2nd Edition
 

Problem-Solving 

Tips 

A Guide to Reducing 

Crime and Disorder 

Through Problem-Solving 

Partnerships 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Problem-Solving Tips: 

A Guide to Reducing Crime and Disorder 

Through Problem-Solving Partnerships 

2nd Edition 

The following guide will assist readers in their efforts to reduce 

crime and disorder through problem-solving partnerships. It may 

be reproduced and distributed. 

This guide was compiled by former COPS Office staff members 

Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott Philips, Tammy Rinehart, 

and Meg Townsend. It draws heavily on previous work by Herman 

Goldstein, Rana Sampson, Darrel Stephens, John Eck, William 

Spelman, the Police Executive Research Forum, and the Home Office. 

Debra Cohen, Ph.D. oversaw the second edition printing for the 

COPS Office. 

The COPS Office wishes to thank Joel B. Plant, Milwaukee (WI) 

Police Department and the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing for 

providing the Sample Problem-Solving Initiatives. 

The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of 

June 2011. Given that URLs and websites are in constant flux, 

neither the authors nor the COPS Office can vouch for their 

current validity. 

©2010 The U.S. Department of Justice reserves a royalty-free, 

nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or 

otherwise use, and authorize others to use, this publication for 

Federal Government purposes. This publication may be freely 

distributed and used for noncommercial and educational purposes. 

www.cops.usdoj.gov 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-08-9 

Originally published April 1998 

Updated July 2011 

| i | 

 

About the COPS Office 

About the COPS Office 

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (the COPS Office) is the component of 

the U.S. Department of Justice responsible for advancing the practice of community policing by the 

nation’s state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies through information and grant resources. 

The community policing philosophy promotes organizational strategies that support the systematic 

use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address the immediate conditions 

that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime. In its simplest 

form, community policing is about building relationships and solving problems. 

The COPS Office awards grants to state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies to hire and train 

community policing professionals, acquire and deploy cutting-edge crime-fighting technologies, 

and develop and test innovative policing strategies. The COPS Office funding also provides training 

and technical assistance to community members and local government leaders and all levels of law 

enforcement. 

Since 1994, the COPS Office has invested more than $16 billion to add community policing officers 

to the nation’s streets, enhance crime fighting technology, support crime prevention initiatives, and 

provide training and technical assistance to help advance community policing. More than 500,000 

law enforcement personnel, community members, and government leaders have been trained 

through COPS Office-funded training organizations. 

The COPS Office has produced more than 1,000 information products—and distributed more 

than 2 million publications—including Problem Oriented Policing Guides, Grant Owners 

Manuals, fact sheets, best practices, and curricula. And in 2010, the COPS Office participated in 

45 law enforcement and public-safety conferences in 25 states in order to maximize the exposure 

and distribution of these knowledge products. More than 500 of those products, along with other 

products covering a wide area of community policing topics—from school and campus safety to 

gang violence—are currently available, at no cost, through its online Resource Information Center 

at www.cops.usdoj.gov. More than 2 million copies have been downloaded in FY2010 alone. The 

easy to navigate and up to date website is also the grant application portal, providing access to 

online application forms. 

| iii | 

 

Contents 

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
 

The Problem-Solving Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
 

Repeat Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
 

Community Involvement in Problem-Solving Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
 

The SARA Model: A Useful Tool. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
 

Identifying and Selecting a Problem (Scanning) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
 

Methods of Identifying Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
 

Selecting a Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
 

Redefining the Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
 

Identifying Stakeholders for the Selected Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
 

Sample Problem (Robbery, Fear) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
 

Analyzing the Selected Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
 

Why Analysis Is Important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
 

Asking the Right Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
 

Crime Triangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
 

Sample Questions for Analyzing Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
 

Resources That Can Help You Analyze Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
 

Responding to a Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
 

Bucking Tradition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
 

Assessing the Impact on the Selected Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
 

Traditional Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
 

A Nontraditional Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
 

Sample Measures That Demonstrate Impact on a Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
 

Sample Measures That Do Not Demonstrate Impact 


on a Crime or Disorder Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
 

Adjust Responses Based on Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
 

Sample Problem-Solving Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
 

Plano, Texas, Traffic Congestion Near Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
 

Chula Vista, California, Problems at Hotels 


and Motels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
 

Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, Burglaries 


from Storage Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
 

Reference List. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
 

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
 

Additional Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
 

| v | 

Introduction 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction 

Traditionally, police have handled each incident or call for service 

as a separate and unique occurrence. For example, most commercial 

burglaries have been addressed individually: an officer has taken a 

report from the victim and attempted to identify the offender and 

recover stolen property. The responding officer might have also 

counseled the victim in general crime-prevention techniques and 

attempted to link a series of commercial burglaries to one offender. 

But typically the incidents have not been analyzed as a group to 

learn why and how the crimes have occurred repeatedly, and how 

they could have been prevented. 

The COPS Office seeks to build on the problem-solving approaches 

used by many communities. These approaches involve analyzing 

groups of related incidents that comprise a specific crime problem 

so that comprehensive, tailored strategies to prevent future crime 

can be developed. These problem-solving strategies rely less on 

arresting offenders and more on developing long-term ways to 

deflect offenders, protect likely victims, and make crime locations 

less conducive to problem behaviors. 

Intended as a reference for those who are interested in implementing 

a problem-solving approach, Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to 

Reducing Crime and Disorder Through Problem-Solving Partnerships 

contains information and insights into the process. It will take you 

step by step through solving problems, offer examples of problem 

solving from the field, and provide additional resources. 

| 1 | 

The Problem-Solving Approach 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Problem-Solving Approach 

The emphasis on problem solving as an effective policing strategy 

stems from pioneering work on problem-oriented policing done 

by Herman Goldstein in the late 1970s and from experiments 

in the early 1980s in Madison, Wisconsin; Baltimore County, 

Maryland; and Newport News, Virginia. In Newport News, police 

practitioners, working in concert with researchers and community 

members, demonstrated that crime and disorder problems could be 

significantly reduced by implementing tailored responses directly 

linked to the findings of comprehensive problem analyses. Police 

and community members in Newport News were able to reduce 

burglaries in a targeted apartment complex by 34 percent, reduce 

prostitution-related robberies in the target district by 39 percent, 

and reduce thefts from vehicles in two downtown areas by more 

than 50 percent.1 From this effort and other early work on problemoriented policing, community policing advocates recognized the 

effectiveness of the problem-solving approach and incorporated it 

into the community policing philosophy. 

Since the mid-1980s, communities of all sizes and police agencies 

of all types—including sheriffs’ departments, state police, highway 

patrols, and transit police—have successfully used the problemsolving approach to address an endless variety of problems. From 

these efforts, it has become clear that problem solving is critical to 

the success of community policing efforts. Initiatives that lack an 

analytical component often improve police-community relations but 

frequently have little impact on specific crime and disorder problems. 

Repeat Problems 

Taking a problem-solving approach to addressing a specific crime 

problem calls for a broad inquiry into the nature of the particular 

problem. As part of that inquiry, many police-community problemsolving teams have found it useful to analyze the patterns of repeat 

calls relating to specific victims, locations, and offenders. Research 

has shown that a relatively small number of locations and offenders 

are involved in a relatively large amount of crime. Similarly, a 

small number of victims accounts for a relatively large amount of 

Since the mid-1980s, 

communities and 

police agencies 

of all types have 

successfully used 

the problem-solving 

approach to address 

an endless variety 

of problems. 

| 3 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

Research shows that 

a small number of 

victims accounts for a 

relatively large amount 

of victimization. 

victimization. For example, researchers have found that more than 

60 percent of calls for service in some areas come from only 10 

percent of the locations.2 According to one study, approximately 

50 percent of crime victims in England had experienced repeat 

victimization, and 4 percent of victims, the “chronically victimized,” 

accounted for 44 percent of all reported crime.3 A large city in the 

southwest United States also found that repeat victims—in this 

case commercial establishments—accounted for a disproportionate 

number of burglaries in the jurisdiction. In this city, 8 percent of 

businesses were burglarized two or more times during the course 

of 1 year and accounted for at least 22 percent of all business 

burglaries. In Gainesville, Florida, this pattern was repeated. Going 

back 5 years, police found that 45 of the 47 convenience stores in 

the city had been robbed at least once between 1981 and 1986, but 

that half had been robbed five or more times, and several had been 

robbed at least 10 times.4 

Community Involvement in Problem-Solving 

Efforts 

Engaging the community without problem solving provides 

no meaningful service to the public. Problem solving without 

[partnerships] risks overlooking the most pressing community 

concerns. Thus, the partnership between police departments and the 

communities they service is essential for implementing a successful 

program in community policing.5 

Community leaders, researchers, and police officials recognize the 

need for a strong, well-articulated role for community members 

in community policing efforts. They know that the police alone 

cannot have a substantial impact on crime and advocate for the 

community as a full partner in preventing and responding to 

problems. Community involvement is an integral part of any 

long-term, problem-solving strategy. At the most basic level, the 

community provides police with invaluable information on both 

the problems of concern to them and the nature of those problems. 

Community involvement also helps ensure that police concentrate 

on the appropriate issues in a manner that will create support. 

| 4 | 
The Problem-Solving Approach 

In addition, collaborative work involving police and community 

members provides the community with insight into the police 

perspective on specific crime and disorder problems. 

Traditionally, community involvement in crime-prevention and 

reduction efforts has been limited to serving as the “eyes and ears” 

for police or helping implement responses. The collaborative 

problem-solving approach allows for much greater and more 

substantive roles for community members. For example, students in 

a high school where there is a drug-use problem on school grounds 

might survey their peers to determine the extent of the problem 

and also help design responses to the problem. 

The SARA Model: A Useful Tool 

As part of the problem-oriented policing project in Newport News, 

officers worked with researchers to develop a problem-solving 

model that could be used to address any crime or disorder problem. 

The result was the SARA model, which has four stages: Scanning, 

Analysis, Response, and Assessment. These stages are discussed in 

greater detail below. Since the mid-1980s, many officers have used 

the SARA model to guide their problem-solving efforts. Although 

the SARA model is not the only way to approach problem solving, 

it can serve as a helpful tool. 

| 5 | 

Identifying and Selecting a Problem (Scanning) 

 

 

Identifying and Selecting a 

Problem (Scanning) 

A problem can be defined as follows: 

•	 A cluster of similar, related, or recurring incidents rather than a 

single incident; a substantive community concern; [or] a unit of 

police business.6 

•	 A type of behavior (loitering, theft of autos); a place (Pinecrest 

Shopping Mall); a person or persons (a repeat perpetrator of 

domestic violence, repeat burglary victims); or a special event or 

time (an annual parade, payday robberies). A problem also may 

be a combination of any of the above.7 

•	 Informally, a problem can be thought of as two or more 

incidents similar in one or more ways that is of concern to the 

police and a problem for the community. 

Methods of Identifying Problems 

Problems may come to your attention in a variety of ways. 

These include the following: 

•	 Routinely analyzing calls for service, crime incident data, and 

other agency records for patterns and trends involving repeat 

locations, victims, and offenders (Police agencies may need 

to look at calls going back 6 months to several years to get an 

accurate picture of repeat incidents for some types of problems.) 

•	 Mapping specific crimes according to time of day, proximity to 

certain locations, and other similar factors 

•	 Consulting officers, police supervisors, detectives, midlevel 

managers, and command staff 

•	 Reviewing police reports 

•	 Surveying community residents, business owners, elected 

officials, or students 

•	 Reviewing citizen complaints and letters 

•	 Participating in community meetings 

A problem can be 

thought of as two or 

more incidents similar 

in one or more ways 

that is of concern 

to the police and 

a problem for the 

community. 

| 7 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

It is important that 

both citizens and 

police help prioritize 

problems once they 

have been identified. 

•	 Reviewing information from neighborhood associations and 

nonprofit organizations (local and national) 

•	 Consulting social service and governmental agencies 

•	 Following media coverage and editorials 

Selecting a Problem 

It is important that both community members and police have 

input into prioritizing problems once they have been identified. 

Sometimes the problems of concern to community members are 

different from what the police expect. Consulting community 

members about their priorities not only ensures that community 

concerns are addressed but enhances the problem-solving effort 

at every step of the process. Citizen input can be solicited in a 

number of ways, including surveys, community meetings, and focus 

groups (e.g., a group of students or a cross-section of neighborhood 

residents). Police input into the selection of a problem is also very 

important because the police have expertise and information about 

problems that citizens do not typically possess. 

In selecting a problem on which to focus from among the many 

problems your community faces, you may want to consider the 

following factors:8 

•	 The impact of the problem on the community including the 

police—its size and costs 

•	 The presence of life-threatening conditions 

•	 Community interest and degree of support likely to exist for 

both the inquiry and subsequent recommendations 

•	 The potential threat to constitutional rights—as may occur 

when citizens take steps to limit the use of the public way, limit 

access to facilities, or curtail freedom of speech and assembly 

•	 The degree to which the problem adversely affects relationships 

between the police and the community 

| 8 | 
Identifying and Selecting a Problem (Scanning) 

 

•	 The interest of rank-and-file officers in the problem and the 

degree of support for addressing it 

•	 The concreteness of the problem, given the frustration 

associated with exploring vague, amorphous complaints 

•	 The potential that exploration is likely to lead to some progress 

in dealing with the problem 

Redefining the Problem 

Once a problem has been selected, it may need to be redefined as 

more information about the problem comes to light. This is to 

be expected. As you work through the problem-solving process 

you may discover that the problem you started with is too broad 

in scope. Alternatively, you may determine that it is actually a 

symptom of another problem that should be your focus. It is even 

possible that what you first perceived as a problem is not really a 

problem at all once you’ve taken a closer look. It is common for the 

problem to need to be redefined as you move through the problemsolving process, and this is one of the reasons why it is best to start 

implementing responses after the problem has been fully analyzed. 

Identifying Stakeholders for the Selected Problem 

Stakeholders are private and public organizations, types or 

groups of people (e.g., senior citizens, homeowners, merchants) 

that will benefit if the problem is addressed or may experience 

negative consequences (e.g., injuries, lack of services, loss of 

revenue, increased enforcement) if the problem is not addressed. 

Stakeholders may include the following: 

•	 Local social service and government agencies with jurisdiction 

over the problem or an interest in an aspect of the problem 

•	 Victims of the problem and/or associations representing victims 

| 9 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

•	 Neighbors, coworkers, friends and relatives of victims, or 

neighborhood residents affected by the problem 

•	 Agencies or people that have some control over offenders 

(parents, relatives, friends, school officials, probation and parole, 

building management) 

•	 Commercial establishments adversely affected by the crime or 

disorder problem 

•	 National organizations or trade associations with an interest in 

the problem (Students Against Drunk Driving for an underage 

drinking problem) 

You should identify as many stakeholders as possible for the 

problem you select. Each stakeholder may bring different 

knowledge and different leverage to the effort for affecting the 

problem. The more stakeholders that are identified, the more 

resources you will have to address the problem. 

However, some communities have found that the problemsolving effort progresses most efficiently if only two or three 

stakeholders—a core group—work on the problem throughout the 

project. Other, more peripheral, stakeholders often have something 

to contribute at specific stages of the project, but not throughout 

the entire effort. 

The following is a brief description of a sample problem and a list of 

potential stakeholders and partners. 

| 10 | 
Identifying and Selecting a Problem (Scanning) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sample Problem (Robbery, Fear) 

A midsized eastern city of 35,000, with a relatively low crime rate, 

had experienced a number of robberies of food delivery people. 

On average, one delivery person had been robbed per month. A 

number of pizza and other fast-food stores refused to deliver to 

a mostly low-income and predominantly black neighborhood 

where many of the robberies were perceived to be taking place. 

Restaurant representatives said that stores decided not to deliver 

food to the area because an increasing number of delivery people 

had been attacked on the job, and they feared making deliveries in 

high-crime areas. A resident of the neighborhood where deliveries 

were not being made complained about the lack of delivery service 

and started a petition to change the policy. The city council 

began considering a proposal to require delivery to all residents, 

regardless of their location, and the story was covered in local and 

regional newspapers. 

Stakeholders 

(In addition to the police) 

•	 Potential home-delivery customers in “no-delivery” 

neighborhood 

•	 Signers of the petition 

•	 Fast food delivery people 

•	 Fast food restaurant management (local franchises) 

•	 National pizza delivery chains 

•	 National Association of Pizza Operators 

•	 Local NAACP chapter 

•	 Local legislators 

•	 Local media 

| 11 | 

Analyzing the Selected Problem 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Analyzing the Selected Problem 

Why Analysis Is Important 

Comprehensively analyzing a problem is critical to the success of a 

problem-solving effort. Effective, tailor-made responses cannot be 

developed unless you know what is causing the problem. 

Yet, many people essentially skip the analysis phase of the SARA 

model. The reasons for this are varied, but include the following: 

the nature of the problem sometimes falsely appears obvious at first 

glance; there may be tremendous internal and external pressure to 

solve the problem immediately; the pressure of responding to calls 

does not seem to allow time for detailed inquiries into the nature 

of the problem; investigating or researching the problem does 

not seem like “real” police work; and supervisors may not value 

analytical work that takes up time but does not produce arrests, 

traffic citations, or other similar traditional measures of police work. 

Also, in many communities, a strong commitment to the old way 

of viewing and handling problems prevents police and community 

members from looking at those problems in new and different ways. 

Despite these pressures and perceptions, problem solvers must 

resist the urge to skip the analysis phase, or they risk addressing a 

problem that doesn’t exist and/or implementing solutions that are 

ineffective in the long run. 

For example, computer-aided dispatch data in one southeastern 

police department indicated that there was a large auto theft 

problem at a local shopping mall. Yet, after a sergeant reviewed 

incident reports and follow-up records on cancellations, it 

became clear to him that many of the reported auto thefts were 

actually cases in which shoppers had misplaced their cars and 

then mistakenly reported them stolen. If he had not analyzed the 

problem, the first instinct of the sergeant probably would have 

been to implement an auto theft prevention effort, which would 

have had little or no impact on the misplaced car problem. After 

analyzing the problem, it was obvious that the auto theft problem 

Comprehensively 

analyzing a problem 

is critical to the 

success of a problemsolving effort. 

| 13 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Problem solvers must 

resist the urge to skip 

the analysis phase, or 

they risk addressing a 

problem that doesn’t 

exist or implementing 

ineffective solutions. 

was not as large as it had appeared, and what was needed was a 

combination of a tailored auto theft prevention effort and better 

marking and distinction of the mall parking lots. 

Asking the Right Questions 

The first step in analysis is to determine what information is needed. 

This should be a broad inquiry, uninhibited by past perspectives. 

Questions should be asked, whether or not answers can be obtained. 

The openness and persistent probing associated with such an inquiry 

is not unlike the approach that a seasoned and highly regarded 

detective would take to solve a puzzling crime: reaching out in 

all directions, digging deeply, asking the right questions. Invited 

to participate in such an exercise, groups of experienced police 

personnel will pose a wide range of appropriate questions. They also 

will acknowledge that, except for some hunches, they usually do not 

have the answers to the questions they pose.9 

Crime Triangle 

Generally, three elements are required to constitute a crime in 

the community: an offender, a victim, and a place (crime scene, 

location, environment).10 Problem solvers have found it useful in 

understanding a problem to visualize a link between these three 

elements by drawing a triangle. 

As part of the analysis phase, it is important to find out as much as 

possible about all three sides of the triangle. One way to start is by 

asking Who? What? When? Where? How? Why? and Why not? 

about each side of the triangle.11 

| 14 | 
Analyzing the Selected Problem 

 

Victims 

It is important to focus on the victim side of the triangle. As 

mentioned earlier, recent research has shown that a small number 

of victims account for a large amount of crime incidents. In 

addition, researchers in England found that victims of residential 

burglary, domestic violence, and other crimes are likely to be 

revictimized very soon after the first victimization—often within 

a month or two.12, 13 Effective interventions targeted at repeat 

victims can significantly reduce crime. 

According to one study of residential burglary in the Huddersfield 

Division of the West Yorkshire Police in England, victims were 

four times more likely than nonvictims to be victimized again, 

and most repeat burglaries occurred within 6 weeks of the first. 

Consequently, the Huddersfield Division developed a tailored, 

three-tiered response to repeat burglary victims, based on the 

number of times their homes had been burglarized. Initial reports 

showed a 20 percent reduction in residential burglary and no 

evidence of displacement.14 In fact, commercial burglaries in 

the area also were reduced, even though that problem was not 

being targeted. The police, however, did experience difficulties 

identifying repeat victims because their database systems were not 

designed for this type of inquiry. 

Offenders 

A fresh look at the offender side of the triangle is critical to a 

problem-solving effort. In the past, much emphasis has been placed 

on identifying and apprehending offenders. While this can reduce 

a specific crime problem, particularly if the apprehended offenders 

account for a large share of the problem, the reduction is often 

temporary because new offenders replace the original offenders. 

Effective 

interventions 

targeted at 

repeat victims 

can significantly 

reduce crime. 

| 15 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

The problem of replacement offenders is particularly acute in 

money-making activities such as drug sales, burglary, robbery, 

and prostitution. For this reason, police have found it helpful to 

learn more about why offenders are attracted to certain victims 

and places, what specifically they gain by offending, and what, if 

anything, could prevent or reduce their rates of offending. 

Place 

It is equally important to analyze the place side of the triangle. 

As mentioned earlier, certain locations account for a significant 

amount of all criminal activity. An analysis of these locations may 

indicate why they are so conducive to a particular crime and point 

to ways in which they can be altered to inhibit offenders and 

protect victims. For example, placing ATMs inside bank lobbies 

may reduce the amount of information an offender has about 

victims (that they actually collected money from the bank, that 

they put their money in their left-front pocket) and reduce the 

vulnerability of victims who have their backs turned to potential 

offenders while using ATMs. 

Handlers, Guardians, and Managers 

People or things can exercise control over each side of the 

triangle so that crime is less likely. Offenders can sometimes be 

controlled by handlers such as the police and probation and parole 

officers. Targets and victims can be protected by the presence of 

guardians. Places can also have guardians or managers influencing 

both offenders and victims. Successful problem solving relies 

on understanding not only how all three sides of the triangle 

interact, but also how offenders, victims, and places are, or are not, 

effectively controlled by others.15 

| 16 | 
Analyzing the Selected Problem 

 

 

Sample Questions for Analyzing Problems 

Agencies should make a list of questions about the nature of 

the problem that need to be answered before new and effective 

responses can be developed.16 The following are 15 sample 

questions about the robbery problem example described on page 11. 

Victims 

1.	 Who were the victims (age, race, gender)? For whom were they 

working? What was the nature of the attacks? 

2.	 What time of day were the victims attacked? 

3.	 Have any food delivery people been attacked more than once? 

Have the food delivery people from certain restaurants been 

attacked more often than others? 

4.	 How fearful are the delivery people? What areas do they fear? 

Do they have any suggestions on ways to make their job safer? 

Are they issued any security devices or provided with safety 

training? 

5.	 What have other jurisdictions facing similar problems done to 

increase the safety of food delivery people? What policies have 

been the most effective and why? 

Place (Crime Scene, Location, Environment) 

6.	 Where are the robberies taking place—at the delivery site, en 

route to the delivery site, or near the fast food establishment? 

How closely do the places of attack conform to the areas where 

delivery people will not go? 

| 17 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

7.	 Of the robberies that take place away from the fast food 

establishment, what is the distribution of places in which the 

robberies have occurred (apartment buildings, townhouses, 

detached houses, public or assisted housing, motels, parking 

lots, office buildings)? 

8.	 Are the delivery people robbed near their vehicle or away from 

it? What type of vehicle do the delivery people drive? Is it 

identified as a fast food delivery vehicle? 

9.	 Where is the food store located in relation to the “nondelivery” 

neighborhood? What routes do delivery people take to deliver 

the food? 

10. Are there any environmental similarities in the specific 

locations of the robberies (lighting, shrubbery, isolated or 

blind areas)? 

Offenders 

11. What is the method of attack? Are any patterns evident? What 

weapons have been used and in how many attacks? 

12. How do the offenders select their victims? What makes some 

victims more attractive than others? What makes nonvictims 

less attractive? 

13. Are the offenders placing orders to lure delivery people to them 

or randomly meeting up with their victims? If the offenders 

are placing orders to rob delivery people, are the orders being 

placed in the name of real customers or under false names? 

14. How much money did offenders steal during a typical incident? 

Was anything else stolen? 

15. Do the offenders live in the neighborhood(s) where the 

robberies are occurring? If so, are they known to residents who 

might have some influence over them? 

| 18 | 
Analyzing the Selected Problem 

Resources That Can Help You Analyze Problems 

A number of tools can assist you in capturing data and other 

information about crime and disorder problems. 

•	 Crime analysts. Crime analysts can provide a great deal 

of assistance in collecting and analyzing data and other 

information about specific crime and disorder problems. 

•	 Records management system. Such systems can help police 

collect, retrieve, and analyze information about problems. In 

particular, the system should be able to quickly and easily help 

users identify repeat calls for service relating to specific victims, 

locations, and offenders. 

•	 Mapping/geographic information systems.17 These systems 

can illuminate patterns, help identify problem areas, and show 

potential links between crime hot spots and other types of 

establishments (ATMs, liquor stores). 

•	 Technical assistance. Criminal justice practitioners who 

specialize in using problem solving to address specific 

crime problems, such as auto theft, robbery, and streetlevel drug dealing, can provide valuable assistance to police 

and community members. In addition, noncriminal justice 

personnel with backgrounds in a variety of areas can also aid 

in problem-solving efforts. For example, a mental health expert 

may be able to assist in assessing a community’s current response 

to people with mental illness and help improve that response. 

•	 Resident/business surveys. These surveys can help police and 

community-based entities identify and analyze problems, gauge 

fear levels, identify preferred responses, and determine the real 

and perceived effectiveness of problem-solving efforts. These 

surveys also can help determine general and repeat victimization 

rates, particularly for under-reported, low-level crimes. 

| 19 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

Systematic 

and structured 

interviews with 

victims and 

offenders can 

provide important 

insights into the 

dynamics of a 

particular crime 

problem. 

•	 Crime environment surveys. These instruments can help 

police and community-based entities systematically assess 

the physical environment of problem locations and the ways 

in which the specific characteristics of the locations lend 

themselves to crime and disorder. 

•	 Interviews with victims and offenders. Systematic and 

structured interviews with victims and offenders can provide 

important insights into the dynamics of a particular crime 

problem. For example, offender interviews conducted with 

street robbers in one locality provided police with important 

information regarding the nature of victim selection and 

other aspects of the crime that could be used to prevent future 

victimizations. 

•	 Training. Problem-solving training, with an emphasis on 

analysis, can help police and community members build and 

enhance problem-solving skills. 

•	 Laptop computers/mobile data computers. When housed 

in patrol cars, the latest generation of laptop computers can 

provide officers with direct access to useful and timely crime 

data and the ability to analyze crime problems and produce 

maps while on patrol. 

•	 Internet. Using online legal and business research services, 

police personnel and community members can quickly learn 

who owns property that has become a haven for drug sales, 

identify pending legislation and current laws affecting a 

particular crime problem, and review news coverage from 

communities facing similar problems. Similarly, police 

personnel and community members can use the Internet to 

exchange information with others who have addressed similar 

problems and to gain access to networks specifically devoted to 

community policing and problem solving. 

| 20 | 
Responding to a Problem 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Responding to a Problem 

After a problem has been clearly defined and analyzed, one 

confronts the ultimate challenge in problem-oriented policing: the 

search for the most effective way of dealing with it.18 

The third stage of the SARA model focuses on developing and 

implementing effective responses to the problem. Before entering 

this stage, an agency must be sure it has thoroughly analyzed the 

problem. The temptation to implement a response and “start doing 

something” before analysis is complete is very strong. But quick 

fixes are rarely effective in the long term. Problems will likely persist 

if solutions are not tailored to the specific causes of the problem.19 

To develop tailored responses to crime problems, problem solvers 

should review their findings about the three sides of the crime 

triangle—victims, offenders, and place—and develop creative 

solutions that will address at least two sides of the triangle.20 

They should approach the development of solutions without any 

preconceived notions about what should be done. Often, the 

results of the analysis phase point police and citizens in unexpected 

directions; for example, suppose the policing agency that faced the 

fast food robbery problem described earlier found the following: 

•	 Fourteen delivery people were robbed during the past year. 

•	 Nine of the robberies occurred between the hours of 10 PM and 

2 AM on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights. 

•	 Four of the fast food delivery stores accounted for 10 of the 

robberies; staff working at two of these four stores experienced 

seven of the robberies. 

•	 Staff at the two stores that were victimized the most deliver until 

2 AM, while the other two stores stop delivering at 12 AM. 

•	 In seven of the robberies, police were unable to locate the 

ordering customer, indicating that orders were placed under 

false names or false addresses. 

| 21 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

•	 Large outdoor parties, mostly attended by youth in their late 

teens, are held each weekend night in several common areas 

near residential units. The party areas are in the vicinity of the 

robberies. Alcohol is served at the parties, and there is some 

concern among residents about noise and underage drinking at 

the parties. 

•	 Fast food delivery staff recall that a number of the robberies 

were committed by teenagers who appeared to have been 

drinking. 

•	 Several delivery staff also recall seeing or passing a group of 

teenage partiers on foot before they were robbed. 

•	 In 11 of the robberies, the offenders stole less than $40. In the 

other three robberies, between $40 and $60 was stolen. 

A tailored response to this problem might include the following: 

•	 An agreement by the two most victimized stores to stop 

delivery at midnight and require customers to pick up their 

take-out between midnight and 2 AM. 

•	 An agreement by the stores to ask customers what bill 

denomination will be used to pay for the food, so that delivery 

people could carry the minimum amount of change required 

for the transaction. Exact change would be requested, but 

not required. 

•	 An agreement by the stores to use an enhanced Caller ID 

system to cross-check names with telephone numbers. If the 

customer’s name did not match the number and name of the 

caller displayed by Caller ID—possibly because the person 

placing the order was a guest of the residence—food store 

personnel would look up the resident’s address to confirm that 

the telephone number matched the address. The resident would 

be called back to confirm the order. 

•	 An agreement by the stores to implement a policy not to deliver 

an order if it means walking by a large crowd that is loitering 

in the area. If a delivery person is unable to deliver an order for 

this reason, the person will return to the store, call the customer, 

and request that he or she meet the delivery person at the 

nearest curb past the loitering group. 

| 22 | 
Responding to a Problem 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•	 An agreement by the resident who started the petition for 

food delivery service to the neighborhood to communicate 

the nature and reason for the new delivery policies (with the 

exception of the Caller ID check) to other residents. The 

petitioner would convey this information at a neighborhood 

meeting and through fliers delivered to each resident. At several 

of the teenage parties, residents would inform the youth in 

attendance that delivery people would no longer carry more 

than $10 in change (and often much less) at all times. 

Bucking Tradition 

From the outset, one is constantly battling a natural tendency to 

revert to traditional responses.21 

Having relied on traditional responses (areawide sweeps or arrests, 

saturation patrol) in the past, it is only natural that police will 

gravitate toward these same tactics to address problems in the 

future—even if these tactics have not been especially effective or 

sustainable over the long term. 

In the case of the fast food robberies, it is easy to see how police 

might have decided to step up car or foot patrols in the problem 

area on weekend nights between the hours of 10 PM and 2 AM. 

But this response would have been relatively costly to the police 

department. Creative responses that go beyond the criminal justice 

system and focus on preventing future occurrences are generally the 

most successful. 

Citizens and police are often tempted to implement programs 

or responses used in other communities. Although it can be 

very useful to learn how other communities have successfully 

addressed similar problems (and police are encouraged to research 

other approaches as part of their analysis), caution should be 

used in adopting off-the-shelf solutions, unless the situation is 

strikingly similar.22 

From the outset, one 

is constantly battling 

a natural tendency to 

revert to traditional 

responses. 

| 23 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

The police facing the fast food robberies might have been inclined 

to suggest that public works increase lighting in the problem area 

because this is one of the ways other communities have successfully 

addressed robbery problems. But unless the robberies have occurred 

in areas that are dimly lit, this strategy probably would have little 

effect on the fast food robbery problem. 

The key to developing tailored responses is making sure the 

responses are very focused and directly linked to the findings from 

the analysis phase of the project. 

For specific examples of problem solving, refer to the ProblemOriented Guides for Police Series, developed by the Center for 

Problem-Oriented Policing (www.popcenter.org) and funded 

by the COPS Office. See also, the Additional Resources section, 

which lists some of the crimes and social disorder problems that can 

be addressed using a problem-solving approach. 

| 24 | 
Assessing the Impact on the Selected Problem 

Assessing the Impact on the 

Selected Problem 

During the past 20 years, it has become clear to many in policing 

that both the traditional approaches to addressing crime, fear, 

and other problems, and the measures of effectiveness have fallen 

short of many people’s expectations. This has caused a significant 

number of police departments to seek new approaches to addressing 

old problems. It has also caused many police departments to ask 

whether their work really makes a difference beyond dealing with 

the immediate incident.23 

Traditional Measures 

Traditionally, a number of measures have been used by police 

and community members to assess effectiveness of approaches to 

addressing crime, fear and other problems. These include numbers 

of arrests, levels of reported crime, response times, clearance rates, 

citizen complaints, and various workload indicators, such as calls for 

service and the number of field interviews conducted.24 

Several of these measures may be helpful to you in assessing the 

impact of a problem-solving effort, including calls for service 

related to the problem (especially a reduction in repeat calls for 

service involving specific locations, victims, or offenders); changes 

in the incidence of reported crime; and changes in levels of citizen 

complaints. Other traditional measures, such as arrests and number 

of field interviews conducted, may not be that useful for your 

problem-solving effort, unless these measures can be directly linked 

to a long-term reduction in the harm associated with the targeted 

crime problem. 

| 25 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

Assessing the 

impact of a 

problem-solving 

effort may 

require using a 

nontraditional 

structure for 

determining 

effectiveness. 

Even reductions in calls for service and citizen complaints may 

not be the best indicators of whether you are having a positive 

impact on a problem because, in some instances, these measures 

may actually increase as the result of a problem-solving effort. In 

some cases, such an increase may be a good outcome if it means that 

residents feel more comfortable filing complaints or believe their 

calls will be taken seriously. However, when a problem-solving effort 

does result in increased arrests or increased calls for service, police 

should look carefully at these and determine whether they were 

intended or unintended as a result of the initiative. 

A Nontraditional Framework 

Assessing the impact of a problem-solving effort may require using 

a nontraditional structure for determining effectiveness. One such 

framework developed by Eck and Spelman identifies five different 

levels or types of positive impact on problems.25 

1.	 Total elimination of the problem. 

2.	 Fewer incidents. 

3.	 Less-serious or harmful incidents. 

4.	 Better handling of the incidents/an improved response to the 

problem. 

5.	 Removing the problem from police consideration (shifting the 

handling to others more able to address the problem). 

| 26 | 
Assessing the Impact on the Selected Problem 

A sixth positive impact also has been suggested: 

6.	 People and institutions affected by the problem are left betterequipped to handle a similar problem in the future.26 

Some of the measures listed above may be appropriate to your 

problem-solving effort. Others not listed above may be more 

appropriate. After you have analyzed the problem, you may wish 

to change the measures initially selected or revise the measures. 

The measures you select will depend on the nature of the problem 

selected, preferences of the police and the community, and the 

ability of your jurisdiction to collect the necessary data both before 

the project begins and after it has been in place for some time. 

A number of nontraditional measures can shed light on whether a 

problem has been affected.27 The key is focusing on measures that 

demonstrate an impact on the targeted problem. 

| 27 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

 

 

Sample Measures That Demonstrate Impact on 

a Problem 

•	 Four crack houses in the 12-block area were closed and 

measurements indicated that there was no displacement of drug 

dealing in the surrounding five-block area. Calls for service 

relating to street-level drug dealing in the target area were 

reduced from an average of 45 per month to 8 per month. The 

number of residents who reported witnessing drug deals during 

the previous month was reduced from 65 percent before the 

effort to 10 percent 4 months after the effort. 

•	 Prior to the effort, 40 percent of those victimized twice by 

burglars were revictimized within a 6-month period. After the 

effort, only 14 percent were revictimized. Overall, burglaries 

in the targeted area were reduced from 68 in 1 year to 45 in 

the next. 

•	 Because the problem-solving effort interrupted juvenile gun 

markets for more-lethal semiautomatic firearms, the number and 

seriousness of injuries from drive-by shootings were significantly 

reduced, even though the number of drive-bys declined only 

slightly. Prior to the effort, there were 52 drive-by shootings 

in the city, 21 life-threatening injuries, and five deaths. After 

the effort, there were 47 drive-by shootings, 8 life-threatening 

injuries, and no deaths. 

•	 In the year prior to the effort, police received an average of 50 

complaints per month relating to disputes between neighbors. 

An average of 10 of the monthly complaints were resolved by 

one visit from a police officer, but approximately 40 of the 

calls were placed by residents at 16 repeat problem locations. 

Since the effort was implemented, the department receives 

an average of 15 complaints per month. Two repeat problem 

locations remain, but they account for less than 25 percent of 

the complaints received each month. 

| 28 | 
Assessing the Impact on the Selected Problem 

 

Sample Measures That Do Not Demonstrate 

Impact on a Crime or Disorder Problem 

•	 Five police-community meetings were held during the course 

of the 1-year project. (Conclusions regarding the impact on the 

problem can’t be drawn from this measure.) 

•	 Officers conducted home security checks for 43 residents in the 

targeted housing development. (While it would be important 

to document the number of home security checks, it would be 

more important to know whether burglaries were reduced as a 

result of the initiative.) 

•	 Officers and community members participated in a 

neighborhood cleanup and removed 150 pounds of trash. (This 

information doesn’t necessarily indicate a reduction in levels of 

targeted crime or disorder problems, and a one-time cleanup 

may be a temporary improvement. It would be more important 

to show that the targeted crime and disorder problem was 

reduced as a result of, or in conjunction with, the cleanup.) 

•	 Police seized more than 10 kilos of cocaine during the initiative, 

which targeted narcotics activity in the southwest district. (This 

result doesn’t indicate whether street-level drug sales and any 

associated problems, such as prostitution, loitering, graffiti, 

trash, and intimidation of residents, were reduced.) 

Adjust Responses Based on Assessment 

If the responses implemented are not effective, the information 

gathered during analysis should be reviewed. New information 

may need to be collected before new solutions can be developed 

and tested.28 

| 29 | 

Sample Problem-Solving Initiatives 

 

 

 

 

 

Sample Problem-Solving 

Initiatives 

The COPS Office seeks to facilitate new, innovative problemsolving efforts tailored to an in-depth analysis of a community’s 

specific problem. To build on the concepts presented in this guide, 

three examples illustrate the use of the SARA model and the kinds 

of analytical efforts we hope to foster. 

Example 1: 

Plano, Texas,29 Traffic Congestion Near Schools 

Comprehensive Education and Design Changes Ease Traffic 

Congestion Near Neighborhood School 

Scanning 

Residents of a neighborhood near Barron Elementary School 

complained to their neighborhood officer about seemingly 

intractable traffic problems, including congestion, speeding, 

red light running, illegal parking, and crashes. Traditional law 

enforcement efforts, including surveillance and citation, had been 

intermittently attempted over multiple years but did not result in 

sustained improvement. 

Analysis 

In 2000, the neighborhood officer undertook a thorough analysis 

of empirical data, environmental factors, and behavioral patterns. 

Barron is located at the corner of a major four-lane thoroughfare 

and a narrow residential street. The school specializes in preschoolaged children with disabilities, resulting in a majority of parents 

choosing to drive their children to and from school. The only 

means of dropping off or picking up a student was to enter and exit 

the residential neighborhood, and parents reported that instead 

of attempting to use the inadequate carpool lane, they routinely 

stopped in the middle of the street and encouraged their children 

to run across the street. 

These examples 

illustrate the use 

of the SARA model 

and feature responses 

that are linked to 

comprehensive 

problem analyses. 

The COPS Office 

is not promoting 

a particular set of 

responses to problems 

and acknowledges 

that there is room 

for disagreement 

regarding the 

responses selected 

and their relative 

impact. 

| 31 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

While traffic-related calls for police service were not unusually 

high when compared to other neighborhoods with schools, 

crashes were much more common in the Barron neighborhood. 

After reviewing the circumstances of each crash in the 

neighborhood, the officer determined that each was the result 

of a traffic violation committed in an attempt to circumvent the 

traffic plan within the neighborhood. Peak times for congestion 

came in 15-minute increments and occurred during morning and 

afternoon drop-off and pick-up, amounting to only 1 hour per 

weekday: 7:45–8:00 AM, 10:45–11:00 AM, 11:15–11:30 AM, 

and 2:45–3:00 PM. Residents had repeatedly complained to the 

city traffic engineering department, resulting in temporary changes 

to traffic signal timing. The officer determined that education and 

enforcement, combined with permanent traffic design and control 

changes, were required to address these chronic problems. 

Response 

The officer developed strategies within three realms: education, 

enforcement, and traffic management. She changed her work hours 

to coincide with the peak problem periods. Working with school 

staff, parents, and residents, she created and distributed maps of 

alternative egress routes from the neighborhood. She also created 

and distributed flyers—translated into Spanish by school staff— 

to educate parents and explain changes to the traffic plan. Schoolprovided traffic signs were replaced with city-made signs to authorize 

police enforcement. Once the education period had elapsed, the 

officer began stopping every observed violation during the peak 

periods. This occasionally meant stopping as many as seven vehicles 

at one time. Working with the traffic engineering department, a 

new traffic plan was developed, including a new carpool lane that 

dispersed vehicles away from the residential neighborhoods and the 

most congested intersection. Visual obstructions to signage—like 

tree limbs—were removed and traffic control devices were installed 

to re-route traffic. Parking was restricted and enhanced signage 

| 32 | 
Sample Problem-Solving Initiatives 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

was installed. Four marked crosswalks were created for pedestrian 

access and school-zone lights were synchronized with dismissal 

times. Traffic signal cycles were precisely programmed to coincide 

with peak use times to ease ingress and egress without unnecessarily 

disrupting the area’s traffic flow during nonpeak times. Last, 

after years of discussion between the city and the area’s resident 

association, a park access road was constructed, facilitating easier 

access to the neighborhood for residents without inviting school 

traffic back onto the residential streets. 

Assessment 

Comparing pre- and post-response survey results showed that 

resident and parent frustrations were reduced, and a majority of 

respondents believed that improvements had been realized in terms 

of both traffic congestion and safety concerns. The neighborhood 

officer reported that traffic flowed at a reasonable rate during 

both peak and nonpeak hours and that the historic blockage of 

residential streets had been virtually eliminated. The purposeful 

displacement of traffic was carefully planned and was deemed by 

all parties to have effectively distributed vehicles. Crashes were 

reduced by 90 percent (from 10 to 1) in just 2 years. 

| 33 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Example 2: 

Chula Vista, California,30 Problems at Hotels 

and Motels 

Holding Hotel and Motel Managers Accountable Under New 

City Ordinance Reduces Crime and Disorder by 70 Percent 

and Calls for Service by 50 Percent 

Scanning 

Throughout the 1990s, the city’s approximately two dozen hotels 

and motels continued to generate unacceptable levels of calls 

for police service and reported crime despite a variety of efforts 

by stakeholders, including police, other city agencies, and local 

business groups. Earlier attempts to curb the crime and disorder, 

which included enhanced police enforcement and adoption of city 

ordinances prohibiting hourly room rentals and requiring guests to 

show identification at check-in, proved unsuccessful. 

Analysis 

The Chula Vista Police Department undertook an analysis of calls 

for service and crime and disorder data, discovering that motels 

were routinely the most common location for drug arrests in the 

city. Furthermore, most calls-for-service originated in motel rooms 

as opposed to the common areas or parking lots. During interviews 

of motel customers, the police learned that 75 percent of them were 

San Diego County residents, many who reported being homeless or 

nearly homeless. In 2002, the Center for Criminal Justice Research 

from California State University, San Bernardino was brought in 

to create and implement both a motel management survey and 

an environmental analysis instrument. The survey identified poor 

management practices that correlated to high levels of calls-for-service. 

These motel management practices included catering to local clientele 

and renting rooms to long-term guests. The environmental analyses 

reviewed security measures, access control, and visible signs of disorder 

on the property. Many of the motel rooms throughout Chula Vista 

lacked basic, industry-accepted security measures like deadbolts, 

peepholes, and chains or swing-bars on external doors. In 2005, the 

police department calculated a calls-for-service per room ratio for each 

| 34 | 
Sample Problem-Solving Initiatives 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hotel and motel in the city. The initial ratios ranged from 2.77 to 0.11 

calls-for-service per room. Plotting these motel-room call-for-service 

ratios on a map revealed that the size or location of a motel property 

had little to do with its likelihood for generating calls-for-service and 

disorder. Analysis of the variation in motel-room prices suggested that, 

contrary to longstanding local belief, low prices alone did not seem 

to cause calls-for-service. Ultimately, the stakeholder group developed 

an array of responses based on the principle that the managers and 

owners of the hotels and motels were in the best position to control 

crime and disorder through sound management practices. 

Response 

Beginning in 2003, the first phase of responses was initiated. A 

meeting was held with motel owners, police, code enforcement, 

and the Chamber of Commerce. Property-specific calls-for-service 

data were provided to owners and were sent on a regular basis. 

A checklist of best practices designed to reduce problems was 

distributed to each property owner. Code enforcement officers 

began an annual inspection program to ensure compliance 

with state and local codes. Between 2001 and 2005, a 7 percent 

reduction in calls-for-service to motels was realized, but motels 

still remained the top drug-arrest location in Chula Vista. In 2005, 

the second phase of responses was launched. The City Attorney’s 

office and other City agencies were brought in to assist in drafting 

a motel-management ordinance modeled after several similar laws 

throughout the country. Under the new law, all motels are required 

to apply for and obtain an annual operating permit from the City. 

The granting of the permit was to be based on the condition of 

the hotel, the use of standard security features for rooms, and the 

maintenance of an acceptable call-for-service ratio. The standard 

acceptable ratio was determined to be the 2005 median ratio 

for all motels in the city. Property owners were required to take 

preventive measures and develop and implement specific responses 

to problems at their motels. The City committed to assist motel 

owners in mitigating their problems but would not mandate 

specific remedial actions. The ordinance was endorsed by area 

business groups, including the Chamber of Commerce, and passed 

the City Council unanimously. 

| 35 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

Assessment 

All motels wishing to continue operations came into compliance 

with the new ordinance within the second year of the law’s 

enactment. Calls-for-service to Chula Vista motels were reduced 

by 49 percent. Drug arrests at motels decreased 66 percent. All 

reported crimes decreased 70 percent, with violent crimes and 

crimes against persons dropping 49 percent. Officers spent 52 

percent less time at motels throughout the city, freeing up 1,240 

patrol hours during the first year of the ordinance’s enactment. 

Motels’ quality, appearance, and management practices improved; 

several hotels were sold to new owners; and the number of 

substandard units in the city (i.e., those without deadbolts, 

peepholes, and door chains or security bars) dropped from 378 to 0. 

The City reported an increase in the transient occupancy tax (room 

tax) receipts. No displacement of crime or disorder was reported 

either at nearby apartment complexes or at motels in neighboring 

jurisdictions during the first 2 years of the ordinance’s enactment. 

Example 3: 

Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina,31 

Burglaries from Storage Facilities 

Thorough Analysis Leads to Simple Responses, Resulting 

in Substantial Reduction in Burglaries at Targeted Storage 

Facilities 

Scanning 

In 2005, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department saw a 

28 percent increase in commercial burglaries, 7 percent of which 

occurred at mini-warehouse or storage facilities. Most of the 

incidents involved multiple units within one facility, with an 

average of 3.5 victims per incident. A sergeant and two detectives 

were assigned to initiate a problem-solving effort to address the 

storage-facility burglaries. 

| 36 | 
Sample Problem-Solving Initiatives 

 

 

 

Analysis 

The detectives began their analysis by reading each of the 99 

storage-facility burglary reports from 2005. Of the 99 reports, 

71 occurred at one of 28 facilities and accounted for 291 individual 

victims. The detectives identified a total of 75 storage facilities 

in the jurisdiction and realized that most facilities did not have 

significant burglary problems. When the facility locations were 

mapped in relation to crime data, no correlation was found between 

the location of a facility, the occurrence of burglary at the facility, 

and the level of crime in the surrounding neighborhood. Reports 

were analyzed to determine whether there were any particular kinds 

of property being targeted, but the detectives found no reliable 

patterns. In an effort to identify variances in design, policy, and 

practice that might account for different levels of victimization, 

the detectives visited each of the 75 facilities. One key finding from 

these visits was that the use of disc-style locks seemed to be the 

most effective measure for securing individual storage units. The 

one facility requiring customers to use disc locks on its units had 

not suffered a single burglary incident. 

Response 

In order to test their hypothesis that the use of disc locks would 

substantially reduce the occurrence of burglary, the police 

department designed a study involving three locations: two storage 

facilities that would suggest, but not require, that their customers 

use the disc locks, and the one facility already requiring the use of 

the locks. The police department purchased the disc locks for use in 

the study and launched the initiative on July 1, 2006. Once the test 

was underway, the detectives collaborated with the mini-storage 

industry and area owners to develop a “best practices” guide. The 

recommendations in the guide relate to performing background 

checks on customers, educating renters on burglary prevention, 

restricting customer access to the units to times when on-site 

managers were present, encouraging the use of disc locks, improving 

lighting, using surveillance cameras, and providing the police the 

access codes to enter the facilities. 

| 37 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

Assessment 

Compared to the year prior to the study, the facilities involved in 

the study realized a 58 percent reduction in the number of reported 

burglary incidents and a 69 percent reduction in the number of 

individual burglarized units during the 1-year test. Highlighting 

the utility of the disc locks is the fact that one incident at one of 

the test facilities involved entry into 26 separate storage units, none 

of which was secured by a disc lock. This single burglary incident 

accounted for 79 percent of that facility’s burglaries during the test 

period. Also during the test period, there was a 39 percent increase 

in the number of reported burglary incidents and a 45 percent 

increase in the number of individual burglarized units at facilities 

not involved in the study. 

| 38 | 
References 

 

 

 

 

 

Reference List 

Anderson, David, Sylvia Chenery, and Ken Pease. 1995. Biting 

Back: Tackling Repeat Burglary and Car Crime, Crime 

Detection and Prevention Series #58. London: Home Office. 

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110220105210/ 

rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/prgpdfs/cdp58bf.pdf 

California Department of Justice. 1992. Community Oriented 

Policing & Problem Solving. 

Clarke, Roland V., and John E. Eck. 2005. Crime Analysis for 

Problem Solvers in 60 Small Steps. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services. 

Community Policing Consortium. 1994. Understanding 

Community Policing: A Framework for Action. Washington: 

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau 

of Justice Assistance. www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/commp.pdf 

Eck, John E., and William Spelman. 1987. 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. 

Farrell, G., and K. Pease. 1993. Once Bitten, Twice Bitten: Repeat 

Victimization and Its Implications for Crime Prevention, Crime 

Prevention, Unit Paper 46. London: Home Office. 

Gist, Nancy E. 1995. Keeping Drug Activity Out of Rental Property: 

Establishing Landlord Training Programs. Bureau of Justice 

Assistance Fact Sheet. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 

November. www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/landlord.pdf 

Goldstein, Herman. 1990. Problem-Oriented Policing. New York: 

McGraw Hill, Inc. 

Hoover, Larry T., ed. 1995. Quantifying Quality in Policing. 

Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum. 

| 39 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

La Vigne, Nancy G., and John E. Eck. 1993. A Police Guide to 

Surveying Citizens and Their Environment. Washington, 

D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 

Bureau of Justice Assistance. www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/polc.pdf 

Neighborhood-Oriented Policing in Rural Communities: A Program 

Planning Guide. 1994. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance. 

www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/neio.txt 

Police Foundation. 2003. Crime Analysis and Crime Mapping 

Information Clearinghouse, 8th Edition. Washington, D.C.: 

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services. 

www.cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/ResourceDetail.aspx?RID=270 

Problem-Oriented Drug Enforcement: A Community-Based 

Approach for Effective Policing. 1993. Washington, D.C.: 

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 

Bureau of Justice Assistance. 

Rich, Thomas. The Use of Computerized Mapping in Crime 

Control and Prevention Programs. 1995. Washington, D.C.: 

U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. 

www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/riamap.pdf 

Sampson, Rana. Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment 

Complexes. 2006. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. 

www.cops.usdoj.gov/files/RIC/Publications/e07063418.pdf 

Sampson, Rana. 1994. “Problem Solving,” Neighborhood-Oriented 

Policing in Rural Communities: A Program Planning Guide. 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 

Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance. 

Spelman, William, and John E. Eck. 1989. “Sitting Ducks, 

Ravenous Wolves, and Helping Hands: New Approaches to 

Urban Policing.” Public Affairs Comment, Austin, Texas: School 

of Public Affairs, University of Texas. 

| 40 | 
References 

Stephens, Darrel. 1995. “Community Problem-Oriented Policing: 

Measuring Impacts,” in Quantifying Quality in Policing, ed. 

Larry T. Hoover, Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research 

Forum. 

Stephens, Darrel. 1996. “Community Problem-Oriented Policing: 

Measuring Impacts,” in Quantifying Quality in Policing, ed. 

Larry T. Hoover, Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research 

Forum. 

Wise After the Event: Tackling Repeat Victimisation. 1994. London: 

National Board for Crime Prevention, Home Office. 

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110220105210/ 

rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/ah379.pdf 

| 41 | 

Endnotes 

Endnotes
 

1.	 Eck, John E., and William Spelman. Problem Solving: ProblemOriented 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. 

2.	 Spelman, William, and John E. Eck. “Sitting Ducks, Ravenous 

Wolves, and Helping Hands: New Approaches to Urban 

Policing.” Public Affairs Comment, Austin, Texas: School of 

Public Affairs, University of Texas, 1989. 

3.	 Farrell, G., and K. Pease. Once Bitten, Twice Bitten: Repeat 

Victimization and Its Implications for Crime Prevention, Crime 

Prevention, Unit Paper 46. London: Home Office, 1993. 

4.	 Clarke, Roland V., and John E. Eck. Crime Analysis for Problem 

Solvers in 60 Small Steps. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department 

of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 

2005. 

5.	 Stephens, Darrel, “Community Problem-Oriented Policing : 

Measuring Impacts,” in Quantifying Quality in Policing, 

ed. Larry T. Hoover, Washington, D.C.: Police Executive 

Research Forum, 1995. 

6.	 Goldstein, Herman. Problem-Oriented Policing, New York: 

McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1990. 

7.	 Goldstein, 1990. 

8.	 Goldstein, 1990. 

9.	 Goldstein, 1990. 

10. This concept was developed by William Spelman and John E. 

Eck in1989. It builds on earlier work by Marcus Felson. 

11. Sampson, Rana. “Problem Solving,” Neighborhood-Oriented 

Policing in Rural Communities: A Program Planning Guide, 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice 

Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1994. 

12. Farrell, G. and K. Pease. 1993. 

| 43 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

 

13. Anderson, David, Sylvia Chenery, and Ken Pease. Biting Back: 

Tackling Repeat Burglary and Car Crime, Crime Detection and 

Prevention Series No. 58. London: Home Office, 1995. 

14. Presentation by West Yorkshire Deputy Chief Inspector 

John Holt, at the Sixth Annual Problem-Oriented Policing 

Conference in San Diego, November 1995. 

15. Unpublished training module developed by Rana Sampson 

under a grant to the Community Policing Consortium from the 

Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice. 

16. For examples of problem-specific analysis issues, see the 

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series, funded by the COPS 

Office and developed by the Center for Problem-Oriented 

Policing. The guides are available through www.popcenter.org 

and the COPS Office website, www.cops.usdoj.gov. 

17. See also Crime Analysis and Crime Mapping Information 

Clearinghouse, 8th. Edition www.cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/ 

ResourceDetail.aspx?RID=270. 

18. Goldstein, 1990. 

19. Sampson, 1994. 

20. Sampson, 1994. 

21. Goldstein, 1990. 

22. Sampson, 1994. 

23.	 Stephens, Darrel, “Community Problem-Oriented Policing: 

Measuring Impacts,” in Quantifying Quality in Policing, ed. Larry 

T. Hoover, Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 

1996. 

24. Stephens, 1995. 

25. Eck and Spelman, 1987. 

26. Sampson, 2003. See also Gist, 1995, for a community-oriented 

property management approach developed originally by 

John Campbell of Campbell DeLong Resources, Inc., for the 

Portland (Oregon) Police Bureau. 

| 44 | 
Endnotes 

27. For examples of problem-specific assessment issues, see the 

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series, funded by the COPS 

Office and developed by the Center for Problem-Oriented 

Policing. The guides are available through www.popcenter.org 

and the COPS Office website, www.cops.usdoj.gov. 

28. Sampson, 1994. 

29. Submission by the Plano (Texas) Police Department for the 

2004 Center for Problem-Oriented Policing Herman Goldstein 

Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. 

30. Submission by the Chula Vista (California) Police Department 

for the 2009 Center for Problem-Oriented Policing Herman 

Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. 

31. Submission by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg (North Carolina) 

Police Department for the 2007 Center for Problem-Oriented 

Policing Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in ProblemOriented Policing. 

| 45 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

 

 

Additional Resources 

The Center for Problem-Oriented Policing 

The Center for Problem-Oriented Policing (POP Center) is a nonprofit organization dedicated 

to the advancement of problem-oriented policing. Its mission is to advance the concept and 

practice of problem-oriented policing. The POP Center has been funded by the COPS Office to 

produce a variety of knowledge resources, including the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series 

(POP Guides), which address a variety of crime and disorder problems. A list of POP Guides, as 

of the date of this publishing, is provided below. Readers may want to visit www.popcenter.org for 

updates and additional problem-oriented policing resources. 

Problem-Specific Guides Series: 

1.	 Assaults in and Around Bars, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly Dedel. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-00-2 

2.	 Street Prostitution, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-01-0 

3.	 Speeding in Residential Areas, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott with David K. Maddox. 2010. 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-02-7 

4.	 Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes. Rana Sampson. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-03-7 

5.	 False Burglar Alarms, 2nd Edition. Rana Sampson. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-04-5 

6.	 Disorderly Youth in Public Places. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-05-3 

7.	 Loud Car Stereos. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-06-1 

8.	 Robbery at Automated Teller Machines. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-07-X 

9.	 Graffiti. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-08-8 

10. Thefts of and From Cars in Parking Facilities. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-09-6 

11. Shoplifting. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-10-X 

12. Bullying in Schools. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-11-8 

13. Panhandling. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-12-6 

14. Rave Parties. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-13-4 

15. Burglary of Retail Establishments. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-14-2 

16. Clandestine Methamphetamine Labs, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly Dedel. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-15-0 

17. Acquaintance Rape of College Students. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-16-9 

18. Burglary of Single-Family Houses. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-17-7 

19. Misuse and Abuse of 911. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-18-5 

20. Financial Crimes Against the Elderly. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-22-3 

21. Check and Card Fraud. Graeme R. Newman. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-27-4 

| 46 | 
Additional Resources 

22. Stalking. The National Center for Victims of Crime. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-30-4 

23. Gun Violence Among Serious Young Offenders. Anthony A. Braga. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-31-2 

24. Prescription Fraud. Julie Wartell and Nancy G. La Vigne. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-33-9 

25. Identity Theft. Graeme R. Newman. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-35-3 

26. Crimes Against Tourists. Ronald W. Glesnor and Kenneth J. Peak. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-36-3 

27. Underage Drinking. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-39-8 

28. Street Racing. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-42-8 

29. Cruising. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-43-6 

30. Disorder at Budget Motels. Karin Schmerler. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-41-X 

31. Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets. Alex Harocopos and Mike Hough. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-45-2 

32. Bomb Threats in Schools. Graeme R. Newman. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-46-0 

33. Illicit Sexual Activity in Public Places. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-47-9 

34. Robbery of Taxi Drivers. Martha J. Smith. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-50-9 

35. School Vandalism and Break-Ins. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. ISBN: 1-9325802-51-7 

36. Drunk Driving. Michael S. Scott, Nina J. Emerson, Louis B. Antonacci, and Joel B. Plant. 

2006. ISBN: 1-932582-57-6 

37. Juvenile Runaways. Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1932582-56-8 

38. The Exploitation of Trafficked Women. Graeme R. Newman. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-59-2 

39. Student Party Riots. Tamara D. Madensen and John E. Eck. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-60-6 

40. People with Mental Illness. Gary Cordner. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-63-0 

41. Child Pornography on the Internet. Richard Wortley and Stephen Smallbone. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-65-7 

42. Witness Intimidation. Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-67-3 

43. Burglary at Single-Family House Construction Sites. Rachel Boba and Roberto Santos. 

2006. ISBN: 1-932582-00-2 

44. Disorder at Day Laborer Sites. Rob Guerette. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-72-X 

45. Domestic Violence. Rana Sampson. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-74-6 

46. Thefts of and from Cars on Residential Streets and Driveways. Todd Keister. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-76-2 

47. Drive-By Shootings. Kelly Dedel. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-77-0 

48. Bank Robbery. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-78-9 

49. Robbery of Convenience Stores. Alicia Altizio and Diana York. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-79-7 

| 47 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

50. Traffic Congestion Around Schools. Nancy G. La Vigne. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-82-7 

51. Pedestrian Injuries and Fatalities. Justin A. Heinonen and John E. Eck. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-83-5 

52. Bicycle Theft. Shane D. Johnson, Aiden Sidebottom, and Adam Thorpe. 2008. 

ISBN: 1-932582-87-8 

53. Abandoned Vehicles. Michael G. Maxfield. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-88-6 

54. Spectator Violence in Stadiums. Tamara D. Madensen and John E. Eck. 2008. 

ISBN: 1-932582-89-4 

55. Child Abuse and Neglect in the Home. Kelly Dedel. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-00-3 

56. Homeless Encampments. Sharon Chamard. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-01-0 

57. Stolen Goods Markets. Michael Sutton. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-09-6 

58. Theft of Scrap Metal. Brandon R. Kooi. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-12-6 

59. Street Robbery. Khadija M. Monk, Justin A. Heinonen, and John E. Eck. 2010. 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-13-3 

60. Theft of Customers’ Personal Property in Cafés and Bars. Shane D. Johnson, Kate J. 

Bowers, Lorraine Gamman, Loreen Mamerow and Anna Warne. 2010. 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-15-7 

61. Aggressive Driving. Colleen Laing. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-18-8 

Response Guides Series: 

1.	 The Benefits and Consequences of Police Crackdowns. Michael S. Scott. 2003. 

ISBN: 1-932582-24-X 

2.	 Closing Streets and Alleys to Reduce Crime: Should You Go Down This Road? 

Ronald V. Clarke. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-41-X 

3.	 Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety Problems. Michael S. Scott and 

Herman Goldstein. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-55-X 

4.	 Video Surveillance of Public Places. Jerry Ratcliffe. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-58-4 

5.	 Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns. Emmanuel Barthe. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-66-5 

6.	 Sting Operations. Graeme R. Newman with assistance of Kelly Socia. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-84-3 

7.	 Asset Forfeiture. John L. Worall. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-90-8 

8.	 Improving Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas. Ronald V. Clarke. 2008. 

ISBN: 1-932582-91-6 

9.	 Dealing With Crime and Disorder in Urban Parks. Jim Hilborn. 2009. ISBN: 1-932582-92-4 

10. Assigning Police Officers to Schools. Barbara Raymond. 2010. 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-14-0 

| 48 | 
Additional Resources 

Problem-Solving Tools Series: 

1.	 Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers. 

John E. Eck. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-19-3 

2.	 Researching a Problem. Ronald V. Clarke and Phyllis A. Schultz. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-48-7 

3.	 Using Offender Interviews to Inform Police Problem-Solving. Scott H. Decker. 2005. ISBN: 

1-932582-49-5 

4.	 Analyzing Repeat Victimization. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-54-1 

5.	 Partnering with Businesses to Address Public Safety Problems. Sharon Chamard. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-62-2 

6.	 Understanding Risky Facilities. Ronald V. Clarke and John E. Eck. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-75-4 

7.	 Implementing Responses to Problems. Rick Brown and Michael S. Scott. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-80-0 

8.	 Using Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design in Problem-Solving. Diane 

Zahm. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-81-9 

9.	 Enhancing the Problem-Solving Capacity of Crime Analysis Units. Matthew B. White. 

2008. ISBN: 1-932582-85-1 

10. Analyzing Crime Displacement and Diffusion. Rob T Guerette. 2009. ISBN: 1-932582-93-2 

Special Publications: 

Crime Analysis for Problem Solvers in 60 Small Steps. Ronald V. Clarke and John Eck, 

2005. ISBN:1-932582-52-5 

Policing Terrorism: An Executive’s Guide. Graeme R. Newman and Ronald V. Clarke. 2008. 

Effective Policing and Crime Prevention: A Problem-Oriented Guide for Mayors, City 

Managers, and County Executives. Joel B. Plant and Michael S. Scott. 2009. 

| 49 | 
Problem-Solving Tips 

 

 

 

 

 

Upcoming Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides 

Abandoned Buildings and Lots 

Animal Abuse 

Chronic Public Inebriation 

Drug-Impaired Driving 

Gasoline Drive-Offs 

Home Invasion Robbery 

Missing Persons 

Prescription Fraud and Abuse, 2nd Edition 

Sexual Assault of Women by Strangers 

Shoplifting, 2nd Edition 

Theft of Vehicles for Export Across Land Borders 

Understanding Hot Products 

Problem-Solving Tools 

Understanding Repeat Offending 

Response Guides 

Monitoring Offenders on Conditional Release 

Using Civil Actions Against Property to Control Crime Problems 

Special Publications 

Intelligence Analysis and Problem-Solving 

Problem-Oriented Policing Implementation Manual 

For a complete and up-to-date listing of all available POP Guides, see the Center for ProblemOriented Policing website at www.popcenter.org. 

For more information about the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series and other COPS 

Office publications, call the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770, via e-mail at 

askCOPSRC@usdoj.gov, or visit COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov. 

| 50 | 

Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing Crime and Disorder 

Through Problem-Solving Partnerships is intended as an introduction 

to implementing a problem-solving approach. It takes the reader 

through each step of the SARA (Scanning, Analysis, Response, 

Assessment) model, offers examples of problem-solving from the 

field, and provides links to additional resources. 

Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing Crime and Disorder Through ProblemSolving Partnerships is intended as an introduction to implementing a problemsolving approach. It takes the reader through each step of the SARA (Scanning, 

Analysis, Response, Assessment) model, offers examples of problem-solving from 

the field, and provides links to additional resources. 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 

145 N Street, N.E. 

Washington, DC 20530 

To obtain details on COPS Office programs, 

call the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770
 

Visit COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov 

Originally published April 1998, updated July 2011 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-08-9 

e050600069