bytes

------------------------------

Bureau of Justice Assistance
Understanding Community Policing
A Framework for Action
Monograph
August 1994

------------------------------

This document was prepared by the Community
Policing Consortium, supported by grant number 93-
DD-CX-K005, awarded by the Bureau of Justice
Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice. The
opinions, findings, and conclusions or
recommendations expressed in this document are
those of the authors and do not necessarily
represent the official position or policies of the
U.S. Department of Justice.

Bureau of Justice Assistance
Response Center
633 Indiana Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20531
800-421-6770

The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of
the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes
the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National
Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office
for Victims of Crime.

------------------------------

Acknowledgments

The Bureau of Justice Assistance wishes to thank
Stephen J. Gaffigan, Director of Operations,
Community Policing Consortium for supervising and
coordinating the preparation of this document with
the Consortium Management Team. BJA also
acknowledges the members of the Executive Board and
Advisory Board, who provided a wealth of expertise
and information essential to the content of the
document.

Executive Board

Richard Ward
Director, Discretionary Grant Programs Division
Bureau of Justice Assistance 

Dan Rosenblatt
Executive Director
International Association of Chiefs of Police 

Charles "Bud" Meeks
Executive Director
National Sheriffs' Association

Chuck Wexler
Executive Director
Police Executive Research Forum 

Hubert Williams
President
Police Foundation
Member of the National Organization of Black Law
 Enforcement Executives 

Margaret Heisler
Program Manager, Law Enforcement Branch
Bureau of Justice Assistance 

Stephen J. Gaffigan
Director of Operations
Community Policing Consortium 

Consortium Management Team

Stephen J. Gaffigan
Director of Operations
Community Policing Consortium 

Ray Galvin
Project Director
International Association of Chiefs of Police 

John R. Doyle
Project Director
National Sheriffs' Association

John Stedman
Acting Associate Director of Research
Police Executive Research Forum 

Bill Matthews
Deputy Director for Administration
Police Foundation 

Lillian T. Dote
Operations Coordinator
Community Policing Consortium 

Advisory Board

Dr. Lee Colwell
University of Arkansas at Little Rock
2801 South University Ave.
Little Rock, AR 72204 

Chief Sylvester Daughtry
Chief of Police
Greensboro Police Department
300 West Washington St.
P.O. Box 3136
Greensboro, NC 27402-3136
Member of the National Organization of Black Law   
 Enforcement Executives 

Dr. Jack Greene
Director, Center for Public Policy
Temple University
Gladfetter Hall, 10th Floor
12th St. and Berks Mall
Philadelphia, PA 19122 

Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske
Buffalo Police Department
74 Franklin St.
Buffalo, NY 14202 

Mr. Bob Lamb
Regional Director, Community Relations Service
U.S. Department of Justice
915 2d Ave., Room 1898
Seattle, WA 98174
Member of the National Organization of Black Law   
 Enforcement Executives 

The Honorable Caroline Long Banks
City Councilwoman
Atlanta City Council
55 Trinity Ave.
Atlanta, GA 30335

The Honorable Edwin J. Rousseau
Commissioner
Board of Commissioners of the County of Allen
City-County Bldg., Room 200
1 East Main St.
Fort Wayne, IN 46802-1893

Mr. Clifford L. Sargeon
Chairman
Board of Directors of the Ad Hoc Group Against     
 Crime
3330 Troost St.
Kansas City, MO 64109 

The Honorable Kurt Schmoke
Mayor of the City of Baltimore
250 City Hall
100 North Holliday St.
Baltimore, MD 21202 

Sheriff Patrick J. Sullivan, Jr.
Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office
5686 South Court Pl.
Littleton, CO 80120-1200 

Ms. Edna Thomas
Soul House
P.O. Box 3278
Newark, NJ 07103 

Dr. Hans Toch
Distinguished Professor
State University of New York at Albany
135 Western Ave.
Albany, NY 12222

Superintendent Matt L. Rodriguez
Chicago Police Department
1121 South State St.
Chicago, IL 60605-2398 

Past members of the Consortium Management Team
include Jerry Needle, Director, Programs and
Research Division, International Association of
Chiefs of Police; John E. Eck, Executive Director,
Crime Control Institute; and Peter Scharf,
Director, Technology and Technical Assistance
Division, Police Foundation. Program research and
document preparation was completed by William D.
Falcon; Craig Fraser, Associate Director,
Management Services, Police Executive Research
Forum; Phyllis MacDonald, Command Executive,
Management Support and Development Command, New
York City Transit Police Department; Kevin Morison,
Assistant Coordinator Specialist, Research and
Development Division, Chicago Police Department;
Timothy N. Oettmeier, Police Lieutenant and
Director, Houston Police Academy; and Mary Ann
Wycoff, Director, Research Division, Police
Foundation. Editorial support was provided by
George Zimmar, President, YES, Inc. Linda Edwards,
Administrative Assistant, Technical Assistance
Division, Police Foundation, did much of the final
fact-finding research.

------------------------------

Preface

Community policing is, in essence, a collaboration
between the police and the community that
identifies and solves community problems. With the
police no longer the sole guardians of law and
order, all members of the community become active
allies in the effort to enhance the safety and
quality of neighborhoods. Community policing has
far-reaching implications. The expanded outlook on
crime control and prevention, the new emphasis on
making community members active participants in the
process of problem solving, and the patrol
officers' pivotal role in community policing
require profound changes within the police
organization. The neighborhood patrol officer,
backed by the police organization, helps community
members mobilize support and resources to solve
problems and enhance their quality of life.
Community members voice their concerns, contribute
advice, and take action to address these concerns.
Creating a constructive partnership will require
the energy, creativity, understanding, and patience
of all involved.

Reinvigorating communities is essential if we are
to deter crime and create more vital neighborhoods.
In some communities, it will take time to break
down barriers of apathy and mistrust so that
meaningful partnerships can be forged. Trust is the
value that underlies and links the components of
community partnership and problem solving. A
foundation of trust will allow police to form close
relationships with the community that will produce
solid achievements. Without trust between police
and citizens, effective policing is impossible.

This monograph is a product of the Community
Policing Consortium, which is made up of the
International Association of Chiefs of Police, 
the National Sheriffs' Association, the Police
Executive Research Forum, and the Police
Foundation. Reflecting the Consortium's
perspective, the document describes the historical
evolution of community policing and its potential
for the future, and it will provide the basis for
the Consortium's work with demonstration sites and
law enforcement organizations as they implement
community policing. The knowledge gained from this
sitework will be reflected in future Consortium
publications. Some examples of these publications
are--

o Expansion of Understanding Community Policing: A
Framework for Action

This preliminary study will be expanded in the
future as the Consortium continues its work with
police departments as they implement community
policing. The goal of this work is to share
practical information with the law enforcement
profession throughout the country that will help
them plan and implement community policing based
upon the experiences of other departments.

o A Series of Monographs

The Consortium is planning to publish a series of
individual monographs that will address issues
relating to the implementation of community
policing. The topics for these monographs will
target critical implementation issues such as
strategic planning, internal and external
assessment measures, and methodologies for
conducting successful internal and external needs
assessments.

o Case Studies

The Consortium will identify applications of
community policing that improve local crime control
and prevention initiatives and will document these
experiences for publication and dissemination to
other departments. This dynamic and ongoing process
will allow for the immediate exchange of practical
experiences for the benefit of other communities.
This process will also identify the successes,
failures, and frustrations that reflect the reality
of implementing community policing.

The Consortium looks forward to working
collaboratively with law enforcement organizations
throughout the country as they explore strategies
for effectively implementing community policing. As
a resource center and facilitator, the Consortium
will tap into the vast resources of communities at
the national, State, and local levels, and will
focus these energies on one goal--to learn together
how to make our communities safer. 

------------------------------

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introducing Community Policing

Chapter 2: Tracing the Roots of Community Policing 
 An Idea for the Times
 
 The Role of the Police: A Historical Perspective
 
 A Social and Professional Awakening

 The Role of Research in Policing
 
 Police Response to the Need for Change

Chapter 3: Defining the Core Components of
Community Policing

 The Two Core Components
 
 The Concept of Community

 Community Partnership: Core Component One

 Problem Solving: Core Component Two

 Implications for Management and the               
  Organizational Structure

 Values: The Guiding Principles

Chapter 4: Implementing a Community Policing
Strategy

 Some Implementation Basics

 City and Community Resources

 Plan of Action: Three Options

 Scope of Initial Implementation Efforts

 Mobilizing Support

 Timing

 Managing Internal Change

  Deployment of Personnel

  Supervision

  Human Resource Development

  Performance Evaluation and Reward

  Workload Control and Information Systems

  Facilities
 
 Facilitating the Implementation Process

 Marketing: Selecting a Message and an Image 

Chapter 5: Assessing the Progress of Community
Policing

 Assessing Internal Changes

 Three Criteria for Assessment

  Effectiveness

  Efficiency

  Equity

 Refining the Assessment Process

Chapter 6: Conclusion

Appendix A: Bibliography

Appendix B: Sources for Further Information

------------------------------

Chapter 1: Introducing Community Policing

The movement toward community policing has gained
momentum in recent years as police and community
leaders search for more effective ways to promote
public safety and to enhance the quality of life in
their neighborhoods. Chiefs, sheriffs, and other
policing officials are currently assessing what
changes in orientation, organization, and
operations will allow them to benefit the
communities they serve by improving the quality of
the services they provide.

Community policing encompasses a variety of
philosophical and practical approaches and is still
evolving rapidly. Community policing strategies
vary depending on the needs and responses of the
communities involved; however, certain basic
principles and considerations are common to all
community policing efforts.

To date, no succinct overview of community policing
exists for practitioners who want to learn to use
this wide-ranging approach to address the problems
of crime and disorder in their communities.
Understanding Community Policing, prepared by the
Community Policing Consortium, is the beginning of
an effort to bring community policing into focus.
The document, while not a final product, assembles
and examines the critical components of community
policing to help foster the learning process and to
structure the experimentation and modification
required to make community policing work.

Established and funded by the U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), the
Community Policing Consortium includes
representatives from the International Association
of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the National Sheriffs'
Association, the Police Executive Research Forum
(PERF), and the Police Foundation. BJA gave the
Consortium the task of developing a conceptual
framework for community policing and assisting
agencies in implementing community policing. The
process was designed to be a learning experience, 
allowing police, community members, and
policymakers to assess the effectiveness of
different implementation procedures and the impact
of community policing on local levels of crime,
violence, fear, and other public-safety problems.

The development of this community policing
framework presented policing organizations with an
opportunity to contribute to the evolution and
implementation of community policing. The sharing
of successes, failures, and frustrations was and
will continue to be an inherent part of this
process. The Community Policing Consortium
facilitates this dialog by providing direct
training and technical assistance to the
demonstration sites, by serving as a repository for
community policing information, and by acting as a
resource for State, county, and municipal police
agencies interested in learning more about
community policing and its implementation.

As the field of community policing evolves, BJA and
the Community Policing Consortium will develop an
array of products, including a community policing
implementation guide, which will contain training
materials with curricula, and a selection of case
studies and anecdotal experiences to illustrate the
challenges and results of community policing
endeavors. Through BJA, the Consortium will also
develop and disseminate a comprehensive resource
directory and bibliography of community policing
literature and practices intended to assist in
future design and implementation efforts.

Understanding Community Policing provides a
conceptual framework that will be useful to
practitioners interested in implementing or
expanding community policing initiatives. Chapter 2
describes the reasons why police professionals
throughout the United States have been searching
for an alternative policing strategy and traces the
roots of community policing. The two defining
elements of community policing-community
partnership and problem solving--are examined in
Chapter 3. Chapter 4 presents the basic
organizational and operational elements associated
with the implementation of a community policing
strategy. Chapter 5 presents the criteria for
assessing the progress of a community policing
initiative.

As the field of community policing develops, this
document will be updated and revised to reflect the
transformations taking place at the test sites in
this collaboration between the Bureau of Justice
Assistance, the Community Policing Consortium, and
the practitioner community. 

------------------------------

Chapter 2: Tracing the Roots of Community Policing

As defined by the Community Policing Consortium,
community policing consists of two core components,
community partnership and problem solving, which
are both outlined in Chapter 3. The movement toward
these two ideas in the United States has been
initiated and shaped by concerned police executives
throughout the country. 

An Idea for the Times

There are compelling reasons why law enforcement
leaders believe the time has come to alter the
policies and practices of their organizations.
These reasons are rooted in the history of policing
and police research during the last quarter of a
century, in the changing nature of communities, and
in the shifting characteristics of crime and
violence that affect these communities.

------------------------------

In this rapidly changing environment, . . . the
concept of community policing is taking hold.

------------------------------

Policing strategies that worked in the past are not
always effective today. The desired goal, an
enhanced sense of safety, security, and well-being,
has not been achieved. Practitioners agree that
there is a pressing need for innovation to curb the
crises in many communities. Both the level and
nature of crime in this country and the changing
character of American communities are causing
police to seek more effective methods. Many urban
communities are experiencing serious problems with
illegal drugs, gang violence, murders, muggings,
and burglaries. Suburban and rural communities have
not escaped unscathed. They are also noting
increases in crime and disorder.

In addition, the social fabric of our country has
changed radically. The family unit is not as stable
as it once was. Single working parents find it
extremely difficult to spend enough time with their
children, and churches and schools have been unable
to fill this void. Immigrants, ethnic groups, and
minorities, while adding to the diverse nature of
American communities, often have different
interests and pursue disparate goals.

Governments at all levels are having increased
difficulty balancing budgets, which frequently
forces police departments to allocate dwindling
resources to growing problems.

In this rapidly changing environment, where police
cope with an epidemic drug problem, gang activity,
and increased levels of violence, the concept of
community policing is taking hold. Police leaders
using this commonsense approach to the problems of
crime and disorder, an approach that may very well
enhance and maximize performance and resources,
have struck a responsive chord in both national and
local governments and in communities across the
Nation.

Government and community leaders are beginning to
recognize that they also must accept responsibility
for keeping their neighborhoods safe. Communities
must take a unified stand against crime, violence,
and disregard for the law, and must make a
commitment to increasing crime-prevention and
intervention activities. Police agencies must help
build stronger, more self-sufficient communities--
communities in which crime and disorder will not
thrive.

------------------------------

Community policing is democracy in action. 

------------------------------

Community policing is democracy in action. It
requires the active participation of local
government, civic and business leaders, public and
private agencies, residents, churches, schools, and
hospitals. All who share a concern for the welfare
of the neighborhood should bear responsibility for
safeguarding that welfare. Community policing is
being advocated by leaders at the highest levels of
government--including President Clinton and
Attorney General Reno, who describes it as the
"changing of policing." In addition, it has been
suggested that community policing can play a
primary role in changing the way all government
services are provided at the community level.

The implementation of community policing
necessitates fundamental changes in the structure
and management of police organizations. Community
policing differs from traditional policing in how
the community is perceived and in its expanded
policing goals. While crime control and prevention
remain central priorities, community policing
strategies use a wide variety of methods to address
these goals. The police and the community become
partners in addressing problems of disorder and
neglect (e.g., gang activity, abandoned cars, and
broken windows) that, although perhaps not
criminal, can eventually lead to serious crime. As
links between the police and the community are
strengthened over time, the ensuing partnership
will be better able to pinpoint and mitigate the
underlying causes of crime.

Police are finding that crime-control tactics need
to be augmented with strategies that prevent crime,
reduce the fear of crime, and improve the quality
of life in neighborhoods. Fear of crime has become
a significant problem in itself. A highly visible
police presence helps reduce fear within the
community, fear which has been found to be " . . .
more closely correlated with disorder than with
crime."1 However, because fear of crime can limit
activity, keep residents in their homes, and
contribute to empty streets, this climate of
decline can result in even greater numbers of
crimes. By getting the community involved, police
will have more resources available for
crime-prevention activities, instead of being
forced into an after-the-fact response to crime.

Analyses of crime statistics show that the current
emphasis on crime fighting has had a limited effect
on reducing crime. In addition, the concept of
centralized management of most police organizations
has often served to isolate police from the
communities they serve. This isolation hampers
crime-fighting efforts. Statistics on unreported
crime suggest that in many cases police are not
aware of existing problems. Without strong ties to
the community, police may not have access to
pertinent information from citizens that could help
solve or deter crime.

-----------------------------

. . . it is essential that the police work closely
with all facets of the community to identify
concerns and to find the most effective solutions.
This is the essence of community policing.

------------------------------

Helpful information will be forthcoming from
community members when police have established a
relationship of trust with the community they
serve. Establishing this trust will take time,
particularly in communities where internal
conflicts exist or where relations with the police
have been severely strained. Community policing
offers a way for the police and the community to
work together to resolve the serious problems that
exist in these neighborhoods. Only when community
members believe the police are genuinely interested
in community perspectives and problems will they
begin to view the police as a part of that
community.

Experience and research reveal that "community
institutions are the first line of defense against
disorder and crime . . . "2 Thus, it is essential
that the police work closely with all facets of the
community to identify concerns and to find the most
effective solutions. This is the essence of
community policing.

The Role of the Police: A Historical Perspective

When Sir Robert Peel established the London
Metropolitan Police, he set forth a number of
principles, one of which could be considered the
seed of community policing: ". . . the police are
the public and the public are the police."3 For a
number of reasons, the police lost sight of this
relationship as the central organizing concept for
police service. Researchers have suggested that the
reform era in government, which began in the early
1900's, coupled with a nationwide move toward
professionalization, resulted in the separation of
the police from the community.4 Police managers
assigned officers to rotating shifts and moved them
frequently from one geographical location to
another to eliminate corruption. Management also
instituted a policy of centralized control,
designed to ensure compliance with standard
operating procedures and to encourage a
professional aura of impartiality.

This social distancing was also reinforced by
technological developments. The expanding role of
automobiles replaced the era of the friendly foot
patrol officer. By the 1970's, rapid telephone
contact with police through 911 systems allowed
them to respond quickly to crimes. Answering the
overwhelming number of calls for service, however,
left police little time to prevent crimes from
occurring. As increasingly sophisticated
communications technology made it possible for
calls to be transmitted almost instantaneously,
officers had to respond to demands for assistance
regardless of the urgency of the situation.
Answering calls severely limited a broad police
interaction with the community. The advent of the
computer also contributed to the decrease in police
contact with the community. Statistics, rather than
the type of service provided or the service
recipients, became the focus for officers and
managers. As computers generated data on crime
patterns and trends, counted the incidence of
crimes, increased the efficiency of dispatch, and
calculated the rapidity and outcome of police
response, rapid response became an end in itself.

------------------------------

The police and the public had become so separated
from one another that in some communities an
attitude of "us versus them" prevailed between the
police and community members.

------------------------------

Random patrolling also served to further break the
link between communities and police. Police were
instructed to change routes constantly, in an
effort to thwart criminals. However, community
members also lost the ability to predict when they
might be able to interact with their local police.

The height of police isolation came in an era of
growing professionalization, when the prevailing
ideology was that the professional knew best and
when community involvement in crime control was
seen by almost everyone as unnecessary.

The movement to end police corruption, the emphasis
on professionalization, and the development of new
technology occurred in an era of growing crime and
massive social change. Police had trouble
communicating with all members of the socially and
culturally diverse communities they served. The
police and the public had become so separated from
one another that in some communities an attitude of
"us versus them" prevailed between the police and
community members. One observer of the urban scene
characterized the deteriorating police-community
relationship this way: "For the urban poor the
police are those who arrest you."5

A Social and Professional Awakening

The burst of ideas, arguments, and protests during
the 1960's and 1970's mushroomed into a full-scale
social movement. Antiwar protestors, civil rights
activists, and other groups began to demonstrate in
order to be heard. Overburdened and poorly prepared
police came to symbolize what these groups sought
to change in their government and society. Focusing
attention on police policies and practices became
an effective way to draw attention to the need for
wider change. Police became the targets of
hostility, which ultimately led police leaders to
concerned reflection and analysis.

In this era of protest, citizens began to take a
stronger hand in the development of policies and
practices that affected their lives. The police
force's inability to handle urban unrest in an
effective and appropriate manner brought demands by
civic leaders and politicians for a reexamination
of police practices. Between 1968 and 1973, three
Presidential Commissions made numerous
recommendations for changes in policing--
recommendations that were initially responded to by
outside organizations. Agencies of the U.S.
Department of Justice, in collaboration with
countless police departments throughout the country
who were open to research and innovation, played a
major role in stimulating, supporting, and
disseminating research and technical assistance.
Millions of dollars were spent to foster and
support criminal justice education. In addition,
these Federal agencies supported a wide variety of
police training, conferences, research, and
technology upgrading.

A number of organizations within the policing field
also became committed to improving policing methods
in the 1970's. Among those on the forefront of this
movement for constructive change were the Police
Foundation, the Police Executive Research Forum,
the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement
Executives, the Urban Sheriffs' Group of the
National Sheriffs' Association, and the
International Association of Chiefs of Police.
These organizations conducted much of the basic
research that led police to reevaluate traditional
policing methods.

The Role of Research in Policing

Increases in Federal funding and the growth of
criminal justice education resulted in the rapid
development of research on policing. Many of the
research findings challenged prevailing police
practices and beliefs.

Federally funded victimization surveys documented
the existence of unreported crime. Practitioners
had to acknowledge that only a fraction of crimes
were being reported, and, therefore, began seeking
ways to improve their image and to interact more
effectively with the communities they served.

An early research study was the Kansas City
Preventive Patrol Experiment. This field experiment
found that randomized patrolling had a limited
impact on crime or citizens' attitudes and caused
police leaders to begin thinking about alternative
ways to use their patrol personnel.6 Another study
by the Kansas City Police Department assessed the
value of rapid response by police and concluded
that in most cases rapid response did not help
solve crimes.7 The study revealed that a large
portion of serious crimes are not deterred by rapid
response. The crime sample that was analyzed
indicated that almost two-thirds of these crimes
were not reported quickly enough for rapid response
to be effective. While a prompt police response can
increase the chance of making an onscene arrest,
the time it takes a citizen to report a crime
largely predetermines the effect that police
response time will have on the outcome. This study
revealed a need for formal call-screening
procedures to differentiate between emergency and
nonemergency calls. More efficient dispatching of
calls could make additional time available for
patrol officers to interact with the community.

------------------------------

. . . a large portion of serious crimes are not
deterred by rapid response.

------------------------------

This study led to further research that also
demonstrated the value of response strategies that
ensured that the most urgent calls received the
highest priority and the most expeditious dispatch.
Studies of alternative responses to calls for
service found that community residents would accept
responses other than the presence of police
immediately on the scene if they were well informed
about the types of alternatives used.8

Differential police response strategies were also
examined by the Birmingham, Alabama, Police
Department.9 The objectives of the project were to
increase the efficiency with which calls for
service were managed and to improve citizen
satisfaction with police service. The study
included the use of call-prioritization codes,
call-stacking procedures, both police and nonpolice
delayed-response strategies, and teleservice. The
alternate strategies were found to be successful in
diverting calls from mobilized field units without
a loss in citizen satisfaction.

The Directed Patrol study assessed how to use most
effectively the time made available by more
efficient call-response measures.10 The study
suggested that, rather than performing randomized
patrols when not handling calls, the officers' time
could be more profitably spent addressing specific
criminal activities. To direct officers' attention
and to help them secure time, the department
instituted support steps that included crime
analysis, teleservice, and walk-in report-handling
capabilities.

The San Diego Police Department conducted several
significant research studies during the 1970's.
These included an evaluation of one-officer versus
two-officer patrol cars, an assessment of the
relationship between field interrogations of
suspicious persons and criminal deterrence, and a
community-oriented policing (COP) project,11 which
was the first empirical study of community
policing.

The COP project required patrol officers to become
knowledgeable about their beats through
"beat-profiling" activities, in which officers
studied the topographics, demographics, and call
histories of their beats. Officers were also
expected to develop "tailored patrol" strategies to
address the types of crime and citizen concerns
revealed by their profiling activities.

------------------------------

. . . interaction with the community can improve
the attitudes of officers toward their jobs and
toward the communities they serve . . . .

------------------------------

Officers participating in the COP project concluded
that random patrolling was not as important as
previously thought. They also concluded that
developing stronger ties with members of the
community was more important than once believed. In
addition, the project demonstrated that interaction
with the community could improve the attitudes of
officers toward their jobs and toward the
communities they served and could encourage the
officers to develop creative solutions to complex
problems.

Many of the findings from this study have a direct
bearing on contemporary community policing efforts.
First, by getting to know members of the community,
the officers were able to obtain valuable
information about criminal activity and
perpetrators. They were also able to obtain
realistic assessments of the needs of community
members and their expectations of police serv-ices.
The study also exposed the need to reevaluate the
issue of shift rotation. Officers must be assigned
to permanent shifts and beats if they are to
participate in community activities. Finally, the
COP project demonstrated the critical role that
shift lieutenants and sergeants play in program
planning and implementation. The exclusion of
supervisors in training and development efforts
ultimately led to the demise of the COP program in
San Diego.

In 1979, Herman Goldstein developed and advanced
the concept of "problem-oriented policing" (POP),
which encouraged police to begin thinking
differently about their purpose.12 Goldstein
suggested that problem resolution constituted the
true, substantive work of policing and advocated
that police identify and address root causes of
problems that lead to repeat calls for service. POP
required a move from a reactive, incident-oriented
stance to one that actively addressed the problems
that continually drained police resources. In a
study of POP implementation in Newport News,
Virginia, POP was found to be an effective approach
to addressing many community problems, and
important data about POP design and implementation
was gathered.13 Other research indicated that
police could identify the "hot spots" of repeat
calls in a community and thereby devise strategies
to reduce the number of calls.14

While much of the policing research conducted in
the 1970's dealt with patrol issues, the Rand
Corporation examined the role of detectives.15 This
study concluded that detectives solved only a small
percentage of the crimes analyzed and that the bulk
of the cases solved hinged on information obtained
by patrol officers. This dramatically challenged
traditional thinking about the roles of detectives
and patrol officers in the handling of
investigative functions. The implication was that
patrol officers should become more actively
involved in criminal investigations. The
implementation of appropriate training would allow
patrol officers to perform some early investigating
that could help in obtaining timely case closures,
thereby reducing the tremendous case loads of
detectives and allowing them to devote more time to
complex investigations.

The Newark Foot Patrol Experiment suggested that
police could develop more positive attitudes toward
community members and could promote positive
attitudes toward police if they spent time on foot
in their neighborhoods.16 Foot patrol also eased
citizen fear of crime, ". . . persons living in
areas where foot patrol was created perceived a
notable decrease in the severity of crime-related
problems."17 Experimental foot patrols in Flint,
Michigan, also elicited citizen approval. Residents
said foot patrols made them feel safer and
residents ". . . felt especially safe when the foot
patrol officer was well known and highly
visible."18 In addition, it is worth noting that in
both cities the use of foot patrols increased
officer satisfaction with police work.19

The fear reduction studies provided empirical data
on the effectiveness of key community policing
tactics (e.g., community organizing, door-to-door
contacts, neighborhood mini-stations, and
intensified enforcement coupled with community
involvement) in reducing fear among residents,
improving community conditions, and enhancing the
image of the police.20 Driving this study was the
notion that if fear could be reduced, community
residents would be more inclined to take an active
role in preserving safety and tranquility within
their neighborhoods.

Police Response to the Need for Change

------------------------------

. . . police managers are beginning to adopt the
principles associated with total quality or
participatory management.

------------------------------

A number of dynamic police leaders participated in
various Presidential Commissions during the 1960's
and 1970's. They also contributed their time and
expertise to the newly created police organizations
that were working to bring about improvements in
policing policies. However, many of these police
leaders found themselves alone when they tried to
infuse their own departments with this spirit of
change. Community policing implementation was
impeded by centralized management practices and
traditional operating assumptions.

Many experienced police managers and officers found
it difficult to accept this challenge to the
practices and procedures that had always guided
their actions. Thus, it was not surprising that
these innovations were often overwhelmed by
traditional policies and that the innovators were
frequently suspected of being manipulated by
outsiders or of pursuing their personal career
agendas at the expense of the organization.

Many of today's police managers have supplemented
their professional education by studying literature
developed since the 1970's. Once considered
radical, many of the strategies that evolved from
this research on policing are now considered
necessary for improving performance. Ideas that
were raised 20 years ago have been modified and
expanded to fit current conditions.

Police executives realize that it is no longer
sufficient to think in terms of making only minor
alterations to traditional management and
operational practices. Management's current
challenge is to meet the escalating and varied
demands for service with more effective delivery
strategies to optimize staff and resources, to
encourage innovative thinking, and to involve the
community in policing efforts.

Following the lead of corporate America, police
managers are beginning to adopt the principles
associated with total quality or participatory
management. There is growing recognition in
policing that employees should have input into
decisions about their work. Management practices
that restrict the flow of communication and stifle
innovation are giving way to the belief that those
actually working in the community can best
understand its needs and develop ways to meet them.
Police also realize that not only the service
providers but also the service recipients must
define priorities and join forces with others to
find inventive, long-term solutions to deepening
problems of crime and violence.

Today the movement for change within policing is
led aggressively by policing practitioners
themselves. The current shift to community policing
reflects the conscious effort of a profession to
reexamine its policies and procedures.
Incorporating the core components of community
policing delineated in the next chapter with
existing policing methods is the first step in this
ongoing process.

------------------------------

Chapter 3: Defining the Core Components of
Community Policing

The growing trend within communities to participate
in the fight against crime and disorder has
paralleled a growing recognition by police that
traditional crime-fighting tactics alone have a
limited impact on controlling crime. Community
policing is the synthesis of these two movements.

The foundations of a successful community policing
strategy are the close, mutually beneficial ties
between police and community members. Community
policing consists of two complementary core
components, community partnership and problem
solving. To develop community partnership, police
must develop positive relationships with the
community, must involve the community in the quest
for better crime control and prevention, and must
pool their resources with those of the community to
address the most urgent concerns of community
members. Problem solving is the process through
which the specific concerns of communities are
identified and through which the most appropriate
remedies to abate these problems are found.

------------------------------

Community policing consists of two complementary
core components, community partnership and problem
solving.

------------------------------

Community policing does not imply that police are
no longer in authority or that the primary duty of
preserving law and order is subordinated. However,
tapping into the expertise and resources that exist
within communities will relieve police of some of
their burdens. Local government officials, social
agencies, schools, church groups, business people--
all those who work and live in the community and
have a stake in its development--will share
responsibility for finding workable solutions to
problems that detract from the safety and security
of the community.

The Concept of Community

The goal of community policing is to reduce crime
and disorder by carefully examining the
characteristics of problems in neighborhoods and
then applying appropriate problem-solving remedies.
The "community" for which a patrol officer is given
responsibility should be a small, well-defined
geographical area. Beats should be configured in a
manner that preserves, as much as possible, the
unique geographical and social characteristics of
neighborhoods while still allowing efficient
service.

Patrol officers are the primary providers of police
services and have the most extensive contact with
community members. In community policing efforts,
they will provide the bulk of the daily policing
needs of the community, and they will be assisted
by immediate supervisors, other police units, and
appropriate government and social agencies. Upper
level managers and command staff will be
responsible for ensuring that the entire
organization backs the efforts of patrol officers.

------------------------------

Effective community policing depends on optimizing
positive contact between patrol officers and
community members. 

------------------------------

Effective community policing depends on optimizing
positive contact between patrol officers and
community members. Patrol cars are only one method
of conveying police services. Police departments
may supplement automobile patrols with foot,
bicycle, scooter, and horseback patrols, as well as
adding "mini-stations" to bring police closer to
the community. Regular community meetings and
forums will afford police and community members an
opportunity to air concerns and find ways to
address them.

Officers working long-term assignments on the same
shift and beat will become familiar figures to
community members and will become aware of the
day-to-day workings of the community. This
increased police presence is an initial move in
establishing trust and serves to reduce fear of
crime among community members, which, in turn,
helps create neighborhood security. Fear must be
reduced if community members are to participate
actively in policing. People will not act if they
feel that their actions will jeopardize their
safety.

Although the delivery of police services is
organized by geographic area, a community may
encompass widely diverse cultures, values, and
concerns, particularly in urban settings. A
community consists of more than just the local
government and the neighborhood residents.
Churches, schools, hospitals, social groups,
private and public agencies, and those who work in
the area are also vital members of the community.
In addition, those who visit for cultural or
recreational purposes or provide services to the
area are also concerned with the safety and
security of the neighborhood. Including these
"communities of interest" in efforts to address
problems of crime and disorder can expand the
resource base of the community.

Concerns and priorities will vary within and among
these communities of interest. Some communities of
interest are long-lasting and were formed around
racial, ethnic, occupational lines, or a common
history, church, or school. Others form and reform
as new problems are identified and addressed.
Interest groups within communities can be in
opposition to one another--sometimes in violent
opposition. Intracommunity disputes have been
common in large urban centers, especially in times
of changing demographics and population migrations.

These multiple and sometimes conflicting interests
require patrol officers to function not only as
preservers of law and order, but also as skillful
mediators. Demands on police from one community of
interest can sometimes clash with the rights of
another community of interest. For example, a
community group may oppose certain police tactics
used to crack down on gang activity, which the
group believes may result in discriminatory arrest
practices. The police must not only protect the
rights of the protesting group, but must also work
with all of the community members involved to find
a way to preserve neighborhood peace. For this
process to be effective, community members must
communicate their views and suggestions and back up
the negotiating efforts of the police. In this way,
the entire community participates in the mediation
process and helps preserve order. The police must
encourage a spirit of cooperation that balances the
collective interests of all citizens with the
personal rights of individuals.

------------------------------

Establishing and maintaining mutual trust is the
central goal of community partnership. 

------------------------------

The conflicts within communities are as important
as the commonalities. Police must recognize the
existence of both to build the cooperative bonds
needed to maintain order, provide a sense of
security, and control crime. Police must build
lasting relationships that encompass all elements
of the community and center around the fundamental
issues of public safety and quality of life. The
key to managing this difficult task is trust.

Community Partnership: Core Component One

Establishing and maintaining mutual trust is the
central goal of the first core component of
community policing--community partnership. Police
recognize the need for cooperation with the
community. In the fight against serious crime,
police have encouraged community members to come
forth with relevant information. In addition,
police have spoken to neighborhood groups,
participated in business and civic events, worked
with social agencies, and taken part in educational
and recreational programs for school children.
Special units have provided a variety of crisis
intervention services. So how then do the
cooperative efforts of community policing differ
from the actions that have taken place previously?
The fundamental distinction is that, in community
policing, the police become an integral part of the
community culture, and the community assists in
defining future priorities and in allocating
resources. The difference is substantial and
encompasses basic goals and commitments.

Community partnership means adopting a policing
perspective that exceeds the standard law
enforcement emphasis. This broadened outlook
recognizes the value of activities that contribute
to the orderliness and well-being of a
neighborhood. These activities could include:
helping accident or crime victims, providing
emergency medical services, helping resolve
domestic and neighborhood conflicts (e.g., family
violence, landlord-tenant disputes, or racial
harassment), working with residents and local
businesses to improve neighborhood conditions,
controlling automobile and pedestrian traffic,
providing emergency social services and referrals
to those at risk (e.g., adolescent runaways, the
homeless, the intoxicated, and the mentally ill),
protecting the exercise of constitutional rights
(e.g., guaranteeing a person's right to speak,
protecting lawful assemblies from disruption), and
providing a model of citizenship (helpfulness,
respect for others, honesty, and fairness).

These services help develop trust between the
police and the community. This trust will enable
the police to gain greater access to valuable
information from the community that could lead to
the solution and prevention of crimes, will
engender support for needed crime-control measures,
and will provide an opportunity for officers to
establish a working relationship with the
community. The entire police organization must be
involved in enlisting the cooperation of community
members in promoting safety and security.

Building trust will not happen overnight; it will
require ongoing effort. But trust must be achieved
before police can assess the needs of the community
and construct the close ties that will engender
community support. In turn, this cooperative
relationship will deepen the bonds of trust.

To build this trust for an effective community
partnership police must treat people with respect
and sensitivity. The use of unnecessary force and
arrogance, aloofness, or rudeness at any level of
the agency will dampen the willingness of community
members to ally themselves with the police.

The effective mobilization of community support
requires different approaches in different
communities. Establishing trust and obtaining
cooperation are often easier in middle-class and
affluent communities than in poorer communities,
where mistrust of police may have a long history.
Building bonds in some neighborhoods may involve
supporting basic social institutions (e.g.,
families, churches, schools) that have been
weakened by pervasive crime or disorder.21 The
creation of viable communities is necessary if
lasting alliances that nurture cooperative efforts
are to be sustained. Under community policing, the
police become both catalysts and facilitators in
the development of these communities.

Community policing expands police efforts to
prevent and control crime. The community is no
longer viewed by police as a passive presence or a
source of limited information, but as a partner in
this effort. Community concerns with crime and
disorder thus become the target of efforts by the
police and the community working in tandem.

------------------------------

The police and the community must be collaborators
in the quest to encourage and preserve peace and
prosperity.

------------------------------

The close alliance forged with the community should
not be limited to an isolated incident or series of
incidents, nor confined to a specific time frame.
The partnership between the police and the
community must be enduring and balanced. It must
break down the old concepts of professional versus
civilian, expert versus novice, and authority
figure versus subordinate. The police and the
community must be collaborators in the quest to
encourage and preserve peace and prosperity.

The more conspicuous police presence of the
long-term patrol officer in itself may encourage
community response. But it is not sufficient. The
entire police organization must vigorously enlist
the cooperation of community residents in pursuing
the goals of deterring crime and preserving order.
Police personnel on every level must join in
building a broad rapport with community members.

For the patrol officer, police/community
partnership entails talking to local business
owners to help identify their problems and
concerns, visiting residents in their homes to
offer advice on security, and helping to organize
and support neighborhood watch groups and regular
community meetings. For example, the patrol officer
will canvass the neighborhood for information about
a string of burglaries and then revisit those
residents to inform them when the burglar is
caught. The chief police executive will explain and
discuss controversial police tactics so that
community members understand the necessity of these
tactics for public and officer safety. The
department management will consult community
members about gang suppression tactics, and every
level of the department will actively solicit the
concerns and suggestions of community groups,
residents, leaders, and local government officials.
In this police/community partnership, providing
critical social services will be acknowledged as
being inextricably linked to deterring crime, and
problem solving will become a cooperative effort.

Problem Solving: Core Component Two

Problem solving is a broad term that implies more
than simply the elimination and prevention of
crimes. Problem solving is based on the assumption
that "crime and disorder can be reduced in small
geographic areas by carefully studying the
characteristics of problems in the area, and then
applying the appropriate resources . . ." and on
the assumption that "Individuals make choices based
on the opportunities presented by the immediate
physical and social characteristics of an area. By
manipulating these factors, people will be less
inclined to act in an offensive manner."22

------------------------------

Determining the underlying causes of crime depends,
to a great extent, on an indepth knowledge of
community.

------------------------------

The problem-solving process is explained further:

"The theory behind problem-oriented policing is
simple. Underlying conditions create problems.
These conditions might include the characteristics
of the people involved (offenders, potential
victims, and others), the social setting in which
these people interact, the physical environments,
and the way the public deals with these conditions.

A problem created by these conditions may generate
one or more incidents. These incidents, while
stemming from a common source, may appear to be
different. For example, social and physical
conditions in a deteriorated apartment complex may
generate burglaries, acts of vandalism,
intimidation of pedestrians by rowdy teenagers, and
other incidents. These incidents, some of which
come to police attention, are symptoms of the
problems. The incidents will continue so long as
the problem that creates them persists."23

As police recognize the effectiveness of the
problem-solving approach, there is a growing
awareness that community involvement is essential
for its success. Determining the underlying causes
of crime depends, to a great extent, on an indepth
knowledge of community. Therefore, community
participation in identifying and setting priorities
will contribute to effective problem-solving
efforts by the community and the police.
Cooperative problem solving also reinforces trust,
facilitates the exchange of information, and leads
to the identification of other areas that could
benefit from the mutual attention of the police and
the community. The problem-solving process, like
community partnership, is self-renewing.

For this process to operate effectively the police
need to devote attention to and recognize the
validity of community concerns. Neighborhood groups
and the police will not always agree on which
specific problems deserve attention first. Police
may regard robberies as the biggest problem in a
particular community, while residents may find
derelicts who sleep in doorways, break bottles on
sidewalks, and pick through garbage cans to be the
number one problem. Under community policing, the
problem with derelicts should also receive early
attention from the police with the assistance of
other government agencies and community members.
For example, one police captain reported the
following:

"What we found . . . was that maybe some things
that we thought were important to them really
weren't that important, and other things we didn't
think were important at all, were very important..
. . Like abandoned cars: in one of our areas, that
was a very important thing. They were really bugged
about all these abandoned cars, and they thought it
was a bad police department that wouldn't take care
of them. When we started removing the cars their
opinion of us went up, even though because we'd
changed priorities we were putting fewer drug
addicts in jail."24

Therefore, in addition to the serious crime
problems identified by police, community policing
must also address the problems of significant
concern to the community. Community policing in
effect allows community members to bring problems
of great concern to them to the attention of the
police. Once informed of community concerns, the
police must work with citizens to address them,
while at the same time encouraging citizens to
assist in solving the problems of concern to the
police.

The nature of community problems will vary widely
and will often involve multiple incidents that are
related by factors including geography, time,
victim or perpetrator group, and environment.
Problems can affect a small area of a community, an
entire community, or many communities. Community
problems might include the following:

o An unusually high number of burglaries in an
apartment complex that are creating great anxiety
and fear among residents.

o Panhandling that creates fear in a business
district.

o Prostitutes in local parks or on heavily traveled
streets.

o Disorderly youth who regularly assemble in the
parking lot of a convenience store.

o An individual who persistently harasses and
provokes community members.25

------------------------------

Problem solving is limited only by the imagination,
creativity, perseverance, and enthusiasm of those
involved. 

------------------------------

In community policing, the problem-solving process
is dependent on input from both the police and the
community. Problem solving can involve:

o Eliminating the problem entirely. This type of
solution is usually limited to disorder problems.
Examples include eliminating traffic congestion by
erecting traffic control signs, and destroying or
rehabilitating abandoned buildings that can provide
an atmosphere conducive to crime.

o Reducing the number of the occurrences of the
problem. Drug-dealing and the accompanying problems
of robbery and gang violence will be decreased if
the police and community work together to set up
drug counseling and rehabilitation centers. Longer
range solutions might include intensifying drug
education in schools, churches, and hospitals.

o Reducing the degree of injury per incident. For
example, police can teach store clerks how to act
during a robbery in order to avoid injury or death
and can advise women in the community on ways to
minimize the chances of being killed or seriously
injured if attacked.

o Improving problem handling. Police should always
make an effort to treat people humanely, (e.g.,
show sensitivity in dealing with rape victims and
seek ways to ease their trauma, or increase
effectiveness in handling runaway juveniles, drug
addicts, drunk drivers, etc., by working with other
agencies more closely).

o Manipulating environmental factors to discourage
criminal behavior. This can include collaborative
efforts to add better lighting, remove overgrown
weeds and trim shrubbery, and seal off vacant
apartment buildings.

There are as many solutions as there are problems.
These solutions range from simple, inexpensive
measures to complex, long-term answers that will
require significant investment of staff and
resources. Problem solving is limited only by the
imagination, creativity, perseverance, and
enthusiasm of those involved. Community policing
allows solutions to be tailor-made to the specific
concerns of each community. The best solutions are
those that satisfy community members, improve
safety, diminish anxiety, lead to increased order,
strengthen the ties between the community and the
police, and minimize coercive actions. The
following example describes such a solution:

"A patrol officer faced with chronic nighttime
robberies of convenience stores discovered that a
major contributing factor was that cash registers
could not be seen from the street, either because
of their location within the store or because of
posters plastered on front windows. The officer did
not identify the "root cause" or ultimate cause of
crime, but instead identified an underlying
condition that, once addressed, held promise of
reducing the number of future convenience store
robberies.

To identify this underlying problem, the patrol
officer talked with and solicited suggestions from
convenience store owners and employees, other
members of the business community, and community
residents. The officer's identification of a
contributing cause of the robberies is a
high-leverage accomplishment in terms of its likely
positive impact on the frequency of future
robberies. Evidence of police concern and
soliciting input from the community also reinforces
cooperative ties."26 

------------------------------

Patrol officers serve as catalysts for joint police
and community problem-solving endeavors. 

------------------------------

Patrol officers serve as catalysts for joint police
and community problem-solving endeavors. They are
involved with the community on a day-to-day basis,
understand its unique physical and social
characteristics, are aware of local problems, and
when needed can help community members articulate
their needs. Many problems within the community can
be successfully handled by patrol officers or their
immediate supervisors and members of the community-
-e.g., determining that better lighting would
decrease the incidence of muggings at a local park.

All levels of the police organization should
contribute to problem solving, depending on the
scope and seriousness of the problem. For example,
crafting a solution to widespread incidents of
spousal assault taking place in several communities
in an agency's jurisdiction might involve multiple
levels of police management. Patrol officers may
have noticed a correlation between spousal assaults
and excessive drinking by the perpetrators,
especially at illegal after-hours clubs. The
officers, their supervisors, and community members
might explore ways to close down these clubs with
the help of local zoning and city planning boards.
Perpetrators with alcohol problems might be
required to attend rehabilitation programs run by a
city agency. Meanwhile, mid- and senior-level
police managers and community leaders might confer
with women's groups and other social agencies about
providing temporary housing and counseling for
victims and their families. In addition, members of
the community might be able to repair an abandoned
building to house the victims.

The problem-solving process relies on the expertise
and assistance of an array of social and government
agencies and community resources. At the senior
command level, police managers might combine forces
with a civil abatement agency to condemn and board
up crack houses. One police officer seeking a
systemwide approach to the problem of spousal
assault formed a team comprised of units from the
police department and representatives from women's
shelters, the YWCA, nearby military bases, the
prosecutor's office, newspapers, hospitals, and
social agencies. A tremendous amount of leverage
can be attained through the collaboration and
partnership of this type of far-ranging alliance.

Community policing puts new emphasis on tackling
the underlying causes of crime by addressing
problems at the grassroots level. To maximize the
time that the patrol officer can spend interacting
with community members, community policing
encourages the use of the 911 system only for true
emergencies. Nonemergency calls should be handled
through other means, including delays in responding
and report handling by the police station or
sheriff's office over the telephone or by mail.

------------------------------

Community policing emphasizes the value of the
patrol function and the patrol officer as an
individual. 

------------------------------

These alternative measures require a wide base of
support within the community. To obtain this
support, the police must instruct residents on the
nature of an emergency and on alternative responses
to nonemergencies. Alternative responses will need
to be thoroughly explained before community members
will accept them. The residents should be secure in
the knowledge that the police response will be
appropriate for the urgency of the demand for
serv-ice, and that the reduction in the volume of
911 calls will allow officers to spend more time in
the community and will maximize the use of the
residents' tax dollars.

Implications for Management and the Organizational
Structure

Effective community partnership and problem solving
will require the mastery of new responsibilities
and the adoption of a flexible style of management.
Community policing emphasizes the value of the
patrol function and the patrol officer as an
individual. Patrol officers have traditionally been
accorded low status despite the scope and
sensitivity of the tasks they perform. Community
policing requires the shifting of initiative,
decisionmaking, and responsibility downward within
the police organization. The neighborhood officer
or deputy sheriff becomes responsible for managing
the delivery of services to a community, and ". . .
everything of a policing nature [in that community]
`belongs' to that person."27

With this responsibility comes wide-ranging
discretionary and decisionmaking power. Under
community policing, patrol officers are given
broader freedom to decide what should be done and
how it should be done in their communities--they
assume managerial responsibility for the delivery
of police services to their assigned area. Patrol
officers are the most familiar with the needs and
strengths of their communities and are thus in the
best position to forge the close ties with the
community that lead to effective solutions to local
problems.

The shift in status and duties of the patrol
officer is critical to the community partnership
and problem-solving components of community
policing. Assignment stability of these
neighborhood officers is also essential if they are
to develop close working relationships within their
communities because

". . . they are expected to engage in activities
other than simply reacting to calls for service.
Having officers periodically rotate among the
shifts impedes their ability to identify problems.
It also discourages creative solutions to impact
the problems, because the officers end up rotating
away from the problems. Thus, a sense of
responsibility to identify and resolve problems is
lost. Likewise, management cannot hold the officers
accountable to deal with problems if the officers
are frequently rotated from one shift to
another."28 

------------------------------

Creativity and innovation must be fostered if
satisfactory solutions to long-standing community
problems are to be found.

------------------------------

The enhanced role of the patrol officer has
enormous organizational and managerial
implications. The entire police organization must
be structured, managed, and operated in a manner
that supports the efforts of the patrol officer and
that encourages a cooperative approach to solving
problems. Under community policing, command is no
longer centralized, and many decisions now come
from the bottom up instead of from the top down.
Greater decisionmaking power is given to those
closest to the situation with the expectation that
this change will improve the overall performance of
the agency. This transformation in command
structure is not only sound management, but is also
crucial to the creation of meaningful and
productive ties between the police and the
community. To establish a partnership with the
community,

". . . the police must move to empower two groups:
the public itself and the street officers who serve
it most closely and regularly. Only when the public
has a real voice in setting police priorities will
its needs be taken seriously; only when street
officers have the operational latitude to take on
the problems they encounter with active
departmental backing will those needs really be
addressed."29

Community policing alters the contemporary
functions of supervisors and managers. Under
community policing, management serves to guide,
rather than dominate, the actions of patrol
officers and to ensure that officers have the
necessary resources to solve the problems in their
communities. Creativity and innovation must be
fostered if satisfactory solutions to long-standing
community problems are to be found.

The transition to community policing requires
recognizing that the new responsibilities and
decisionmaking power of the neighborhood patrol
officers must be supported, guided, and encouraged
by the entire organization. In addition, it
requires establishing clearly stated values that
provide both the police organization and the public
with a clear sense of policing's expanded focus and
direction.

Values: The Guiding Principles

Community policing is ultimately about values--
specifically, the change in values that is needed
to adapt policing to these changing times. Values
must be ingrained in the very culture of the
organization and must be reflected in its
objectives, in its policies, and in the actions of
its personnel.

"Values are the beliefs that guide an organization
and the behavior of its employees . . . . The most
important beliefs are those that set forth the
ultimate purposes of the organization . . . . They
provide the organization with its raison d'etre for
outsiders and insiders alike and justify the
continuing investment in the organization's
enterprise . . . . [They] influence substantive and
administrative decisions facing the organization,
they lend a coherence and predictability to top
management's actions and the responses to the
actions of employees. This helps employees make
proper decisions and use their discretion with
confidence that they are contributing to rather
than detracting from organizational performance."30

------------------------------

A clear statement of beliefs and goals gives
direction to the organization and helps ensure that
values are transformed into appropriate actions and
behaviors.

------------------------------

A clear statement of beliefs and goals gives
direction to the organization and helps ensure that
values are transformed into appropriate actions and
behaviors. The entire agency must be committed to
the values embodied by such a mission statement.
This mission statement should be widely
disseminated both inside and outside the police
organization to garner public support and to
facilitate accountability. In the move to community
policing, where problem-solving efforts and
accountability are shared by the police, the local
government, and the community, explicitly defined
values become critically important in assigning
responsibility and attracting and mobilizing
support and resources. Community policing

". . . relies heavily on the articulation of
policing values that incorporate citizen
involvement in matters that directly affect the
safety and quality of neighborhood life. The
culture of the police department therefore becomes
one that not only recognizes the merits of
community involvement but also seeks to organize
and manage departmental affairs in ways that are
consistent with such beliefs."31

An organization's mission statement should be
simple, direct, and unassuming. Values must be
unequivocally communicated so that officers
understand the influence on their actions:

"Planners need to assess what specific behaviors by
organizational members support or undermine the
stated values. This assessment requires that the
values be defined in operational terms such that an
observer can know whether any particular employee
action is on target or off target . . . . Planners
must also think clearly about how management will
know whether the desired changes are taking place;
feedback and evaluative steps must be developed."32

Community policing relies on the establishment of a
clear, unambiguous link of values to behaviors. By
creating a system of performance measurement,
specific operational meaning can be given to
seemingly abstract values. The guiding values
central to community policing are trust,
cooperation, communication, ingenuity, integrity,
initiative, discretion, leadership, responsibility,
respect, and a broadened commitment to public
safety and security. A succinct mission statement
that embodies these values and that is widely
communicated to personnel, local government, and
members of the community will form the basis of
assessment systems that match actions and behaviors
to the goals of community policing. 

------------------------------

Chapter 4: Implementing a Community Policing
Strategy

The implementation of a community policing strategy
is a complicated and multifaceted process that, in
essence, requires planning and managing for change.
Community policing cannot be established through a
mere modification of existing policy; profound
changes must occur on every level and in every area
of a police agency--from patrol officer to chief
executive and from training to technology. A
commitment to community policing must guide every
decision and every action of the department.

Some Implementation Basics

Implementation plans will vary from agency to
agency and from community to community. The most
appropriate implementation method will depend, in
part, on internal and external conditions facing
the agency. For example, a chief executive who
comes into an organization that is ripe for change
at a time when confidence in the police is low may
find that the organization will respond favorably
to innovative policies. On the other hand, a chief
executive who inherits a smoothly running
organization may find it more difficult to
implement change.33

One factor that will affect the approach to
implementation is the extent of change that is
required. In some agencies, current operations
procedures and management practices may already
conform closely to community policing, while in
others extensive changes may be necessary. This
will affect how a chief guides the organization
toward the goals of community policing. A thorough
assessment of current programs will help identify
what will be required to integrate community
partnership and problem-solving strategies and
expanded crime control and prevention tactics with
preexisting policies. Identifying priorities for
change will also permit police agencies to
establish interim milestones for monitoring
progress.

Another essential element of successful
implementation is communication. Communication must
be timely, comprehensive, and direct. The chief
executive must explain the concepts of community
policing thoroughly to the entire police
organization, the local political leadership,
public and private agencies, and the community at
large. All participants must understand their role
in community policing efforts. Regular
communication will encourage active participation
and decrease resistance and opposition. Lines of
communication must be maintained both within the
police organization and between the police and
participants within the community. Successful
implementation requires the smooth flow of
information.

------------------------------

Ongoing input, evaluation, and feedback from both
inside and outside the police organization are
essential to making community policing work.

------------------------------

The implementation of a community policing strategy
must be a dynamic and flexible process. Ongoing
input, evaluation, and feedback from both inside
and outside the police organization are essential
to making community policing work. All phases of
community policing implementation must be carefully
planned and properly timed to maximize success;
even good ideas can fail if they are poorly
executed.

Planning must be responsive to changing needs,
conditions, and priorities. A strong research and
planning capability that is open to suggestion and
criticism will allow refinements and revisions to
be made during the implementation process. Such
flexibility is crucial to the success of community
policing.

There are numerous ways in which police management
can steer agencies toward community policing. This
chapter offers guidelines that can be adapted to
the circumstances of different organizations and
communities.

City and Community Resources

The long-term success of community policing in
transforming the law enforcement profession depends
on the willingness of local governments to pursue
effective integration. Elected and appointed
administrators must understand the law enforcement
agency's implementation strategy and participate in
its development. Mayors, city managers, legislative
representatives, and other government executives
must not be passive partners in this process; they
must guide the expansion of this movement toward
"community-oriented government" at the local level.
Just as the police need to determine the best ways
to respond to and solve problems of crime and
violence, political leaders and service providers
need to find ways to direct all available resources
at these critical social problems. Law enforcement
agencies alone do not have the resources to address
all contemporary problems; however, community
policing can be a catalyst for mobilizing resources
at the national, State, and local levels to impact
these problems more successfully.

Collaboration between the police agency and local
government officials is essential, since officers
and supervisors will routinely seek assistance from
local government departments for services from
sanitation to health. Regular communication with
the heads of government agencies will help secure
their assistance and will allow them to prepare
their personnel for the additional service requests
that will be received.

Nongovernment agencies and institutions constitute
another important community asset. The chief or
sheriff should enlist the support of these private
agencies in community policing efforts. One
department invited representatives from these
organizations to participate in training sessions
on community-oriented policing.34

Depending on the nature and scope of the problem
addressed, the com-position of problem-solving
teams could be restricted to police personnel or
could include representatives from the community,
government agencies, and social agencies. The
department must develop close cooperative links
with all community policing partners who contribute
to the problem-solving process, and explicit
procedures must be established that facilitate the
appropriate use of resources.

Every member of the police organization can
contribute to the development of a comprehensive
list of available government and private resources.
This list should include names, addresses, phone
numbers, and a description of services. This
information should be easily accessible to allow
patrol officers, supervisors, and dispatchers to
provide references to community members.

Plan of Action: Three Options

There is no "right" way to implement community
policing. Each of the following three approaches
has strengths and weaknesses.

Plan, then implement. This method entails
developing a detailed long-range plan, with tasks
and timelines, and assigning officers to execute
the plan. This approach clearly delineates a set of
strategies and actions that impart a sense of
direction to implementation efforts; however, the
initial planning stage for a large agency can take
months or even years, and even a very detailed plan
will be unable to predict the obstacles that will
arise. In the absence of experience-based feedback,
some part of the implementation process may be
miscalculated.

Planning can also be complicated by the size of the
staff involved. Keeping the planning staff
relatively small may prevent the process from
becoming unwieldy; however, it may not adequately
represent all levels of command, function, and
experience within the organization, thus creating
the risk that the plan will not be well
implemented. Planning can also become excessive and
may stifle enthusiasm.

Plan and implement. In this approach, planning and
action occur simultaneously. While the planning
process continues, the agency begins to implement
certain aspects of the program. This method allows
the agency to get started quickly, involves more
personnel at the outset, and permits future
planning to benefit from feedback. However, the
agency risks false starts, confusion, and major
blunders unless effective, rapid, and regular
communication takes place between planners and
implementers.

Implement with little planning. The third option is
for an agency with little preparation or knowledge
of the nature of community policing to quickly
launch into the action phase and then, on the basis
of feedback, to retool the effort and begin the
cycle again. This process is continuous, with each
reevaluation cycle advancing the idea of community
policing a bit further within the organization.
This approach assumes that a limited knowledge of
community policing may prevent agencies from
initially planning in a meaningful way. Advocates
note that the almost immediate action will catch
officers' attention at all organizational levels
and will harness the existing enthusiasm to help
mobilize support. However, the constant shifts in
goals and actions can be highly unsettling to the
organization and the community it serves.

Among the factors to be considered when selecting a
method of implementation are the extent of change
in current agency operations that will be required,
the size of the organization, the staff the agency
can assign to implementation efforts, the readiness
of the organization for the new approach, and the
expectations of the community. The method of
planning and implementing simultaneously will
probably prove most effective for the majority of
agencies implementing community policing.

Scope of Initial Implementation Efforts

Initial implementation of community policing can
involve the entire agency, or only a special unit
or district. Agencywide commitment will require a
reevaluation of all aspects of operations. Many
systems will need to be restructured to facilitate
new job responsibilities and to foster productive
partnerships with the community. Initiating changes
of this magnitude will require patience,
perseverance, and total commitment. For these
reasons, organizationwide implementation may not be
feasible for agencies in which current methods of
policing are deeply ingrained. Effective
implementation will require time to train
personnel, establish bonds with the community, and
create appropriate support systems. The amount of
time required will depend on the current
orientation of the organization, its existing
relationship with the community, and the resources
available.

Implementation of community policing through a
special, well-trained unit often offers early
indications of success and focuses the attention of
the community and media on the beneficial nature of
community policing. However, care must be taken to
avoid creating divisions within the agency. If
community policing is perceived as merely a
special-unit function, its eventual implementation
throughout the agency could be significantly
impaired. In addition, launching community policing
through a special unit can lead to the
misconception that the new policing style does not
have to be integrated with all other facets of
operations.

Implementation within one or more districts or
areas can serve to demonstrate success and generate
valuable data for expanding community policing
agencywide, but this may also require more time and
effort than implementation within a special unit.
However, officers in the targeted district can help
train others as community policing expands
throughout the organization. Another advantage of
district implementation is that it requires the
cooperative efforts of all levels of management.
The community policing district must not be
perceived as a mere adjunct to existing police
procedures.

------------------------------

Change must come from the top down. The behavior of
the chief executive will set the tone and pattern
for the entire organization.

------------------------------

The effectiveness of the implementation of
community policing throughout the organization will
depend on the manner in which community policing
goals are communicated initially. If agency leaders
imply that community policing in the special unit
or district constitutes a test to determine whether
the approach should be expanded agencywide,
competition and divisiveness can result. Managers
should state unequivocally that the special unit or
district is not a test site, but is the starting
point for the agencywide implementation of
community policing.

No matter which approach is selected, feedback is
essential. Without adequate feedback, agencies can
encounter implementation problems that could have
been avoided. Mistakes are bound to occur during
implementation of community policing. Recognizing
mistakes, handling them in a timely manner, and
learning from them should be built into
well-planned feedback procedures.

Mobilizing Support

The police executive will be called on to display
exemplary leadership in the move to community
policing. Change must come from the top down. The
behavior of the chief executive will set the tone
and pattern for the entire organization. Management
must create a new, unified organizational outlook,
and strategies must be developed to deal
effectively with obstacles to change.

"For the police it is an entirely different way of
life . . . . The task facing the police chief is
nothing less than to change the fundamental culture
of the organization . . . . Throughout the period
of change the office of the chief executive is
going to be surrounded by turbulence, like it or
not. It will require personal leadership of
considerable strength and perseverance."35 

Early mobilization of support for community
policing is critical. Internally, the chief or
sheriff must develop support at all levels of the
organization; externally, the chief executives must
gather support from the local government, public
and private agencies, the media, and other policing
agencies in the region. The cooperation of the
local mayor or city manager is imperative to the
successful implementation of a community policing
strategy, as is the cooperation of local government
decisionmakers and community organizations. A lack
of commitment from any of these key groups could
result in failure.

------------------------------

A certain amount of opposition to community
policing should be anticipated, both inside and
outside the agency.

------------------------------

A certain amount of opposition to community
policing should be anticipated, both inside and
outside the agency. Elected officials may be too
impatient to await the results of a community
policing effort or may prefer to have a newer
version of current policing procedures. Some groups
within the community may be suspicious of the
concept in general.

Resistance within the agency is inevitable as
restructuring occurs. During the implementation of
any change, employees may feel threatened and seek
ways to resist.36 This will be especially true if
community policing is incorrectly perceived as
being "soft on crime" and as making social service
activities the patrol officers' primary
responsibility.

Those at the highest level of command must be aware
of the concerns of mid-level managers, who may be
particularly sensitive to the shifts in
decisionmaking responsibility and to the wider
discretion accorded patrol officers.

"Teamwork, flexibility, mutual participation in
decisionmaking, and citizen satisfaction are
concepts that initially may threaten the supervisor
who is more comfortable with the authoritarian role
and routinized operations inherent in traditional
policing. Thus, the education of supervisors in new
styles of leadership and management must be given a
high priority if they are to carry out their
responsibility for the success of community
policing."37

Keeping all personnel well informed, involving them
in ongoing planning and implementation, soliciting
their input and suggestions, and encouraging
feedback in all areas of implementation are
essential to obtaining organizationwide support.
Management must instill the agency with a new
spirit of trust and cooperation that will be
carried over into the relationships between the
agency and its community policing partners. The
early cooperation and influence of management is
key to gaining support throughout the ranks.

"Chiefs who do not invest in assessing and
responding to the honest attitudes of managers, who
do not invest in defining the new roles managers
are expected to play, and who do not provide their
managers with the training they need to effectively
fill these new roles are likely to be frustrated in
their efforts to implement change. In their
frustration with managers, they will be tempted to
bypass them and to go straight to the first-line
officers with implementation plans . . . . But
without the support of the supervisors and
managers, few first-line officers will be willing
to risk changing their behaviors."38 

Agency leaders can also move to counter intraagency
resistance by building a strong external
constituency.39 The chief or sheriff might make a
public commitment to community policing and elicit
from special interest groups a statement of their
concerns. The chief may be able to support the work
of commissions and committees that support ideas
for change. These efforts would allow the top
management to approach the organization backed by a
public mandate for community policing.

In anticipation of a move to community policing, a
chief might also disband some squads that emphasize
traditional methods of policing, redesign
evaluation systems to give credit for contributions
to the nature and quality of community life, expand
training to include community partnership and
problem-solving strategies, and establish new
communication channels with other public service
organizations.40

Timing

Timing is an important factor in the implementation
process. Implementation that moves too slowly may
dampen enthusiasm and reduce momentum, while
implementation that moves too quickly may create
confusion and resentment and may threaten the
success of the project through the use of hurried
and ill-conceived methods. Community policing
requires major changes in operations including:
decentralization of activities and facilities, role
changes for most personnel, new training, revised
schedules, and an altered call-response system. All
of these changes require careful consideration and
coordination.

"The order of some changes will have an inherent
logic; it simply won't make sense to undertake some
before making others. However, the ordering of some
of the objectives may be optional. When this is the
case, it may make sense to postpone the more
difficult until later in the change timetable. Easy
"wins" may make the best openers. These would be
changes for which it should be possible to build
the broadest base of support . . . . Meeting some
of the easier goals may help prepare the
organization for the more difficult ones."41

Correct timing is often a matter of making the most
of available opportunities. Police management
should be ready to take advantage of any
opportunity that could champion the cause of
community policing.

"Those opportunities can be defined as events that
throw the spotlight on police policy and provide a
`case in point' justification for a reform
proposal. Ironically, opportunities often come
disguised as crises, and managers must resist the
instinctive impulse to think first of damage
control. Managers interested in reform will embrace
crises and make the most of them . . . ."42

Managing Internal Change

Community policing necessitates the introduction of
fundamental and comprehensive change to the police
agency. Organizational efforts must support the
evolving responsibilities of patrol officers. For
example, information systems should move beyond the
efficient processing of criminal offense reports to
the delivery of timely and accurate information to
officers. Training will govern the pace of change
and should affect more than just the new recruits.
Performance evaluation should no longer be a mere
feedback mechanism, but instead should be a tool to
facilitate the change process. Successful
implementation of community policing entails
careful examination of the following organizational
issues.

Deployment of Personnel

Permanent or long-term shifts and beat assignments
must be instituted if patrol officers are to form
lasting and productive partnerships with the
community. Community policing depends on this
stability. In addition, community boundaries should
be carefully drawn to preserve the integrity of
existing neighborhoods and to encourage cooperation
within the community.

A comprehensive analysis of workloads across shifts
and areas is essential to guide the deployment of
personnel. This analysis should include data for
each community covering the following areas:

o The frequency and nature of calls for service.

o The frequency and nature of criminal activity.

o The expectations for response time.

o The estimated time needed for community
partnership and problem-solving activities.

Some agencies will need to increase the number of
officers who are assigned to patrol operations and
to readjust existing patrol assignments. Criminal
investigation units may need to be surveyed to
determine if efforts are being duplicated, which
could allow some officers to return to patrol.
Civilians could also be hired for support positions
not requiring policing skills, in order to reassign
police personnel to community patrols.

------------------------------

Close collaboration between patrol officers and
their supervisors is as critical to successful
community policing as the partnership between the
officer and the community members.

------------------------------

Supervision

Consistent supervision is necessary for effective
community policing. Supervision will suffer if
sergeants or lieutenants have schedules that only
partially overlap those of the patrol officers.
Close collaboration between patrol officers and
their supervisors is as critical to successful
community policing as the partnership between the
officer and the community members.

While patrol officers need consistent supervision,
"The attitude that police officers must be guided
and directed at every turn must be discarded . . .
. "43 Supervisors should function as mentors,
motivators, and facilitators. Community policing's
broad approach to problem solving can enhance
communication and interaction between departmental
levels. If middle managers are made an integral
part of the problem-solving process, they will
become another resource for patrol officers, rather
than just another level of supervision.44 By acting
as liaisons, running interference, and suggesting
appropriate auxiliary support, supervisors can help
patrol officers respond to a wide variety of
service demands.

Among the community policing responsibilities for
first-line supervisors and mid-level managers are
the following:

o Maintaining beat integrity.

o Overseeing the creation of beat profiles.

o Working with officers and community residents to
create a system for the allocation and utilization
of resources.

o Working with officers and community members to
develop, implement, and manage problem-solving
systems.

o Assessing results and providing feedback on
accomplishments and progress made in addressing
problems of crime and disorder.

Supervisors should also bring patrol officers into
the management process, facilitate group
cohesiveness, and assist personnel in reaching
their maximum potential.

Mid-level managers should eliminate impediments to
the process of problem solving and to the
attainment of results. They must learn to manage
multifunctional teams and to assume more
responsibility for strategic planning, as well as
become actively involved in mobilizing the
community in crime-prevention activities.

Mid-level managers should conduct regular meetings
with their staff to discuss plans, activities, and
results. They should evaluate the progress or
failure of strategies, programs, or responses based
on performance indicators supplied by officers,
supervisors, and community members. Managers have a
responsibility to enrich the jobs of their
personnel by delegating authority, acting as
mentors, and overseeing training and education.
They also must meet frequently with their superiors
to provide updates, seek direction and guidance,
and help expand strategies to address crime and
disorder within communities.

Human Resource Development

Training is key to the effective implementation of
community policing. Training should communicate and
reinforce the changes taking place in
organizational values and policies, and should help
build consensus, resolve, and unity both inside and
outside the police organization.

Community policing skills should be integrated into
the training curricula, not treated as a separate
component of the training program. Training in
community policing should supplement law
enforcement techniques with communication and
leadership skills that will encourage participation
from the community. All personnel must become
skilled in the techniques of problem solving,
motivating, and team-building. Training should
involve the entire agency and should include
civilian personnel who can enlist participation in
community meetings, help the police organization
sharpen its marketing message, and incorporate
sophisticated technology into the organization's
service-oriented operations.

Initial training efforts should be directed at
managers and supervisors, who may feel their
authority is being eroded by the modified
priorities of the organization.45 More important,
they must be relied on to transmit and translate
the new concepts to those they supervise.

The training of mid-level managers should emphasize
their role in facilitating the problem-solving
process by coaching, coordinating, and evaluating
the efforts of patrol officers. To prepare
mid-level managers for their community policing
responsibilities, one agency chief required all
personnel with the rank of sergeant and above to
attend training sessions that had three goals: to
show supervisors how to manage officers' time so
that problems could be addressed without
diminishing police capability for handling calls,
to describe how problems should be analyzed, and to
ensure that all trainees knew what was expected of
them and their officers.46

------------------------------

Systems for evaluating personnel performance should
reflect the goals of community policing.

------------------------------ 

Patrol officers must also receive extensive
training that encourages and develops both
initiative and discretionary ability--a dramatic
departure from traditional thinking. They must
develop planning, organization, problem solving,
communication, and leadership skills through
ongoing, thorough training. Eventually, these
officers will be able to assist in the training of
others.

Performance Evaluation and Reward

Performance evaluation can be a valuable management
tool for facilitating change and can help
communicate agency priorities to employees.

Systems for evaluating personnel performance should
reflect the goals of community policing.
"Emphasizing quality over quantity represents a
major difference between traditional policing and
community-oriented policing."47 Patrol officers
could be evaluated on how well they know their
beats--a prerequisite for identification of
problems--and how effectively they and their
supervisors have adopted problem-solving
techniques. Other relevant performance measures
include the extent to which personnel have formed
partnerships with the community and the nature of
their contributions to this team effort. Since
officers are working as part of a team, they should
not be evaluated as if they were operating alone.

The occasional mistake made by an officer seeking
to solve community issues in a proactive manner
would be an inappropriate measure of performance.
"Managers cannot have it both ways. They cannot ask
officers to be risk-takers and then discipline them
when occasional mistakes occur."48 The insight,
initiative, and creativity shown by personnel
should be considered in the performance appraisal;
the motivation behind the action also must be
considered. Mistakes made in an honest attempt to
solve a problem should not be evaluated in the same
manner as mistakes made through carelessness, lack
of commitment, or deliberate disregard for policing
policies.

Retaining the services of personnel who are skilled
in community policing depends, in large part, on
appropriate rewards for solid performance. Rewards
must be consistent with the values and methods
associated with community policing. Patrol officers
and supervisors should be evaluated and rewarded
for exceptional skills in problem solving or
community mobilization efforts, rather than on the
number of calls handled or parking tickets issued.

Rewards also include the establishment of
well-defined and suitable career paths for all
personnel. Specific career development
opportunities should reward past effort and allow
room for growth, especially for patrol officers.
The backbone of community policing is the patrol
officer and the status, pay, and working conditions
of this position should encourage people to spend
an entire career in patrol. "In effect, what is
needed is a system that rewards advancement through
skill levels in the same job as much or more than
it rewards advancement through the ranks."49

Management should also consider expanding the
criteria for the existing award program and placing
more emphasis on community partnership and
problem-solving skills. Some departments have
invited community members to help select police
award recipients. Others have added awards for
community members who participate in police
efforts. These awards will help solidify
commitments and encourage continued cooperation
among community policing participants.

Workload Control and Information Systems

The efficient management of service calls is
essential for officers to have sufficient time to
interact and work with community members to solve
problems of crime and disorder. Most agencies
control 911 calls for service by determining which
calls demand an immediate response and which can be
handled with alternate responses or through a
referral to another agency. Nonemergency calls can
be handled by delayed officer response, by
telephone, by mail, or by having the caller come to
the station. Research shows that the public will
not insist on an immediate response to a
nonemergency service request if the alternative
response is both appropriate and performed as 
described.50

------------------------------

Analysis must go beyond identifying and forecasting
crime patterns; tactical analysis should be
supplemented with strategic analysis.

------------------------------

The problem-solving orientation of community
policing requires a greater emphasis on analytic
skills and expert systems management to obtain the
most valuable information support. Information
support will have to be provided for problems that
have not been previously studied and for the
incorporation of data from outside the
department.51 Analysis must go beyond identifying
and forecasting crime patterns; tactical analysis
should be supplemented with strategic analysis.

". . . strategic analysis seeks to identify factors
that contribute to crime and non-crime problems.
Strategic analysis is a natural by-product of the
problem-oriented approach . . . . Strategic
analysts should attempt to identify why problems
exist in neighborhoods as well as identify the
conditions that contribute to and perpetuate crime.
This information will certainly prove useful in the
planning and implementation of tactical responses
and crime prevention strategies."52

Strategic analysis will require that information be
collected by a number of unconventional methods,
e.g., conducting neighborhood victimization
surveys, canvassing rehabilitation centers and
hospitals, interacting with school officials, and
assessing the impact of environmental changes on
criminal activity.

Technology tends to heighten the isolation of the
police from the public; therefore, management must
ensure that technological innovations are
integrated into community policing activities in a
way that fosters meaningful cooperation and aids in
the process of problem solving.

Modern CAD (computer-aided dispatch) systems can
assist in prioritizing police response to service
requests. Cellular telephones, pagers, fax
machines, and voice mail can also relieve the
overburdened 911 systems and provide vital
communication links between communities and the
police. In addition, geocoding and mapping
technology can prove invaluable to the
problem-solving process.

"Advancements in technology now allow computerized
maps of neighbor-hood activity. [In a test] using
personal computers with specially designed
software, community groups were able to map data
provided by daily police reports . . . . This
strategy holds considerable promise for mapping
less-serious incivilities (not only the dramatic
incidents) that lower the quality of neighborhood
life . . . . Research suggests that releasing local
crime statistics to the public will not increase
the public's fear of crime so long as the
statistics are accompanied by specific, feasible
crime prevention recommendations."53

All data should be made available through an
integrated management information system that can
be conveniently accessed by patrol officers,
supervisors, command staff, and support personnel.
This might entail the use of laptop computers and
other mobile communications equipment. Wide
dissemination and information sharing are essential
components of community policing. Pertinent and
appropriate information should be made available to
members of the community whenever possible. For
example, statistics showing an increase in
burglaries or rapes in a specific section of town
should be shared with the community to further the
problem-solving process.

Facilities

Effective community collaboration and interaction
will require patrol officers to be more accessible
to community members. "Storefront" police offices
or "mini-stations" within neighborhoods can be
established quite inexpensively, particularly with
assistance from the community. The duties of
staffing storefront facilities can be shared among
officers, civilian employees, and community
residents. These sites provide officers and
citizens with the opportunity to discuss problems
and plan activities. One police jurisdiction
operated a storefront station at a shopping mall,
while another used a closed-down roadhouse in a
rural area to provide residents with easier access
to police services. Some deputies in sparsely
populated rural areas are allowed to report in by
phone, instead of driving many miles to attend roll
call, so that contact with community residents can
be maximized. In a sense, the deputies' homes
become satellite stations, allowing them greater
access to the community.

Facilitating the Implementation Process

Astute chief executives will realize that
leadership ability can be found at many levels,
both inside and outside the police organization.
They should enlist the help of people whose ideas,
drive, and ability will help spur the progress of
community policing. However, police executives must
take responsibility for directing implementation
efforts and outlining the parameters for addressing
the various facets of community policing. Strong
and continued leadership from the top of the
organization will reduce confusion and disagreement
at lower levels.

Police chiefs will not be able to manage the entire
implementation process; therefore, a team or
committee, one or more internal coordinators, and
outside sources such as consultants should be
designated by the chief.

Members of an implementation team, task force, or
committee will also have other responsibilities;
therefore, an internal coordinator may be needed to
provide daily support for team efforts. For greater
effectiveness, internal coordinators should be
recruited from the command level of the
organization to avoid communication problems.

------------------------------

. . . top management should consider creating a
broad-based implementation team.

------------------------------

Outside consultants can also facilitate
implementation because they are frequently able to
gain access to all levels of the organization more
easily than an internal coordinator. Consultants
can bring a wealth of experience to the
implementation process, including knowledge about
the implementation of community policing strategies
and suggestions for gathering relevant information.
Occasionally consultants may encounter resistance
within agencies that are not accustomed to external
assistance. Executives loaned from private sector
companies also may be useful to police
organizations. "The private sector uses such
programs to allow one or more employees to work,
with pay, for a not-for-profit or community
organization for as long as a year at a time."54

To ensure a smooth transition to community
policing, top management should consider creating a
broad-based implementation team. An agencywide
team, which could be divided into a number of
committees, should adequately represent all levels
of the agency in experience and function. An even
broader team might include representatives from
local government, police unions, other agencies,
and members of the community whose assistance would
be instrumental to the success of a community
policing strategy.

Officers on the implementation team must be allowed
to participate outside the traditional lines of
authority.55 This means that while a chairperson
will direct and coordinate each committee's
activities, there should be no rank within
committees. The police chief must have frequent
contact with all committees. In addition, the
efforts of committees should be coordinated by one
or more facilitators who share the chief's thinking
and understand the ultimate goals of community
policing.

Marketing: Selecting a Message and an Image

Before implementing a community policing strategy,
the agency should communicate the concept of
community policing to its own personnel and to the
community, including political and business leaders
and the media. Different emphases and images may be
appropriate for different audiences; however, a
message to one group should not contradict or
neutralize an equally valid message to another.

For example, messages to officers focusing on
problem solving and arrests might conflict with
images directed at the general public showing
officers distributing teddy bears to preschoolers.
Both messages and roles are valid; one emphasizes
problem solving as a valuable anticrime tool, while
the other shows the benefits of trust-building and
partnerships with the community.

To avoid sending contradictory messages, agencies
should settle on a dominant theme and communicate
it consistently both internally and externally. For
example, the theme might emphasize a new
"customer-service" orientation to policing, focus
on partnership building, or highlight the prospects
community policing holds for creating secure
neighborhoods. Subsidiary points--problem solving,
community contact, or ridding neighborhoods of
signs of neglect or disorder--could be grouped
under the umbrella of this central theme. An
excellent example of a central theme is the
"Together We Can" slogan that will steer the
marketing of community policing efforts in Chicago.

Marketing involves communicating through symbols,
stories about real-life situations, and
testimonials by those whom the community and
officers respect. Marketing messages are conveyed
internally through memos, roll-call briefings,
newsletters, and special videos, and in person by
command staff and chief executives, among others.
Externally, they are publicized through public
forums, posters, flyers, meetings, public service
announcements, and the officers' personal contact
with community members.

Although the use of a label or acronym to help
market community policing seems a small matter, it
needs careful consideration.

"If employees are generally supportive of the
change, then the label provides a positive rallying
symbol . . . . If, on the other hand, there is
substantial resistance to the change, then the
label becomes a negative rallying symbol . . . .
People begin to play games with the acronym.
Neighborhood-Oriented Policing becomes `Nobody On
Patrol' or `NOPE'."56 

------------------------------

Media involvement ensures a wide dissemination of
the community policing message and encourages the
media to stay involved in future community policing
efforts. . . .

------------------------------ 

The media must be included early in the
implementation process to market successfully the
idea of community policing. Media involvement
ensures a wide dissemination of the community
policing message and encourages the media to stay
involved in future community policing efforts; the
media also will be less apt to "derail" if there is
a bump in the crime statistics or if some community
policing policies are less effective than hoped. If
the budget allows, media consultants can be useful.
The agency's internal media relations unit should
thoroughly understand the chief executive's vision
of community policing and communicate it clearly in
news releases and interviews. All who are marketing
the concept must be careful not to claim more for
community policing than it can deliver. 

------------------------------

Chapter 5: Assessing the Progress of Community
Policing

A critical aspect of implementation is the
assessment of community policing efforts, both in
terms of achieving necessary change within the
organization itself and accomplishing external
goals (such as, establishing working relationships
with the community and reducing levels of crime,
fear, and disorder). Ongoing assessment meets a
number of fundamental needs.

Every government and public agency, including the
police, should be able to give an accurate account
of its current activities to policymakers and
taxpayers. Thus, ongoing assessment of policy and
performance should be a primary function of any
policing organization. Assessment becomes even more
vital when an organization is undergoing the
comprehensive changes that a shift to community
policing will entail. Constant assessment of the
process of change is needed for managers to
determine how to keep the implementation process on
track. The most effective strategies also need to
be identified so managers can make informed choices
about where to allocate limited resources.

Ongoing assessment helps give the organization a
clear sense of direction and allows management to
focus efforts on the most productive and efficient
practices. Therefore, assessment is indispensable
in determining which elements of community policing
should be maintained, altered, or eliminated, and
offers key decisionmakers in the jurisdiction a way
to gauge the impact and cost-effectiveness of
community policing efforts.

Assessment will help determine whether necessary
changes in the support systems are taking place and
whether appropriate efforts are being made to
accomplish the stated goals. Assessment also can
help communicate agency expectations to employees.

Giving community members a way to measure the
success of community policing efforts is critical
to maintaining strong ties, ensuring continued
participation, and documenting the progress made.
Conversely, evaluations of the community policing
strategy from government and community leaders will
affect how future cooperative efforts are
constructed. Thorough assessment helps make police
more responsive to the community's needs, which
should strengthen the trust and partnership on
which community policing is based.

Developing a sound assessment program should begin
with a strategic plan that outlines the goals,
methods, objectives, and timetables, and assigns
personnel for internal and external changes. These
goals and responsibilities will form the basis of
performance assessment and will allow police
leadership to detect failures and roadblocks, as
well as to chart progress and document
accomplishments.

Assessing Internal Changes

Large gaps can exist between policy and actions,
therefore, management must take nothing for granted
in the implementation of community policing
policies and procedures. The chief executive should
constantly ask, "How is the implementation going?
Is it on track? What problems are occurring? What
help is needed?"

In smaller organizations, these questions can be
answered through a process called "management by
walking around" in which the chief visits key
managers and implementation groups to get
on-the-spot reports on implementation efforts. The
chief should also consult patrol officers to obtain
their views on the implementation process. In every
organization, the chief executive should hold
regular meetings with the personnel responsible for
overseeing community policing implementation and
should ask for reports on efforts with the goal of
both reinforcing accountability and allowing for
immediate discussion of problems. Regular reports
on progress and problems relating to specific
community policing objectives and timetables should
be supplied by members of the implementation team.

Assessment of the more intangible internal changes,
for example, the decentralization of management,
can be complex. The chief executive and the head of
the implementation team could meet regularly with
groups of managers and supervisors to discuss
changes in decisionmaking authority. Periodic
personnel surveys can also help determine what
modifications have occurred in management style,
which obstacles stand in the way of change, and how
agency leadership can facilitate the necessary
adjustments in the roles of managers, supervisors,
and patrol officers.

Three Criteria for Assessment

Evaluating the impact of community policing is
critical for many reasons. Key decisionmakers must
be able to judge the strategy's impact and
cost-effectiveness, and the police organization
must be able to measure the success or failure of
its policies and activities. As with implementation
methods, assessment measures will vary depending on
the size of the organization and the nature of its
current policies. Ongoing monitoring will expedite
the implementation process, attract support, aid
problem solving, and reveal new opportunities for
productive partnerships with the community.

In the past, police efforts usually have been
evaluated on a traditional and narrow set of
criteria (e.g., crime statistics, the number of 911
calls, the length of police response, the number of
arrests and citations, etc.). These assessments
were often taken only at times of serious crime
increases.

------------------------------

Creativity, initiative, and ingenuity should be
emphasized in the evaluation of individual
officers. 

------------------------------

Many of the traditional methods of assessment
remain valid, but can measure only the
effectiveness of crime-fighting tactics and cannot
gauge the effect of crime-prevention efforts.
Changes in the scope of policing necessitate a
revised system for evaluating the performance of
individuals, as well as agencies. As police take a
proactive role in deterring crime, a broader set of
assessment criteria, which incorporate traditional
measures of crime-fighting activities with those
that encompass community partnership and
problem-solving activities, will be needed.

Traditional crime-control activities should become
only one of the ways in which the community
policing strategy and individual officers are
assessed. Many indications of the success of
community policing efforts are intangible (e.g.,
absence of fear, quality of interaction with
community members, etc.); therefore, assessing a
community policing strategy is a qualitative as
well as a quantitative process. The values that the
department promotes will form the basis of sound
qualitative measures of effectiveness. Assessment
should reward organizational and individual
behavior that assists in deterring crime and
solving other neighborhood problems. Creativity,
initiative, and ingenuity should be emphasized in
the evaluation of individual officers. Three major
criteria--effectiveness, efficiency, and equity--
can be used to provide the quantitative and
qualitative measures needed to assess the success
of a community policing strategy.

Effectiveness

An effective community policing strategy will
reduce neighborhood crime, decrease citizens' fear
of crime, and enhance the quality of life in the
community. An important goal of community policing
is to provide higher quality service to
neighborhoods; therefore, customer satisfaction
becomes an important measure of effectiveness. The
perception of progress among community members and
ongoing feedback from all elements of the community
are essential parts of the assessment process.
Randomly and routinely conducted surveys will
inform the agency of the public view of police
performance, the level of fear and concern, and
will make the agency aware of the extent to which
community members feel as if they are participants
in the community policing effort.

One of the core components of community policing is
community partnership. Therefore, an early measure
of effectiveness will be the number and type of
community partnerships that have been formed. The
cooperation and participation of community members
is necessary to deter crime and reduce the fear of
crime in the neighborhood. Assessing the
effectiveness of community policing efforts
includes determining whether problems have been
solved and judging how well the managers and patrol
officers have applied the community partnership and
problem-solving components of community policing
described in Chapter 3.

------------------------------

Assessment should measure whether a problem was
solved and how this was accomplished.

------------------------------

Assessment should measure whether a problem was
solved and how this was accomplished. As stated
earlier, the number of arrests made is only one
possible measure of effective problem solving;
solving problems often does not involve arrest and,
in many cases, does not guarantee that a problem
will disappear completely. For example, the officer
(cited in Chapter 3), who determined that one of
the underlying causes of an increase in convenience
store robberies was that cash registers could not
be seen by passersby, did not eradicate the
burglary. However, his efforts did provide valuable
information that could help deter future robberies.
Satisfactory assessment measures for community
policing must give proper credit to officers like
this who successfully abate a problem through means
other than arrest. The officer's contribution to
solving the problem and his consultations with
members of the community showed the concern and
effectiveness of police officers and created the
goodwill for the department that is crucial to the
success of community policing.

The number and type of problems solved and the
creativity and scope of the solutions will provide
a way to measure community policing's
effectiveness. Not all of the problems will involve
criminal activity, and many will not even be
considered a priority by the police agency.
However, where serious crime is not involved, the
concerns and fears of community members should
order the priorities of the agency.

In community policing, officers may act as
facilitators to mobilize community support. They
may also function as mediators in disputes between
individuals or organizations, or take
responsibility for referring a problem to the
appropriate social or government agency. The
effective use of government and community agencies
in problem solving is an indication that community
policing policies are working. Thus, the
mobilization and intelligent use of community
resources in solving problems and the sensitive
handling of dissension become important factors in
assessing the performance of officers and the
success of the program.

Increased levels of community participation in
crime reduction and prevention efforts is another
indication of program success. Community members
will not act if they are afraid or suspicious.
Community members should become more willing to
work with the police in a variety of ways, ranging
from converting abandoned buildings to community
assets to involving police actively in neighborhood
watch groups. They might also be more comfortable
providing information on criminal activity in the
area. In fact, calls to report crime may increase
considerably during the early phases of community
policing implementation, as community confidence in
police capability rises and community trust
increases. However, the number of 911 calls will
likely decrease over time, which will provide a
quantitative measure of the strategy's effect. For
instance, emergency calls in the pioneering Flint,
Michigan, foot patrol district dropped 43 percent
over the course of the experiment.57

A concrete indication of community policing's
success is the commitment of an increased level of
community resources devoted to crime reduction
efforts. Active consultation and financial
participation by public and private agencies,
schools, and the business community will
demonstrate that community-partnership efforts are
working. Communities also should begin to initiate
and conduct projects with minimal guidance from the
police.

------------------------------

Renewed activity within the community will
demonstrate the effectiveness of community policing
efforts, particularly in areas where citizens have
been afraid to leave their homes.

------------------------------

Renewed activity within the community also will
demonstrate the effectiveness of community policing
efforts, particularly in areas where citizens have
been afraid to leave their homes. Reduction in fear
can also result in the perception among residents
that crime is on the wane, whether or not this is
statistically accurate. An increased willingness of
citizens to walk to schools and parks, patronize
stores, and go to restaurants and movies will
signal a general decrease in fear of crime. In
turn, the very fact that community members are
reclaiming their streets will help deter future
criminal activity and create more vigorous
neighborhoods.

Improved quality of life is difficult to measure
but is an important goal of community policing and
will be reflected in comments from community
members. Ridding the streets of gangs, drunks,
panhandlers, and prostitutes--perhaps with the help
of public and private social agencies--will enhance
the quality of life. Removing signs of neglect
(e.g., abandoned cars, derelict buildings, and
garbage and debris) will offer tangible evidence
that community policing efforts are working to
bring about increased order in the community.

In community policing, the police function includes
the provision of services that in the recent past
have been regarded as outside policing's purview.
These services include aiding accident and crime
victims, arbitrating neighborhood and domestic
disputes, and providing emergency medical and
social services. An analysis of the nature of calls
for police service (e.g., a lower percentage of
calls reporting criminal activity in proportion to
calls requesting social assistance) will provide a
measure of how well the strategy is working.

Efficiency

Efficiency means getting the most results with
available resources. To measure the efficiency of
community policing, the resources of the police
agency, local government and private agencies,
citizen groups, the business community, and the
neighborhood must first be defined. The assessment
must then determine whether these resources are
being used to their fullest to solve any given
problem. Agencies that can successfully enhance and
realign their resources by forming community
partnerships will be able to make community
policing more efficient and cost-effective.

Two major shifts must occur within the police
organization if community policing is to work
efficiently. Staunch partnerships and collaborative
efforts must first be established with the
community. The command structure of the police
organization must then be decentralized so that
problem solving, decisionmaking, and accountability
are spread to all levels of the organization. Such
decentralization challenges personnel to be more
creative and more effective because the decisions
they make are more timely and influenced by
firsthand knowledge of the facts.58
Decentralization also gives higher level managers
more time to formulate strategies that will improve
the organization's performance.

In a decentralized policing organization,
neighborhood patrol officers are responsible for
the daily policing needs of the community, with
guidance and backing from supervisors. Their
long-term shifts and neighborhood patrol
assignments give them the opportunity to function
more efficiently and successfully.

Patrol officers who handle daily police functions
can form stronger bonds with the community. This
"pride of ownership" motivates both parties to
solve the problems that affect the security and
harmony of the neighborhood. Patrol officers will
experience greater job satisfaction as they accept
higher levels of responsibility and accountability.
Officers are often able to resolve issues quickly,
allowing them to see the immediate results of their
efforts.

With high morale and greater job satisfaction,
patrol officers will more effectively mobilize the
community. If they are highly motivated, given the
necessary support, and appropriately rewarded for
their efforts, the job satisfaction they experience
will help make the community policing strategy a
success.

The roles and responsibilities of all personnel in
the police organization are altered so that the
leadership and ingenuity officers display will
become important factors in determining the
efficiency of the program. Assessment and reward
procedures must therefore be revised accordingly.

Community help will increase the efficiency of the
program and relieve some of the strain of tight
police budgets. Partnerships in the community can
bring fresh resources to problems, even those
traditionally considered "police-only" business.
According to one sheriff, "There is virtually no
limitation on how much more effective and efficient
a sheriff's office can become, working collectively
as a partner with community members while, at the
same time, saving resources, dollars, and
frustration on the part of constituents."59

Decentralized decisionmaking and community
partnership engenders new organizational and
resource issues that must be addressed to operate
the system efficiently. Budgets must reflect the
goals of community policing by allocating money and
resources in proportion to the results achieved.
With decentralization police officers who have the
greatest responsibility for the daily policing
operations will have more direct input into
budgetary decisions and greater accountability for
financial decisions, actions taken, and results
achieved.

------------------------------

Effectiveness and efficiency are important
yardsticks by which to measure community policing's
achievements, but equity has the greatest impact on
the success of community policing.

------------------------------

Efficiency must be built into each aspect of the
community policing strategy--from the creation of
community boundaries that cultivate productive
alliances to the adoption of technologies that
increase communication. Expanded and thorough
training is paramount in an efficient shift to
community policing. Intensive training, although
initially costly in terms of dollars and time, will
eventually make the process more efficient, as
well-trained and experienced personnel share
practical knowledge with colleagues.

Efficiency in larger agencies may be increased by
redefining job functions at all management levels.
For example, one large jurisdiction implementing
community policing required sergeants to coordinate
officer decisionmaking across beats as necessary
and to confer with their lieutenants on decisions
that involved a large or long-term commitment of
resources. Lieutenants in turn apprised their
respective captains about happenings on beats
across their districts. Such amended roles for
midlevel managers may promote efficiency through
fewer levels of supervision. While an important
supervisory role is to help maximize the amount of
time neighborhood officers can spend in their
communities, community policing will require
supervisors to coordinate problem-solving
activities within and across communities, help
secure resources, evaluate activities and
decisions, and provide guidance and support to
neighborhood officers.

Also central to achieving efficiency in time and
dollars is controlling calls for service.
Sophisticated technological advances can help
prioritize calls and facilitate communication among
community policing partners. Alternative response
strategies for nonemergency calls include a
delayed-officer response and officer response by
appointment. Low-priority situations can be handled
by telephone, walk-in, and mail-in reporting. "All
indications are that these systems save an enormous
amount of time, reduce officer frustration, and are
equally satisfactory to the callers."60

Effectiveness and efficiency are important
yardsticks by which to measure community policing's
achievements, but equity, the third major criterion
for judging progress, has the greatest impact on
the success of community policing.

Equity

Equity is grounded firmly in the Constitution of
the United States, which all police officers are
sworn to uphold. A foremost tenet of community
policing is equity; that is, all citizens should
have a say in how they are governed. Officers may
relate better to citizens as individuals because
they cooperate closely with and are recognized as
an integral part of the community. Community
policing can thus become a force for enhancing
democratic principles.

Community policing provides an opportunity to
emphasize uncompromising integrity, unyielding
standards of fairness, and unwavering equality
because officers have to work closely with the
community and will be increasingly confronted with
ethical dilemmas.

Equity, as understood in community policing
activities, has three dimensions: equal access to
police services by all citizens, equal treatment of
all individuals under the U.S. Constitution, and
equal distribution of police services and resources
among communities.

Equal access to police services. All citizens,
regardless of race, religion, personal
characteristics, or group affiliation, must have
equal access to police services for a full and
productive partnership with a community. The
paramount commitment of community policing should
be respect for all citizens and sensitivity to
their needs. Neighborhood officers must not
discriminate against any community members.
Supervisors should help ensure that police services
are readily available throughout the community.

In addition, lines of communication must be kept
open with all partners in the community policing
effort. Favoritism of one group over another will
severely hamper future cooperative efforts. Groups
who are more vocal than others cannot be permitted
to use community policing to serve their own
purposes. Police must prevent such behavior before
it adversely affects the trust that has been
established within and among communities.

Equal treatment under the constitution. Police must
treat all individuals according to the
constitutional rights that officers are sworn to
protect and enforce. Careful attention to the
constitutional rights of citizens, victims, or
perpetrators will help to engender bonds of trust
between the police and community. Police must treat
all persons with respect and impartiality--
including the homeless, the poor, and the mentally
or physically handicapped. They must reject
stereotypes, ignore skin color, and use reason and
persuasion rather than coercion wherever possible
because inequitable or harsh treatment can lead to
frustration, hostility, and even violence within a
community. Such unethical behavior will imperil the
trust so necessary to community policing.

Some contemporary community activists and leaders
have experienced past confrontations with the
police which may present serious challenges to
implementing community policing and involving the
community in policing efforts.

Equal distribution of police services and resources
among communities. Because community policing
customizes policing services to the needs of each
community, services should be distributed equitably
among poor and minority communities. Care must be
taken, however, to ensure that this is the case.

------------------------------

. . . all communities must have equal access to
police services.

------------------------------

For equitable distribution of resources among
communities, each community must articulate its
needs and be willing to work with the police to
ensure its share of police services. Each
neighborhood officer must listen to the community
members, and be willing to work with the community
members to meet those needs. Poor and minority
neighborhoods can present particular challenges for
some patrol officers, who may have to bridge
differences of race and class before a level of
trust and cooperation can be established. 

Some neighborhoods may appear unwilling to help
police in their efforts to improve life in the
community. Officers must realize that sometimes
"the community seems so helpless because it feels
abandoned and would discover new strengths if only
the police could make an effective alliance with
important community elements. . . . Departments
that have taken early steps [into community
policing] are full of stories of apparently lost
neighborhoods that flowered under new police
attention."61

One community must not be given preference over
another; all communities must have equal access to
police services. Equity, however, may not always
mean equal distribution of police services and
resources. Wealthier communities are often able to
contribute more resources to the problem-solving
process than can poorer communities. Crime rates
will also be higher in some communities, requiring
more police intervention and a larger share of
police resources to decrease crime and transform
neighborhoods from places of fear into city or
county assets.

Refining the Assessment Process

Assessment of community policing is an ongoing
process that should include a reevaluation of the
assessment measures themselves. With more
experience in community policing, a police agency
will be able to develop measures that accurately
chart successes and failures and indicate where
changes need to be made.

The values of the policing organization must guide
the move to community policing, and shape every
decision made and every action taken. Above all,
police organizations must be responsive to
community priorities and demands for service from
the beginning of the community policing effort. 

------------------------------

Chapter 6: Conclusion

Police agencies should not allow political leaders
and the public to develop unrealistic expectations
for community policing in terms of crime deterrence
or speed of implementation. Community policing
calls for long-term commitment; it is not a quick
fix. Achieving ongoing partnerships with the
community and eradicating the underlying causes of
crime will take planning, flexibility, time, and
patience. Management can measure progress by their
success in meeting interim goals and must reinforce
the concept inside and outside the organization
that success is reached through a series of gradual
improvements.

Local political leadership may be eager for fast
results, but police leadership must make it clear
to city and county officials that implementing
community policing is an incremental and long-term
process. Political and community leaders must be
regularly informed of the progress of community
policing efforts to keep them interested and
involved. The police organization, from the chief
executive down, must stress that the success of
community policing depends on sustained joint
efforts of the police, local government, public and
private agencies, and members of the community.
This cooperation is indispensable to deterring
crime and revitalizing our neighborhoods. 

------------------------------

Footnotes

1. Kelling, George L., and Mark H. Moore. The
Evolving Strategy of Policing. Perspectives on
Policing. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of
Justice and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1988:p.8. Based on The Newark
Foot Patrol Experiment. Washington, D.C.: Police
Foundation. 1981.

2. As quoted in Kelling, George L. Police and
Communities: the Quiet Revolution. Perspectives on
Policing. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of
Justice and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1988:p.2. 

3. Braiden, Chris. "Enriching Traditional Police
Roles." Police Management: Issues and Perspectives.
Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum.
1992:p.108. 

4. Kelling, George L., and Mark H. Moore. The
Evolving Strategy of Policing. Perspectives on
Policing. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of
Justice and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1988:pp.4-5. 

5. Harrington, Michael. The Other America: Poverty
in the United States. New York: Macmillan.
1981:p.16. 

6. Kelling, George L., Antony Pate, Duane Dieckman,
and Charles E. Brown. The Kansas City Preventive
Patrol Experiment: A Technical Report. Washington,
D.C.: Police Foundation. 1974:pp.iii, 533-5. 

7. Kansas City Police Department. Response Time
Analysis: Volume II, Part I--Crime Analysis.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
1980:p.iii. 

8. Eck, John E., and William Spelman. "A
Problem-Oriented Approach to Police Service
Delivery." Police and Policing: Contemporary
Issues, ed. Dennis Jay Kenney. New York: Praeger.
1989:p.101. 

9. Farmer, Michael T., ed. Differential Police
Response Strategies. Washington, D.C.: Police
Executive Research Forum. 1981:p.3. 

10. Kansas City Police Department. Directed Patrol:
A Concept in Community-Specific, Crime-Specific,
and Service-Specific Policing. Kansas City,
Missouri: Kansas City Police Department.
1974:p.465. 

11. Boydstun, John E., and Michael E. Sherry. San
Diego Community Profile: Final Report. Washington,
D.C.: Police Foundation. 1975:p.83. 

12. Goldstein, Herman. "Improving Policing: A
Problem-Oriented Approach." Crime and Delinquency
25(1979):pp.241-3. 

13. Eck, John E., and William Spelman. Problem
Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in Newport News.
Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum.
1987:pp.81,99.

14. Sherman, Lawrence W., Patrick R. Gartin, and
Michael E. Buerger. "Hot Spots of Predatory Crime:
Routine Activities and the Criminology of Place."
Criminology 27(1989):p.39. 

15. Greenwood, Peter W., and Joan Petersilia. The
Criminal Investigation Process--Volume I: Summary
and Policy Implications. Santa Monica: Rand
Corporation. 1975:p.v. See also Greenwood, Peter
W., Jan M. Chaiken, and Joan Petersilia. The
Criminal Investigation Process. Lexington: DC
Heath. 1977. 

16. Kelling, George L. The Newark Foot Patrol
Experiment. Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation.
1981:pp.94-96. 

17. Trojanowicz, Robert C. "An Evaluation of a
Neighborhood Foot Patrol Program." Journal of
Police Science and Administration 11(1983):pp.410-
419. 

18. Trojanowicz, Robert C. An Evaluation of the
Neighborhood Foot Patrol Program in Flint,
Michigan. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
1982:p.86. See also Trojanowicz, Robert C. "An
Evaluation of a Neighborhood Foot Patrol Program."
Journal of Police Science and Administration
11(1983). 

19. Kelling, George L. Police and Communities: The
Quiet Revolution. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice and
John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University. 1988:p.5. 

20. Pate, Antony M., Mary Ann Wycoff, Wesley G.
Skogan, and Lawrence W. Sherman. Reducing Fear of
Crime in Houston and Newark: A Summary Report.
Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation. 1986:p.3. 

21. Moore, Mark H., Robert Trojanowicz, and George
L. Kelling. Crime and Policing. Perspectives on
Policing. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of
Justice and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1988:p.10. 

22. Eck, John E., and William Spelman, et al.
Problem Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in
Newport News. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive
Research Forum. 1987:pp.xvi-xvii. See also Clarke,
Ronald V. "Situational Crime Prevention: Its
Theoretical Basis and Practical Scope." Crime and
Justice: An Annual Review of Research, eds. Michael
Tonry and Norval Morris. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press. 1983. 

23. Eck, John E., and William Spelman, et al.
Problem Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in
Newport News. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive
Research Forum. 1987:p.xvi.

24. Sparrow, Malcolm K., Mark H. Moore, and David
M. Kennedy. Beyond 911: A New Era in Policing. New
York: Basic Books. 1990:pp.175-176.

25. Goldstein, Herman. Problem-Oriented Policing.
New York: McGraw Hill. 1990:pp.66-67.

26. Dietz and Baker. "Murder at Work." American
Journal of Public Health 77(1987):pp.273-274. 

27. Braiden, Chris R. "Enriching Traditional
Roles." Police Management: Issues and Perspectives,
ed. Larry T. Hoover. Washington, D.C.: Police
Executive Research Forum. 1992:p.101. 

28. Oettmeier, Timothy N., and William H. Bieck.
Developing a Policing Style for Neighborhood
Policing. Executive Session #1. Houston: Houston
Police Department. 1987:pp.12-13. 

29. Sparrow, Malcolm K., Mark H. Moore, and David
M. Kennedy. Beyond 911: A New Era for Policing. New
York: Basic Books. 1990:pp.182-183.

30. Wasserman, Robert, and Mark H. Moore. Values in
Policing. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: National Institute of Justice and John F.
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
1988:pp.1,3. 

31. Brown, Lee P. Community Policing: A Practical
Guide for Police Officials. Perspectives on
Policing. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of
Justice and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1989:p.5. 

32. Cordner, Gary W., Craig B. Fraser, and Chuck
Wexler. "Research, Planning, and Implementation."
Local Government Police Management, ed. William A.
Geller. Washington, D.C.: International City
Management Association. 3d edition. 1991:pp.346-
347. 

33. Sparrow, Malcolm K. Implementing Community
Policing. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: National Institute of Justice and John F.
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
1988:p.2. 

34. Couper, David C., and Sabine H. Lobitz. Quality
Policing: The Madison Experience. Washington, D.C.:
Police Executive Research Forum. 1991:p.67. 

35. Sparrow, Malcolm K. Implementing Community
Policing. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: National Institute of Justice and John F.
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
1988:p.2.

36. Cordner, Gary W., Craig B. Fraser, and Chuck
Wexler. "Research, Planning and Implementation."
Local Government Police Management, ed. William A.
Geller. Washington, D.C.: International City
Management Association. 3d edition. 1991.

37. Meese, Edwin III. Community Policing and the
Police Officer. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice and
John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University. 1991:p.7. 

38. Wycoff, Mary Ann and Timothy Oettmeier.
Forthcoming. 1994. 

39. Sparrow, Malcolm K. Implementing Community
Policing. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: National Institute of Justice and John F.
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
1988:p.3. 

40. Ibid. 

41. Wycoff, Mary Ann and Timothy Oettmeier.
Forthcoming. 1994. 

42. Sherman, Lawrence W. and Anthony V. Bouza in
Gary W. Cordner, Craig B. Fraser, and Chuck Wexler.
"Research, Planning and Implementation." Local
Government Police Management, ed. William A.
Geller. Washington, D.C.: International City
Management Association, 3d edition. 1991:sidebar. 

43. Oettmeier, Timothy N., and William H. Bieck.
Integrating Investigative Operations Through
Neighborhood-Oriented Policing: Executive Session
#2. Houston: Houston Police Department. 1988:p.35. 

44. Sparrow, Malcolm K. Implementing Community
Policing. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: National Institute of Justice and John F.
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
1988:p.6. 

45. Oettmeier, Timothy N., and William H. Bieck.
Integrating Investigative Operations Through
Neighborhood-Oriented Policing: Executive Session
#2. Houston: Houston Police Department. 1988. 

46. Eck, John E., and William Spelman. Problem
Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in Newport News.
Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum.
1987:pp.104-6. 

47. Brann, Joseph E., and Suzanne Whalley. "COPPS:
The Transformation of Police Organizations."
Community-Oriented Policing and Problem Solving.
Sacramento: Attorney General's Crime Prevention
Center. 1992:p.74. 

48. Kelling, George L., Robert Wasserman, Hubert
Williams. Police Accountability and Community
Policing. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of
Justice and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1988:p.6. 

49. Moore, Mark H., and Darrel W. Stephens. Beyond
Command and Control: The Strategic Management of
Police Departments. Washington, D.C.: Police
Executive Research Forum. 1991:p.94.

50. Eck, John E., and William Spelman. "A
Problem-Oriented Approach to Police Service
Delivery." Police and Policing: Contemporary
Issues, ed. Dennis Jay Kenney. New York: Praeger.
1989:p.101. 

51. Sparrow, Malcolm. Information Systems and the
Development of Policing. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice and
John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University. 1993:p.4. 

52. Oettmeier, Timothy N., and William H. Bieck.
Integrating Investigative Operations Through
Neighborhood-Oriented Policing: Executive Session
#2. Houston: Houston Police Department. 1988:p.64. 

53. Rosenbaum, Dennis P., Eusevio Hernandez, and
Sylvester Daughtry, Jr. "Crime Prevention, Fear
Reduction, and the Community." Local Government
Police Management, ed. William A. Geller.
Washington, D.C.: International City Management
Association. 1991:p.116. 

54. Williams, Hubert. "External Resources." Local
Government Police Management, ed. William A.
Geller. Washington, D.C.: International City
Management Association. 1991:p.465. 

55. Wadman, Robert C., and Robert K. Olson.
Community Wellness: A New Theory of Policing.
Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum.
1990:p.61. 

56. Wycoff, Mary Ann and Timothy Oettmeier.
Forthcoming. 1994. 

57. Trojanowicz, Robert C. "An Evaluation of a
Neighborhood Foot Patrol Program." Journal of
Police Science and Administration 11(1983):p.417. 

58. Moore, Mark H., and Darrel W. Stephens. Beyond
Command and Control: The Strategic Management of
Police Departments. Washington, D.C.: Police
Executive Research Forum. 1991:p.76. 

59. Prinslow, Robert J. "Community Policing in
Marion County, Oregon." Roll Call. Special edition
(June 1993):p.9. 

60. Goldstein, Herman. Problem-Oriented Policing.
New York: McGraw Hill. 1990:pp.20-21. 

61. Sparrow, Malcolm, Mark H. Moore, and David M.
Kennedy. Beyond 911: A New Era for Policing. USA:
Basic Books. 1990:p.180.

------------------------------

Appendix A: Bibliography

Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
The New Grass Roots Government. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office. 1972.

Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
State-Local Relations in the Criminal Justice
System. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office. 1971.

Allevato, S. Developing of a Law Enforcement Plan
for California Cities Committed to Quality Service
Through Community-Oriented Policing. Sacramento:
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards
and Training. 1989.

American Association of Retired Persons Criminal
Justice Services Program Department. Neighborhood
Watch--Communities Combat Crime. Washington, D.C.:
American Association of Retired Persons. 1983.

Banas, Dennis, and Robert C. Trojanowicz. Uniform
Crime Reporting and Community Policing--An
Historical Perspective. East Lansing, Mich.:
National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, Michigan
State University, School of Criminal Justice. 1985.

Bayley, David H. The Best Defense. Washington,
D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum. 1992.

Bayley, David H. Model of Community Policing: The
Singapore Story. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1989.

Behan, Cornelius J. "Responding to Change and
Managing Crimewarps." American Journal of Police
9(3)(1990).

Belknap, J., Merry Morash, and Robert C.
Trojanowicz. Implementing a Community Policing
Model for Work With Juveniles--An Exploratory
Study. East Lansing, Mich.: National Neighborhood
Foot Patrol Center, Michigan State University,
School of Criminal Justice. 1986.

Bittner, Egon. Aspects of Police Work. Boston:
Northeastern University Press. 1990.

Blumstein, Alfred, and Jacqueline Cohen. Criminal
Careers and Career Criminals. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy of Sciences. 1986.

Blumstein, Alfred, Jacqueline Cohen, and Daniel
Nagin. Deterrence and Incapacitation: Estimating
the Effects of Criminal Sanctions on Crime Rates.
Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.
1978.

Bowman, Gary W., Simon Hakim, et. al., eds.
Privatizing the United States Justice System:
Police, Adjudication, and Corrections Services From
the Private Sector. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland
Company, Inc. 1992.

Boydstun, John E., and Michael E. Sherry. San Diego
Community Profile, Final Report. Washington, D.C.:
Police Foundation. 1975.

Brann, Joseph E., and Suzanne Whalley. "COPPS: The
Transformation of Police Organizations." Community
Oriented Policing and Problem Solving. Sacramento:
California Attorney General's Crime Prevention
Center. 1992.

Brown, Lee P. "Neighborhood-Oriented Policing."
American Journal of Police Special Issue
9(3)(1990).

Brown, Lee P. Community Policing: A Practical Guide
for Police Officials. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice; and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1989.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. "Prisoners in 1992."
Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin (May 1992).

Bureau of Justice Statistics. The Prosecution of
Felony Arrests. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. 1992.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. "State and Local
Police Departments, 1990." Bureau of Justice
Statistics Bulletin (February 1992).

Bureau of Justice Statistics. Sourcebook of
Criminal Justice Statistics, 1991. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs. 1992.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. Criminal
Victimization in the United States, 1991.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs. 1992.

C.F. Productions, Inc. Crime File: Drugs, Community
Response. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1990.

Chamber of Commerce of the United States.
Marshaling Citizen Power Against Crime. Washington,
D.C. 1970.

Chamber of Commerce of the United States. Forward
Thrust--A Process for Mobilizing Total Community
Resources. Washington, D.C. 1969.

Chamber of Commerce of the United States.
Developing Voluntary Leadership. Washington, D.C.
No Date Given.

Chen, M.M. "System Approach of Needs-Oriented
Police Planning: An Empirical Study." Police
Studies 13(4)(Winter 1990).

Clarke, Ronald V. "Situational Crime Prevention:
Its Theoretical Bases and Practical Scope." Crime
and Justice: An Annual Review of Research 4(1983).

Community Patrol Officer Program: A Pilot Program
in Community Oriented Policing in the 72d Precinct,
Interim Progress Report. New York: Vera Institute
of Justice. 1984.

Community Policing--Making the Case for Citizen
Involvement. Rockville, Md.: Charles Stewart Mott
Foundation. 1987.

Cordner, Gary W. "Fear of Crime and the Police--An
Evaluation of a Fear-Reduction Strategy." Journal
of Police Administration 14(3)(September 1986).

Cordner, Gary W., and Donna C. Hale, eds. What
Works in Policing: Operations and Administration
Examined. Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Publishing
Company. 1992.

Couper, David C., and Sabine H. Lobitz. Quality
Policing: The Madison Experience. Washington, D.C.:
Police Executive Research Forum. 1991.

Cox, S.M. "Policing Into the 21st Century." Police
Studies 13(4)(Winter 1990).

Craven, D. Oregon Serious Crime Survey: Attitudes
About Crime. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1989.

Criswell, D., and V. King. "Houston's Field
Training Practicum." Field Training Quarterly
5(2)(Second Quarter 1988).

Cumming, Elaine, Ian Cumming, and Laural Edell.
"Policeman as Philosopher, Guide, and Friend."
Social Problems 12(1965).

Daly, N.C., and P.J. Morehead. Evaluation of
Community Policing: Final Report of the Community
Survey and Police Department Internal Survey. St.
Petersburg, Florida: St. Petersburg Police
Department. 1992.

Delaware Statistical Analysis Center. East Side
Wilmington Anti-Drug Abuse Program Evaluation.
Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office
of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
1990.

Donovan, E.J., and W.F. Walsh. "Private Security
and Community Policing: Evaluation and Comment."
Journal of Criminal Justice. 17(3)(1989).

Dunham, Roger G., and Geoffrey Alpert, eds.
Critical Issues in Policing: Contemporary Readings.
Prospect Heights, Ill.: Waveland Press Inc. 1989.

Eck, John E., and William Spelman. Problem Solving:
Problem-Oriented Policing in Newport News.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice; and Police Executive Research Forum. 1987.

Eck, John E., and William Spelman. "Who Ya Gonna
Call? The Police as Problem-Busters." Crime and
Delinquency. 33(1987).

Esbensen, F. "Foot Patrol: Of What Value?" American
Journal of Police. 6(1)(Spring 1987).

Espinosa, G., and R. Wittmier. "Police Bicycle
Patrols: An Integral Part of Community Policing."
Campus Enforcement Journal. 21(6)(November-December
1991).

Farmer, Michael T., ed. Differential Police
Response Strategies. Washington, D.C.: Police
Executive Research Forum. 1981.

Farrell, Michael J. Community Patrol Officer
Program: Community-Oriented Policing in New York
City Police Department, Interim Progress Report
Number 2. New York: Vera Institute of Justice.
1986.

Fleissner, D., N. Feden, E. Scotland, and D.
Klinger. Community Policing in Seattle: A
Descriptive Study of the South Seattle Crime
Reduction Project. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1991.

Freeman, Michael A. "Community-Oriented Policing."
MIS Report. International City Management
Association. 24(9)(September 1989).

Friedmann, Robert R. "Community Policing: Promises
and Challenges." Journal of Contemporary Criminal
Justice. 6(2)(May 1990).

Geller, William A., ed. Local Government Police
Management. Washington, D.C.: International City
Management Association. 1991.

Geller, William A., ed. Police Leadership in
America. New York: Praeger Publishers. 1985.

Goldstein, Herman. Problem-Oriented Policing. New
York: McGraw Hill, Inc. 1990.

Goldstein, Herman. "Improving Policing: A
Problem-Oriented Approach." Crime and Delinquency.
25(1979).

Greene, Jack R. "Foot Patrol and Community
Policing: Past Practices and Future Prospects."
American Journal of Police. 6(1)(Spring 1987).

Greene, Jack R., and Stephan D. Mastrofski.
Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality. New York:
Praeger Publishers. 1988.

Greenwood, Peter W., Jan M. Chaiken, and Joan
Petersilia. The Criminal Investigation Process.
Lexington: DC Heath. 1977.

Greenwood, Peter W., and Joan Petersilia. The
Criminal Investigation Process--Volume I: Summary
and Policy Implications. Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand
Corporation. 1975.

Gruber, C.A. "Neighborhood Policing." Law
Enforcement Technology. 19(5)(May 1992).

Hall, D.L. "Community Policing: An Overview of the
Literature." Public Policy Report. 1(1)(June 1990).

Hand, Learned. The Contribution of an Independent
Judiciary to Civilization. 1942.

Hansen, K.J. Exploratory Study of the Extension of
Local Empowerment Through Community Policing.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice. 1991.

Harrington, Michael. The Other America: Poverty in
the United States. New York: Macmillan. 1981.

Hayward Police Department. Community Policing and
Problem Solving (COPPS). Hayward: Hayward Police
Department. 1991.

Hermanson, S. Police-Community Relations: A Survey
Measuring Citizens' Attitudes Towards and
Perceptions of the Louisville Police Department.
Louisville, Ky.: University of Louisville Urban
Studies Center College of Urban and Public Affairs.
1982.

Herzberg, F. "One More Time, How Do You Motivate
Employees?" Harvard Business Review (January-
February 1968).

Hoover, Larry T., ed. Police Management: Issues and
Perspectives. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive
Research Forum. 1992.

Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police
Department. Report of the Independent Commission on
the Los Angeles Police Department. Los Angeles.
1991.

Institute for Law and Social Research. Expanding
the Perspective of Crime Data: Performance
Implications for Policymakers. Washington, D.C.:
Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. 1977.

International City Management Association. Source
Book: Community-Oriented Policing: An Alternative
Strategy. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1991.

Jackson, F. Directory of City Policing Programs,
Volume 3. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1989.

Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American
Cities. New York: Vintage. 1961.

Jensen, F.P. Evaluating Police Effectiveness by the
Year 2001. Sacramento: California Commission on
Peace Officer Standards and Training. 1992.

Johnson, J. Police Officers A to Z. New York:
Walker. 1986.

Johnson, M.C. Effectiveness of the Addition of Foot
Patrol in Montclair, N.J. Ann Arbor, Mich.:
University Microfilms. 1980.

Kansas City Police Department. Response Time
Analysis: Volume II--Part I Crime Analysis.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
1980.

Kansas City Police Department. Directed Patrol: A
Concept in Community-Specific, Crime-Specific, and
Service-Specific Policing. Kansas City, Mo.: Kansas
City Police Department. 1974.

Kelling, George L. Police and Communities: The
Quiet Revolution. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice; and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1988.

Kelling, George L. "Acquiring a Task for Order--The
Community and Police." Crime and Delinquency
33(1)(January 1987).

Kelling, George L. Foot Patrol--Crime File Series
Study Guide. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1986.

Kelling, George L. "Conclusions." The Newark Foot
Patrol Experiment. Washington, D.C.: The Police
Foundation. 1981.

Kelling, George L. Foot Patrol. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice. 1986.

Kelling, George L., Robert Wasserman, and Hubert
Williams. Police Accountability and Community
Policing. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice; and John
F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University. 1988.

Kelling, George L., and Mark H. Moore. The Evolving
Strategy of Policing. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice; and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1988.

Kelling, George L., Anthony Pate, Duane Dieckman,
and Charles E. Brown. The Kansas City Preventive
Patrol Experiment: A Technical Report.Washington,
D.C.: Police Foundation. 1974.

Kennedy, David M. The Strategic Management of
Police Resources. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice; and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1993.

Kennedy, L.W. "Evaluation of Community-Based
Policing in Canada." Canadian Police College
Journal 15(4)(1991).

Kenney, Dennis Jay, ed. Police and Policing:
Contemporary Issues. New York: Praeger Publishers.
1989.

Manning, Peter K. "Community Policing." American
Journal of Police 3(2)(Spring 1984).

Manual for the Establishment and Operation of a
Foot Patrol Program--Books in Brief. Rockville,
Md.: National Criminal Justice Reference Service.
1985.

Maryland Department of Public Safety and
Correctional Services. Maryland's Law Enforcement
Strategy in Partnership with the People. Rockville,
Md.: National Criminal Justice Reference Service.
1992.

McDonald, P., and Robert Wasserman. High
Performance Police Management: A Source Book.
Rockville, Md.: Police Management Association; and
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice. 1988.

McElroy, Jerome E., Colleen A. Cosgrove, and Susan
Sadd. An Examination of the Community Patrol
Officer Program (CPOP) in New York City. New York:
Vera Institute of Justice. 1989.

McEwan, Thomas, and John Eck, et al. Evaluation of
Community Crime/Problem Resolution Through Police
Directed Patrol: Executive Summary. Alexandria,
Va.: Institute for Law and Justice; and Washington,
D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum. 1989.

McEwan, Thomas, Edward F. Connors III, and Marcia
I. Cohen. Evaluation of the Differential Police
Response Field Test. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. 1986.

Meese, Edwin III. Community Policing and the Police
Officer. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice; and John
F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University. 1991.

Moore, Mark H., and Darrel W. Stephens. Beyond
Command and Control: The Strategic Management of
Police Departments. Washington, D.C.: Police
Executive Research Forum. 1991.

Moore, Mark H. and Robert C. Trojanowicz. Policing
and the Fear of Crime. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice; and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1988.

Moore, Mark H., and Robert C. Trojanowicz.
Corporate Strategies for Policing. Perspectives on
Policing. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice; and John F. Kennedy School of
Government, Harvard University. 1988.

Moore, Mark H., Robert C. Trojanowicz, and George
L. Kelling. Crime and Policing. Perspectives on
Policing. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice; and John F. Kennedy School of
Government, Harvard University. 1988.

More, Harry W. Special Topics in Policing.
Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Publishing Company.
1992.

Morris, Edward K., and Curtis J. Braukmann, eds.
Behavioral Approaches to Crime and Delinquency: A
Handbook of Application, Research, and Concepts.
New York: Plenum Press. 1987.

National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders.
Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil
Disorders. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government
Printing Office. 1992.

National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice
Standards and Goals. Community Crime Prevention.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
1973.

National Institute of Justice. Community Policing
in Seattle: A Model Partnership Between Citizens
and Police. Research-in-Brief. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs. 1992.

Needle, Jerome A., and Raymond T. Galvin.
"Community Policing: An Inevitable Progression."
Community Policing: Issues and Options 1(9)(October
1993).

Newport News Police Department Patrol Division.
COPP (Community Oriented Police Patrol). Rockville,
Md.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice. 1984.

Oettmeier, Timothy N., and William H. Bieck.
Integrating Investigative Operations Through
Neighborhood-Oriented Policing: Executive Session
#2. Houston: Houston Police Department. 1987.

Oettmeier, Timothy N., and William H. Bieck.
Developing a Policing Style for Neighborhood
Policing: Executive Session #1. Houston: Houston
Police Department. 1987.

Pate, Antony, and Sampson Annan. Baltimore
Community Policing Experiment Part 1--Technical
Report; and Part 2--Appendixes. Rockville, Md.:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice. 1989.

Pate, Antony, and Sampson Annan. Baltimore
Community Policing Experiment: Summary Report.
Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office
of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
1989.

Pate, Antony, Mary Ann Wycoff, Wesley Skogan, and
Lawrence W. Sherman. Reducing Fear of Crime in
Houston and Newark. New York: AMS Press Inc. 1987.

Pate, Antony, Mary Ann Wycoff, Wesley Skogan, and
Lawrence W. Sherman. Reducing Fear of Crime in
Houston and Newark: A Summary Report. Washington,
D.C.: Police Foundation. 1986.

Pate, Antony and Wesley Skogan. Coordinated
Community Policing--The Newark Experience Technical
Report. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice. 1985.

Pate, Antony, P.J. Lavrakas, Mary Ann Wycoff,
Wesley Skogan, and Lawrence Sherman. Neighborhood
Police Newsletters--Experiments in Newark and
Houston Technical Report. Rockville, Md.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
National Institute of Justice. 1985.

Pate, Antony, Robert Bowers, and Ron Parks. Three
Approaches to Criminal Apprehension in Kansas City:
An Evaluation Report. Washington, D.C.: Police
Foundation. 1976.

Payne, Dennis M., and Robert C. Trojanowicz.
Performance Profiles of Foot Versus Motor Officers.
East Lansing, Mich.: National Neighborhood Foot
Patrol Center, Michigan State University, School of
Criminal Justice. 1985.

Peak, Ken, Robert Bradshaw, and Ronald Glensor.
"Improving Citizen Perceptions of the Police: `Back
to the Basics' With a Community Policing Strategy."
Journal of Criminal Justice 20(1)(1992).

Philadelphia Police Study Task Force. Philadelphia
and Its Police: Toward a New Partnership.
Philadelphia: Philadelphia Police Study Task Force.
1987.

Police Foundation. Foot Patrol--Crime Files Series.
Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office
of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
1984.

President's Commission on Law Enforcement and
Administration of Justice. Task Force Report: The
Police. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office. 1967.

President's Commission on Law Enforcement and
Administration of Justice. The Challenge of Crime
in a Free Society. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. 1967.

Punch, Maurice, ed. Control in the Public
Organization. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 1983.

Reiner, R. "Watershed in Policing." Political
Quarterly (April-June 1985).

Reiss, Albert J., Jr. Private Employment of Public
Force. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1988.

Reiss, Albert J., Jr. Police a City's Central
District: The Oakland Story. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. 1985.

Reiss, Albert J., Jr. The Police and the Public.
New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press. 1971.

Richardson, J. Exploratory Study of Present and
Potential Relations Between Community Policing and
Neighborhood Justice Centers. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice. 1991.

Riechers, L.M., and R.R. Roiberg. "Community
Policing: A Critical Review of Underlying
Assumptions." Journal of Police Science and
Administration 17(2)(June 1990).

Ripley, J.P. "Crime Prevention Through Community
Relations." Innovations in South Carolina Law
Enforcement. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1982.

Ruane, J.M., and K.A. Cerulo. "Police and Community
Mental Health Centers (CMHCs): The Transition From
Penal to Therapeutic Control." Law and Police
12(2)(April 1990).

Rush, Thomas Vale. A Study of Police-Citizen
Transactions. Dissertation. Philadelphia: Temple
University. 1974.

Scanlon, Robert A., ed. Law Enforcement Bible.
South Hackensack, N.J.: Stoeger Publishing Company.
1982.

Schnelle, John F., Robert E. Kirchner, Jr., Joe D.
Casey, Paul H. Uselton, Jr., and M. Patrick McNees.
"Patrol Evaluation Research: A Multiple Baseline
Analysis of Saturation Police Patrolling During Day
and Night Hours." Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis 10(1977).

Schwab, S. Restructuring Small Police Agencies: A
Transition Toward Customer Service. Sacramento:
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards
and Training (POST). 1992.

Scott, Eric J. "The Impact of Victimization on
Fear." Crime and Delinquency 31(1981).

Sechrest, et al. Rehabilitation of Criminal
Offenders 2(1979).

Sherman, Lawrence W. Neighborhood Safety--Crime
File Series Study Guide. Rockville, Md.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
National Institute of Justice. 1986.

Sherman, Lawrence W., Patrick R. Gartin, and
Michael E. Buerger. "Hot Spots of Predatory Crime:
Routing Activities and the Criminology of Place."
Criminology 27(1)(1989).

Skogan, Wesley G. and George E. Attunes.
"Information, Apprehension, and Deterrence:
Exploring the Limits of Police Productivity."
Journal of Criminal Justice 7(1979).

Skolnick, Jerome H., and David H. Bayley. New Blue
Line: Police Innovation in Six American Cities. New
York: Free Press. 1986.

Smith, Douglas A. "Neighborhood Context of Police
Behavior." In Communities and Crime, eds. Albert J.
Reiss, Jr., and Michael Tonry. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press. 1986. (See NCJ 103315.)

Sparrow, Malcolm K. Information Systems and the
Development of Policing. Perspectives on Policing.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice; and John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University. 1993.

Sparrow, Malcolm K. Implementing Community
Policing. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice; and John
F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University. 1988.

Sparrow, Malcolm K., Mark H. Moore, and David M.
Kennedy. Beyond 911: A New Era for Policing. New
York: Basic Books, Inc. 1990.

Staff report to the National Commission on the
Causes and Prevention of Violence. Law and Order
Reconsidered. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government
Printing Office. 1969.

Stratta, E. "Lack of Consultation." Policing
6(3)(Autumn 1990).

Taylor, M. "Constraints to Community-Oriented
Policing." Police Journal 15(2)(April 1992).

Toch, Hans, and J. Douglas Grant. Police As Problem
Solvers. New York: Plenum Publishing Corporations.
1991.

Trojanowicz, Robert C. Preventing Civil
Disturbances: A Community Policing Approach.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice. 1989.

Trojanowicz, Robert C. An Evaluation of a
Neighborhood Foot Patrol Program in Flint,
Michigan. East Lansing, Mich.: Michigan State
University. 1982.

Trojanowicz, Robert C. "An Evaluation of a
Neighborhood Foot Patrol Program." Journal of
Police Science Administration 11(4)(December 1983).

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Bonnie Bucqueroux.
Toward Development of Meaningful and Effective
Performance Evaluations. East Lansing, Mich.:
National Center for Community Policing, Michigan
State University School of Criminal Justice. 1992.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Bonnie Bucqueroux.
Community Policing and the Challenge of Diversity.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice. 1991.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Bonnie Bucqueroux.
Community Policing. Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson
Publishing Company. 1990.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Mark H. Moore The
Meaning of Community in Community Policing. East
Lansing, Mich.: Michigan State University, National
Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, School of Criminal
Justice. 1988.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and David Carter.
Philosophy and Role of Community Policing.
Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office
of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
1988.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., B. Benson, and Susan
Trojanowicz. Community Policing: University Input
Into Campus Police Policy-Making. East Lansing,
Mich.: National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center,
Michigan State University, School of Criminal
Justice. 1988.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., Richard Gleason, Bonnie
Pollard, and David Sinclair. Community Policing:
Community Input Into Police Policy-Making. East
Lansing, Mich.: National Neighborhood Foot Patrol
Center, Michigan State University, School of
Criminal Justice. 1987.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Bonnie Pollard.
Community Policing: The Line Officer's Perspective.
East Lansing, Mich.: National Neighborhood Foot
Patrol Center, Michigan State University, School of
Criminal Justice. 1986.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., Marilyn Steele, and Susan
Trojanowicz. Community Policing: A Taxpayer's
Perspective. East Lansing, Mich.: National
Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, Michigan State
University, School of Criminal Justice. 1986.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., Bonnie Pollard, Francine
Colgan, and Hazel A. Harden. Community Policing
Programs--A Twenty-Year View. East Lansing, Mich.:
National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, Michigan
State University, School of Criminal Justice. 1986.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Jerome Belknap.
Community Policing: Training Issues. East Lansing,
Mich.: National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center,
Michigan State University, School of Criminal
Justice. 1986.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Dennis W. Banas.
Perceptions of Safety: A Comparison of Foot Patrol
Versus Motor Patrol Officers. East Lansing, Mich.:
National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, Michigan
State University, School of Criminal Justice. 1985.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Dennis W. Banas. Job
Satisfaction: A Comparison of Foot Patrol Versus
Motor Patrol Officers. East Lansing, Mich.:
National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, Michigan
State University, School of Criminal Justice. 1985.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Dennis W. Banas. Impact
of Foot Patrol on Black and White Perceptions of
Policing. East Lansing, Mich.: National
Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, Michigan State
University, School of Criminal Justice. 1985.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and Hazel A. Harden. Status
of Contemporary Community Policing Programs. East
Lansing, Mich.: National Neighborhood Foot Patrol
Center, Michigan State University, School of
Criminal Justice. 1985.

Trojanowicz, Robert C., and P.R. Smyth. Manual for
the Establishment and Operation of a Foot Patrol
Program. East Lansing, Mich.: National Neighborhood
Foot Patrol Center, Michigan State University,
School of Criminal Justice. 1984.

Tucson Police Department. Tucson Police Department
Enhanced Crime Prevention Program, Final Report.
Tucson, Ariz.: Tucson Police Department. 1991.

Turner, B. "Community Policing: Beyond Neighborhood
Watch." Research Update 2(4)(Fall 1991).

Uchida, Craig, Brian Forst, and Sampson Annan.
Modern Policing and the Control of Illegal Drugs:
Testing New Strategies in Two American Cities.
Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation. 1992.

United States Conference of Mayors. Directory of
City Policing Programs, Volume IV. Rockville, Md.:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice. 1990.

University of South Carolina College of Criminal
Justice. Innovations in South Carolina Law
Enforcement, 1985. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1985.

Vaughn, J.R. "Community-Oriented Policing . . . You
Can Make It Happen." Law and Order 39(6)(June
1991).

Wadman, Robert C., and Robert K. Olson. Community
Wellness: A New Theory of Policing. Washington,
D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum. 1990.

Ward, J. "Community Policing on the Home Front." CJ
the Americas 5(2)(April-May 1992).

Wasserman, Robert, and Mark H. Moore. Values in
Policing. Perspectives on Policing. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice; and John
F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University. 1988.

Webber, Alan M. "Crime and Management: An Interview
With New York City Police Commissioner Lee P.
Brown." Harvard Business Review 69(May-June 1991).

Weisburd, David, Jerome McElroy, and Patricia
Hardyman. "Challenges to Supervision in Community
Policing: Observations on a Pilot Project."
American Journal of Police 7(2)(1988).

Whitaker, Gordon P., ed. Understanding Police
Agency Performance. Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office. 1984.

Wiatrowski, M., and J. Vardalis. "Experiment in
Community Policing in Delray Beach, Florida."
Police Journal 63(2)(April-June 1990).

Williams, Hubert, and Patrick V. Murphy. The
Evolving Strategy of Police: A Minority View.
Perspectives on Policing. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
National Institute of Justice; and John F. Kennedy
School of Government, Harvard University. 1990.

Wilson, James Q., and George L. Kelling. "Making
Neighborhoods Safe." The Atlantic Monthly
263(2)(February 1989).

Wilson, James Q. and George L. Kelling. "Broken
Windows." The Atlantic Monthly (March 1982).

Witte, Jeffrey E., Lawrence F. Travis III, and
Robert H. Langworthy. "Participatory Management in
Law Enforcement: Police Officer, Supervisor, and
Administrator Perceptions." American Journal of
Police 9(4)(1990).

Wycoff, Mary Ann, and Timothy N. Oettmeier.
Planning and Implementation Issues for
Community-Oriented Policing: The Houston
Experience. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. Forthcoming.

Wycoff, Mary Ann, and Wesley G. Skogan. Community
Policing: Quality From the Inside, Out. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice.
Forthcoming.

Wycoff, Mary Ann, and Wesley G. Skogan. Citizen
Contact Patrol--The Houston Field Test. Washington,
D.C.: Police Foundation; and Rockville, Md.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
National Institute of Justice. 1985.

Wycoff, Mary Ann, Wesley G. Skogan, Anthony M.
Pate, and Lawrence W. Sherman. Police Community
Stations: The Houston Field Test, Executive
Summary. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1985.

Wycoff, Mary Ann, Wesley G. Skogan, Anthony M.
Pate, and Lawrence W. Sherman. Police as Community
Organizers--The Houston Field Test, Executive
Summary. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1985.

Wycoff, Mary Ann, and Wesley G. Skogan. Police as
Community Organizers--The Houston Field Test,
Technical Report. Washington, D.C.: Police
Foundation; and Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National
Institute of Justice. 1985. 

------------------------------

Appendix B: Sources for Further Information

Bureau of Justice Assistance
633 Indiana Ave. NW.
Washington, DC 20531
202-514-6278

Bureau of Justice Assistance Clearinghouse
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20850
800-688-4252 

Community Policing Consortium
1726 M St. NW., Suite 801
Washington, DC 20036
202-833-3305

-------------------------------

For More Information

BJA has a range of publications related to
community policing, including:

o Problem-Oriented Drug Enforcement: A
Community-Based Approach for Effective Policing,
NCJ 143710.

o The Systems Approach to Crime and Drug
Prevention: A Path to Community Policing, NCJ
143712.

o Understanding Community Policing: A Framework for
Action, NCJ 148457.

o Neighborhood-Oriented Policing in Rural
Communities: A Planning Guide, NCJ 143709.

o National Service and Public Safety: Partnerships
for Safer Communities, NCJ 146842.

o Working as Partners With Community Groups, NCJ
148458.

o An Introduction to DARE: Drug Abuse Resistance
Education, NCJ 129862.

o An Introduction to the National DARE Parent
Program, NCJ 142422.

o Partnerships To Prevent Youth Violence, NCJ
148459.

Call the BJA Clearinghouse at 800-688-4252 to order
these publications.