Effective Policing and 

Crime Prevention

A Problem-Oriented Guide for Mayors, City Managers, and County Executives

Joel B. Plant and Michael S. Scott

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

1

Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

A Problem-Oriented Guide for Mayors, City 

Managers, and County Executives

Joel B. Plant and Michael S. Scott

This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement Number 

2006-CK-WX-K003 by the Office of Community Oriented Policing 

Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein 

are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official 

position of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific 

agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered 

an endorsement of the product by the authors or the U.S. Department 

of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement 

discussion of the issues.

The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of April 

2009. Given that URLs and web sites are in constant flux, neither the 

author nor the COPS Office can vouch for their current validity.

© 2008 Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, Inc. 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

August 2009
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

2

Contents

Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................. 4

Foreword................................................................................................................................................. 5

Letter from the COPS Office .................................................................................................................. 6

Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 8

What Local Government Executives Should Know About Policing and 

Crime Prevention......................................................................................................................... 11

The Police Function Is Much Broader Than 

Crime Control............................................................................................................................. 11

The Police Can and Should Do More Than Enforce the Law .............................................................. 13

The Criminal Justice System Is Not the Solution to All Public Safety Problems..................................... 14

The Police Exercise Substantial Discretion ........................................................................................ 15

Standard Police Responses to Crime and Disorder Are Limited .......................................................... 16

Effective Policing Requires Collaboration .......................................................................................... 17

Police Should Be Rated by More Than Crime and Arrest Tallies and Response Times........................... 18

Crime and Disorder Are Heavily Concentrated .................................................................................. 20

The Local Government Executive’s Role in Policing and Crime Prevention ..................................... 21

Treat Public Safety as a Local Government Function, Not Just a Police Function.................................. 22

Adopt a Problem-Oriented Approach to Addressing Public Safety Concerns........................................ 24

Insist on Best (or Good) Professional Practices.................................................................................. 25

Insist on Good Data Analysis to Inform Public Safety Policies and Practices......................................... 26

Emphasize Prevention ..................................................................................................................... 27

Help Broker Responsibility for Addressing Public Safety Problems...................................................... 28

Develop Sensible Public Safety Indicators......................................................................................... 29
3

Contents

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder .......................................... 31

General Approaches........................................................................................................................ 31

Problem-Oriented Policing ....................................................................................................... 32

Situational Crime Prevention ..................................................................................................... 33

Intelligence-Led Policing........................................................................................................... 34

Broken Windows Policing.......................................................................................................... 35

Zero-Tolerance Policing ............................................................................................................ 35

CompStat ................................................................................................................................ 36

The Traditional Policing Model................................................................................................... 36

Specific Responses to Some Common Public Safety Problems........................................................... 37

Control Alcohol Distribution and Consumption ............................................................................ 38

Close Drug Markets ................................................................................................................. 39

Expect Property Owners and Managers to Control Activity in and around Their Properties............. 40

Design and Manage Parks ....................................................................................................... 41

Promote Safe Schools ............................................................................................................. 42

Reduce Vehicle Crime............................................................................................................... 43

Prevent Repeat Burglaries ....................................................................................................... 44

Prevent Shoplifting .................................................................................................................. 45

Control Speeding in Residential Neighborhoods ......................................................................... 46

Minimize Graffiti ...................................................................................................................... 47

Control Disorderly Behavior on the Streets................................................................................. 48

Control Street Prostitution ........................................................................................................ 49

Don’t Waste Police Time ........................................................................................................... 50

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 53

Appendix: Good Police-Community Problem Solving: Stories From the Field.................................. 55

Summaries of the Winning Projects for the Herman Goldstein Award for 

Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing, 1993–2008 .................................................................. 55

About the Authors................................................................................................................................. 63
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

4

Acknowledgments 

The authors of Effective Policing and Crime Prevention are indebted 

to the anonymous peer reviewers and COPS Office staff for their 

helpful comments and suggestions on matters of content, format, and 

style. The authors especially acknowledge the contribution of Marcus 

Felson of the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University, who first 

articulated the need for such a guide and proposed the framework and 

some content relating to specific crime-prevention recommendations. 

Additionally, Herman Goldstein of the University of Wisconsin 

Law School, Ron Clarke of Rutgers University, Rana Sampson (an 

independent police consultant), San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders, 

and Madison, Wisconsin, Mayor Dave Cieslewicz provided valuable 

comments and suggestions. 

Debra Cohen, Ph.D., and Cynthia Pappas oversaw the project for the 

COPS Office. Phyllis Schultze conducted research for the guide at 

Rutgers University’s Criminal Justice Library. Nancy Leach coordinated 

the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing’s production process. 

Suzanne M. Fregly edited this guide.
5

Foreword

Foreword

As a mayor, and a former police chief, finding and supporting effective 

and fair ways to reduce crime and improve community safety is a top 

priority. Too often, mayors and city managers hear from their police chief 

“we need more cops.” No doubt, sometimes they are right but in many 

cases, the answer is not more, it is that police agencies rely too often 

on tactics that are heavily dependent on personnel rather than tactics 

that engage and require others in our community to reduce crime. For 

example, retail stores are in the best position to reduce shoplifting, 

apartment owners are in the best position to prevent burglary or drug 

dealing on their property, malls are the best situated to reduce auto theft 

from their parking lots, and bars and nightclubs can create crime havens 

or minimize offending opportunities. Holding these entities to account is 

less costly than providing the policing personnel to cover their defaults 

and an added benefit is it appropriately places the responsibility for crime 

control on those who have the most power, authority, and ability to reduce 

it. Otherwise, everyone else is subsidizing their defaults.

When we adopt this approach police chiefs fear they will be taken to task 

as not being ‘business friendly.’ We need to give our chiefs our support for 

approaches that are supported by analysis, evidence, and fairness. In that 

same regard, when our chiefs want to adopt zero tolerance practices against 

neighborhood communities, we need to express our concern because there 

is no fairness when all individuals in an area are regarded as criminals. As 

you know, policing, in this nation, is a complex endeavor. This brief guidebook 

steers us through the research on policing, the evidence of what works and 

what we should scrutinize more closely and offers up a series of legitimate 

tools the police have and a city and community can use to reduce crime and 

build public safety. 

Jerry Sanders

Mayor

City of San Diego
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

6

Letter from the COPS Office 

An essential role of local government is to ensure community 

safety. Elected and appointed local government officials who are 

held accountable for public safety need to understand how local 

government can effectively control and prevent common public safety 

problems. In addition to securing public safety for its own sake, a 

community’s reputation for public safety heavily influences its appeal 

as a place to raise a family or open a business. Mayors, city and county 

managers, and council members have been instrumental in developing 

partnerships with the Federal Government and bringing home the 

resources needed to better protect their communities. 

Community policing remains the strategy of choice for municipal 

and county executives who understand that policing is a shared 

responsibility and who are looking to strengthen partnerships, 

build respect and appreciation between police and communities, 

and implement effective crime-prevention initiatives. In fact, local 

government executives have a direct role in addressing crime and 

disorder in their communities through their ability to develop broad, 

collaborative partnerships among government agencies, businesses, 

and private citizens to implement effective public safety strategies.

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

Mayors, City Managers, and County Executives is the latest tool from 

the COPS Office and the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing that is 

specifically designed for city and county executives actively engaged in 

public safety. This guide reviews contemporary public safety strategies, 

from adopting a community policing approach to implementing specific 

responses to common public safety problems, and offers insight and 

recommendations on how local governments can work with police to 

address common public safety problems.
7

Letter from the COPS Office

This guide is a companion to the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

series produced by the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing and 

funded by the COPS Office. These Guides provide valuable information 

on how local police can more effectively address the multitude of public 

safety problems that they routinely confront. The COPS Office is proud 

to make this publication, along with an extensive library of resources, 

available to municipal leaders eager to learn from best practices and 

dutifully work to develop their own successful public safety strategies.

The COPS Office
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

8

Introduction

Establishing public safety is among local government’s fundamental 

obligations to its citizens. The safety of one’s person and security 

of one’s property are widely viewed as basic human rights and are 

essential to the community’s overall quality of life. When the citizenry is 

not, and does not feel, reasonably safe, other critical local government 

functions such as economic development, government finance, public 

education, stable housing, and basic local government services 

become that much more difficult to provide. In short, a community’s 

reputation for public safety heavily influences its appeal as a place to 

raise a family or open a business.

If you are a mayor or county executive voters directly elected, or a 

city or county manager elected officials appointed, you hardly need a 

guide to remind you of this: your constituents do so regularly. And yet, 

notwithstanding much popular rhetoric about the nature of crime and 

what should be done about it, establishing real and perceived public 

safety is one of local government’s more complex and challenging 

undertakings. 

This guide is intended to help you as a local government executive 

better understand how local government in general, and local police 

in particular, can more effectively meet public safety challenges. The 

guide is a companion to several guides in a series known collectively 

as the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police, produced by the Center 

for Problem-Oriented Policing and published by the COPS Office. The 

three series—the Problem-Specific Guides, Response Guides, and 

Problem-Solving Tools Guides—represent a summary of the growing 

body of knowledge about how local police can more effectively address 

the multitude of specific and varied public safety problems that they 

routinely confront. 

This guide does not directly address other aspects of the local police 

function, such as criminal investigation, emergency response, police 

integrity, or political accountability, although how the police carry out 

their crime-prevention function has profound implications for those 

matters as well. 
Introduction

9

As a local government executive, you are held accountable for public 

safety, and the perception thereof, in your community. In turn, you likely 

delegate to your local police agency the primary responsibility for public 

safety, at least that part of it that pertains to crime, nuisances, disorder, 

and traffic safety. The voters or other elected officials may hold you 

personally accountable for public safety and its perception regardless 

of your actual authority over your local function.1 While you certainly 

should rely on your police executives to understand public safety and 

crime prevention in depth, you need to know enough to ensure that 

police and other local government functions are being carried out 

effectively, efficiently, and fairly.

This guide is deliberately brief because you are busy. It is not an 

exhaustive academic treatise about policing and crime control, but it is 

nonetheless based on solid research-based knowledge. The guide will 

do the following:

 Summarize what you should know about policing that directly 

affects public safety.

 Recommend how you as a local government executive can promote 

public safety and effective policing.

 Present some of what is known about how local government 

can effectively control and prevent some common public safety 

problems.

1

 Local government executives’ 

legal authority over police 

operations varies considerably 

across the United States, with 

some executives having direct 

and complete supervisory control 

over police, others having partial 

supervisory control, and others 

having little more than political 

influence. Much of this guide 

pertains as well to the operations 

of sheriff’s offices as it does to 

municipal police agencies, and the 

term “police” is intended to refer 

to both.

11

What Local Government Executives Should Know About Policing and Crime Prevention

What Local Government Executives 

Should Know About Policing and 

Crime Prevention

The Police Function Is Much Broader Than 

Crime Control

Citizens largely think of police as crimefighters. Certainly, Hollywood plays 

up this image. They know that audiences won’t be terribly interested 

in watching films and shows about police as service providers, traffic 

controllers, and conflict managers. Audiences want action and they want 

stories about the fight between good and evil. Police officers themselves 

like and perpetuate this crime-fighting self-image, even though they 

understand it represents but a partial truth about real policing. Real 

policing is, of course, at least partly about crime-fighting. But it is about 

much, much more, and it is inescapably complex. 

In addition to dealing with such better-known crimes as murder, rape, 

robbery, assault, burglary, and theft—which combined comprise only 

about 10 percent of all police business—police are routinely expected 

to deal with other offenses such as drug dealing and prostitution; 

such nuisances as excessive noise and panhandling; and such safety 

hazards as traffic crashes and crowd control, to name but a few. By 

some counts, police routinely deal with hundreds of types of public 

safety problems, each one different from another, each calling for 

different and multifaceted responses. 

Moreover, as the American Bar Association has stated so clearly below, 

the police have multiple objectives that sometimes must be balanced 

one against another. Police objectives include the following:

 Prevent and control conduct threatening to life and property, 

including serious crime. 

 Aid crime victims and protect people in danger of physical harm.

 Protect constitutional guarantees, such as the right of free speech 

and assembly. 
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

12

2 This slightly modified version of 

the ABA Standards on the Urban 

Police Function is adapted from 

Goldstein, Herman, Policing a Free 

Society, Ballinger Publishing Co., 

1977. The original ABA Standards 

are available online at www.abanet.

org/crimjust/standards/urbanpolice.

html#1-2.2. 

 Facilitate the movement of people and vehicles. 

 Help those who cannot care for themselves, including the 

intoxicated, the addicted, the mentally ill, the physically disabled, 

the old, and the young. 

 Resolve conflict between individuals, between groups, or between 

citizens and their government.

 Identify problems that have the potential for becoming more serious 

for individuals, the police, or the government. 

 Create and maintain a feeling of community security.2

The police function’s complexity may well frustrate some citizens—as 

well as some police and government officials—who desire simple and 

straightforward police action, but it is a fact of life in a democracy. 

The reasons why police might not be able to take certain popularly 

supported actions might be because police simultaneously are obliged 

to try to achieve other objectives. 

For example, with regard to public demonstrations and gatherings, 

police must balance the right of the public to assemble with the need 

to ensure that other citizens can move about freely. With regard to 

investigating crime, police must balance the search for evidence 

against citizens’ civil liberties. With regard to chronic inebriates on the 

street, police must balance the general public’s interest in safety and 

order against an obligation to provide care for incapacitated people. 

And so forth. Much of police work entails balancing and prioritizing 

objectives.

These competing objectives should not paralyze police into inaction, 

but good policing demands that the various objectives be reconciled. 

As a local government executive, you can help the police by reminding 

citizens of these challenges.
13

What Local Government Executives Should Know About Policing and Crime Prevention

The Police Can and Should Do More Than Enforce 

the Law 

In trying to achieve their multiple objectives, police have at their 

disposal a wide variety of tactics and strategies. Although many people 

think that the main way police achieve their public safety objectives 

is to enforce the law, in fact, police commonly do things other than 

just enforce the law. In most interactions with the public, police do 

not issue a citation or make an arrest. Indeed, even were it possible 

for police to fully enforce the law—which it is not—it is unlikely that 

most communities would tolerate such a thing. Sometimes strict 

law enforcement is neither fair nor effective; indeed, sometimes it is 

counterproductive to public safety, as, for instance, when it provokes 

such widespread public hostility as to engender even more widespread 

disorder and lawlessness.

Essential to fair and effective policing is the need to expand the range 

of viable alternatives to criminal law enforcement so that police have 

multiple tools from which to fashion effective responses to quite varied 

public safety problems.

Examples of alternatives to criminal law enforcement police commonly 

use to address particular public safety problems include the following:

 Mobilizing the community (as witnesses, to patrol the community, 

for advocacy)

 Requesting that citizens exercise informal social control over one 

another (e.g., parents over children, employers over employees, 

coaches over athletes, teachers over students, military commanders 

over soldiers, lenders over borrowers, landlords over tenants)

 Using mediation and negotiation skills to resolve disputes

 Conveying information (e.g., to reduce exaggerated fear, to generate 

public awareness, to elicit conformity with laws that are not known 

or understood, to show citizens how they contribute to problems 

and ways to avoid doing so, to educate the public about the limits 

of police authority, to build support for new approaches)
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

14

 Altering the physical environment to reduce opportunities for 

problems to occur

 Enforcing civil laws (e.g., nuisance abatement, injunctions, asset 

forfeiture)

 Recommending and enforcing special conditions of bail, probation, 

or parole

 Intervening short of arrest (e.g., issuing warnings, placing people in 

protective custody, temporarily seizing weapons, issuing dispersal 

orders)

 Advocating enactment of new laws or regulations to control 

conditions that create problems

 Concentrating attention on those people and circumstances that 

account for a disproportionate share of a problem (e.g., repeat 

offenders, repeat victims, repeat locations)

 Coordinating with other government and private services (e.g., drug 

treatment, youth recreation, social services).

When one views policing in light of the objectives and methods 

described above, it becomes more sensible to acknowledge that 

enforcing the law is not an end in itself, but rather is one means among 

several available to the police toward the objectives previously described.

The Criminal Justice System Is Not the Solution to 

All Public Safety Problems

When fear of crime is on the rise, the public reflexively turns to its 

police to “do something about it.” Commonly, the “something” the 

public demands is for police to crack down by boosting arrests. And 

while calls for police to crack down might satisfy citizens’ need to 

express their frustration and condemnation of a situation they perceive 

to be out of control, not all police crackdowns prove as effective as one 

might hope; occasionally, they create their own civic problems.

The criminal justice system lacks both the capacity and the expertise 

necessary to effectively address all public safety concerns. Its important 
15

What Local Government Executives Should Know About Policing and Crime Prevention

safeguards designed to ensure due process and protect defendants’ 

civil liberties help render the criminal justice system ill-suited for highvolume business. 

Relying too heavily on this expensive system designed primarily to deal 

with serious and habitual offenders creates several important public 

safety risks, including the following:

 It compromises the care and attention that it can give to the most 

serious offenses and offenders. 

 It detracts resources and attention away from other institutions 

and systems that are equally essential to ensuring public safety. 

Properly resourced and accessible systems for mental health, 

substance abuse treatment, victim and witness protection, property 

code enforcement, consumer product design, school discipline, 

youth recreation, social services, civil law enforcement, and dispute 

resolution, to name a few, are as important to police effectiveness 

as is a well-functioning criminal justice system.

 It places undue pressure on police officers to distort and manipulate 

their authority in ways not intended under the law and that can lead 

to abuse allegations.

 It can strain police-community relations and erode public trust in 

local government generally. This has proven particularly true in 

some racial and ethnic minority communities.

The Police Exercise Substantial Discretion

Borne of practical limitations, a sense of justice, and the absence 

of close supervision and immediate review, the police exercise a 

tremendous amount of discretion at all levels of the police hierarchy, 

including at the line level, where police officers decide how to 

handle incidents. Police make discretionary decisions about all sorts 

of matters, such as where and on what public safety problems to 

concentrate resources, whether to formally enforce the law when they 

have legal grounds to do so, and what methods to use in performing 

their duties.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

16

3 For a comprehensive review 

of research on policing see The 

National Research Council, Fairness 

and Effectiveness in Policing: The 

Evidence, The National Academies 

Press, 2004.

Although the law or policy might compel or constrain some police 

discretionary decisions, on most matters there are choices to be made 

from among a range of options. In some instances, police alone should 

make those choices, but in many instances, the considered views of 

citizens, community groups, and elected and appointed government 

officials should inform police choices. Bringing police discretionary 

decisions, particularly at the strategic level, out into the open where 

they can be publicly deliberated and reviewed strengthens democratic 

policing and can make the police more effective and fair.

Standard Police Responses to Crime and Disorder 

Are Limited

An abundance of research evidence has demonstrated that some of 

the common local government responses to crime and disorder, such 

as hiring more police officers and deploying them in conventional patrol 

and investigative modes, having police respond rapidly to all incidents, 

having police patrol the streets in random patterns, and assigning all 

criminal cases for follow-up investigation by detectives are of lesscertain value than commonly believed.3

This is not to say that these responses are necessarily ineffective or 

unwarranted under all conditions, but only that local governments 

and citizens should have more realistic expectations about what 

public safety benefits such responses are likely to yield. Moreover, the 

standard responses are tremendously expensive for local governments, 

and you might reasonably expect a higher public-safety return on these 

investments. 

As a local government executive, you and other elected officials 

might be under considerable public pressure to demonstrate your 

commitment to public safety by pressing for these responses, but you 

will leave yourself equally vulnerable to later criticism if these standard 

responses fail to achieve their promise.
17

What Local Government Executives Should Know About Policing and Crime Prevention

Effective Policing Requires Collaboration

It might seem odd to say that, in spite of their authority, extensive 

training, and often considerable resources, the police require the 

support and assistance of others to fairly and effectively control and 

prevent crime and disorder, but it is true for the following reasons:

 The number of police officers available for duty at any time is far 

fewer than most citizens imagine, and they cannot possibly establish 

a physical presence in all places at all times in a community.

 Police authority, great as it is for certain tasks, is often relatively 

inadequate compared with what people expect of police.

 Police do not directly control most of the conditions that generate 

society’s crime and disorder opportunities.

 Police authority is founded in part, of course, on what the law 

grants, but the extent to which police can effectively use their legal 

authority heavily depends on the public’s support of and trust in the 

police, which police must constantly strive to cultivate and sustain.

For police to be effective, they must be able to work effectively not only 

within the operations of the criminal justice system with which they are 

most closely identified, but also within other social and governmental 

systems, such as the following:

 Community organizations

 Government agencies, including local, state, and federal regulatory 

systems and civil law enforcement systems

 Mental health systems

 Public health and emergency medical service systems

 Government and nongovernment social service agencies, including 

those for drug and alcohol treatment and detoxification

 School systems

 Corporate and business communities

 Juvenile justice systems

 Alternative dispute resolution systems.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

18

Police must develop effective policies, protocols, and working 

relationships with all of these systems, as well as with the criminal 

justice system, to achieve their objectives. As the local government 

executive, you obviously have the greatest influence over the interdepartment working relationships and protocols, but you may well 

have influence with respect to other systems through which you can 

encourage or promote good relations with your police agency.

Police Should Be Rated by More Than Crime and 

Arrest Tallies and Response Times

It should logically follow that if policing is a varied and complex 

undertaking, one should assess police agencies as a whole, and 

police officers as individuals accordingly. No more than we would 

contemplate assessing other important government functions such as 

public finance, public health, or public education by crude and onedimensional performance indicators should we assess the policing 

function the same way. Yet, to a large extent, we commonly do. 

We most commonly assess police agencies in terms of reported 

crime, arrest numbers, cases solved, and patrol response times, but 

these measures alone grossly distort the true picture of the quality of 

policing and public safety. For example, since the true aim of policing 

is to prevent crime and enhance the public’s sense of security, and 

not merely to enforce the law for its own sake, simply counting arrest 

numbers tells us rather little about police effectiveness.

Crime experts widely recognize that the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports 

data—the principal crime index—are an incomplete and flawed 

measure of both crime and police efficacy. Among the system’s more 

widely recognized limitations are the following:

 Based on what is known from crime victimization surveys, as much 

as one-half of all crimes committed are never reported to police. 

Even many serious crimes go unreported to police.
19

What Local Government Executives Should Know About Policing and Crime Prevention

 Notwithstanding Uniform Crime Reports coding rules, police 

agencies vary considerably in how they classify incidents, thereby 

making comparisons across police agencies difficult.

 The Uniform Crime Reports make no claim to measure other 

important public safety indicators such as actual crime victimization, 

traffic safety, nuisance levels and many other forms of disorder, 

citizen perceptions of their safety and security, or citizen perceptions 

of police fairness.4

There is a need to refine and improve the macro-level measures of 

policing and public safety. The FBI’s new National Incident-Based 

Reporting System is an important step toward improving measures of 

reported crime insofar as it provides much greater detail about many 

more crime types than the Uniform Crime Reports.5 But other macro 

measures of policing and public safety are also important, such as:

 The local community’s sense of safety, security, and peace of mind 

 Its confidence in the local police 

 Traffic safety 

 The safety and welfare of its most vulnerable citizens (e.g., the 

elderly, young, mentally ill, suicidal, drug- and alcohol-addicted, or 

physically handicapped). 

In addition, local governments should also improve micro-measures of 

how well the local government, police included, is addressing specific 

public safety problems. Each type of public safety problem will warrant 

a special set of performance measures tailored to that problem type. 

For example, the measures for how local government and police are 

responding to child abuse will differ considerably from measures for 

how they are responding to retail theft.

4 For an explanation of the 

methodology and limitations of 

the Uniform Crime Reports, see 

the annual reports of the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation, Crime in 

the United States. The reports can 

be accessed online at www.fbi.gov/

ucr/ucr.htm#cius. 

5

 For a description of the National 

Incident-Based Reporting System, 

see the FBI’s web site at www.fbi.

gov/ucr/ucr.htm#nibrs.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

20

Crime and Disorder Are Heavily Concentrated 

Crime and disorder are not evenly distributed across your community. 

Rather, they are heavily concentrated: among relatively few offenders, 

happening to relatively few victims, occurring in relatively few places, 

and involving relatively few target types. Investing in the data collection 

and analysis tools necessary to identify the repeat offenders, repeat 

victims, hot spots, and products most likely to be stolen can greatly 

help police and local government focus their attention where it is 

most needed.

Recommended for further information:

Clarke, Ronald 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. www.popcenter.org/

learning/60steps. 

National Research Council of the National Academies. Fairness and 

Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence. Washington, D.C.: The National 

Academies Press, 2004.

Goldstein, Herman. Problem-Oriented Policing. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990.
21

The Local Government Executive's Role in Policing and Crime Prevention

The Local Government Executive’s Role 

in Policing and Crime Prevention

With all that you have to concern yourself with as the local government 

chief executive—taxes, budgets, and finance; physical infrastructure; 

public transportation; water and air quality; economic development; 

legislation; labor negotiations; personnel matters; public relations; 

political relations; etc.—it might be tempting to defer public safety 

to the police to handle. This might be especially tempting if you lack 

formal authority over and control of the police department. After all, 

policing can be a complex and messy business, with lots that can go 

wrong. Establishing a bit of distance from the police can sometimes 

seem the wiser political course. 

But leaving public safety entirely to the police is a mistake. Policing 

can be done well and effectively with the right leadership and support, 

including yours. We hope this guide, along with the more detailed 

information contained in the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police, will 

help demystify policing and crime prevention, providing clear, sensible, 

and practical recommendations for many public safety problems.

An overarching theme of the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police is that 

law enforcement alone, and police alone, will not effectively address 

most public safety problems. Police have a strong and important 

role to play, but so do others in local government, other government 

agencies, nongovernment organizations, the business community, and 

the general community. As the local government chief executive, you 

have both the formal and the moral authority to insist on sound public 

safety policies and practices and to compel the collaboration necessary 

to achieve them.

On the following pages are some recommendations regarding your role 

in promoting good policing and crime prevention.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

22

Treat Public Safety as a Local Government 

Function, Not Just a Police Function

Your strongest role with regard to public safety is as the supervisor of 

the various department heads reporting to you. Although many people 

think only of the police, fire, and emergency medical services as public 

safety agencies, in fact, nearly every local government department 

plays some important role in promoting public safety. The following are 

examples:

 Building inspection and code enforcement: Enforces building 

codes that help ensure that property owners are responsibly 

maintaining their properties, which discourages crime in and around 

them.

 Economic development: Influences an area’s mix of commerce, 

which influences the types of people present in the area on various 

days and at various times of the day, which in turn influences crime 

opportunities and crime prevention. 

 Government attorney: Responsible for much of the civil law 

enforcement, which is especially important for ensuring responsible 

property management that reduces crime and disorder risks.

 Mass transit: Regulates passengers’ conduct and its 

transportation vehicles’ and stations’ design and security.

 Mental health: Responsible for providing crisis intervention and 

community care for many mentally ill people, some of whom 

otherwise might become criminal offenders or victims.

 Parking: Influences traffic flow through parking regulations and 

controls the design, maintenance, and security of publicly owned 

parking facilities, which affects the safety and security of vehicles 

and the people in them.

 Parks and recreation: Responsible for the design, maintenance, 

and organized activities in parks, all of which influence the parks’ 

crime and disorder levels. Also is responsible for recreation 

programs that draw youth away from crime.
23

The Local Government Executive's Role in Policing and Crime Prevention

 Planning and community development: Approves site plans at 

the lot, building, neighborhood, and community levels, the proper 

design of which can discourage crime through the application of 

crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED, commonly 

pronounced “sep ted”) principles.

 Public health: Responsible for controlling the spread of 

communicable diseases, including sexually transmitted diseases 

commonly spread by prostitutes and drug addicts.

 Public housing: Establishes and enforces standards of good 

conduct among tenants.

 Public libraries: Regulates patrons’ conduct in the libraries and 

can provide youth with a safe and productive place to be when not 

in school.

 Public works: Responsible for street lighting, which affects many 

nighttime crime problems such as burglary, robbery, and sexual 

assault.

 Schools: Controls the design of school buildings and grounds, 

policies on student attendance and off-campus privileges, afterschool activities, and in-school monitoring of student conduct, 

all of which affect the safety of students and the security of the 

surrounding neighborhood.

 Social services: Responsible for the welfare of abused and 

neglected people, especially children, some elderly citizens, and 

domestic violence victims.

 Traffic engineering: Designs the roads and establishes speed 

limits, both of which have much to do with speed, traffic flow, and 

crash risks.

Accordingly, responsibility and capacity to affect public safety reaches 

well beyond your police department. Depending on the particular 

public safety problem at issue, you should ensure that all the local 

government agencies bearing some responsibility and capacity to 

influence that issue work together toward its resolution. You should also 

promote and facilitate, within legal constraints, data sharing among 

various government departments so that the various departments 

have the information necessary to work effectively with one another. 
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

24

You should ensure that those whom you appoint as department heads 

understand how their departments’ work implicates public safety and 

promote inter-department cooperation and collaboration.

Often, the police are the first agency to detect emerging or acute public 

safety problems because they handle the critical incidents and are one 

of few agencies open for business around the clock. As a consequence, 

police may develop special insights into the problems, but that should 

not mean that police retain sole responsibility for addressing all the 

problems they identify.

Adopt a Problem-Oriented Approach to 

Addressing Public Safety Concerns

The problem-oriented approach (explained more fully in the following 

section) need not be restricted to policing. It has equal relevance to all 

local government functions. In brief, it establishes a process through 

which: 

 Problems are identified and defined. 

 Problems are analyzed to determine causes and contributing 

factors.

 Current responses are reviewed to determine strengths and 

limitations.

 New and alternative responses are considered.

 An improved response strategy is designed.

 Responses are implemented.

 Results are measured. 

If deemed successful, the responses might be made permanent and 

the problem is monitored. If deemed unsuccessful, the problem is 

reanalyzed or different responses are tried. In most instances, the 

process and findings are documented for others to learn from.
25

The Local Government Executive's Role in Policing and Crime Prevention

More specifically, you should do the following:

 Ensure there are multiple systems in place to identify public safety 

problems demanding special attention, perhaps to include:

 Monitoring specific reported crime and disorder trends

 Surveying citizens to identify problems they might not have 

reported through official channels

 Consulting with police officers and other line-level government 

employees

 Consulting with elected officials who commonly hear citizen 

complaints

 Monitoring media reporting on emerging problems

 Meeting with community groups to hear about chronic and 

emerging problems.

 Ensure structures, systems, and project leadership are in place to 

facilitate problem-solving, track progress, and hold employees and 

departments accountable for follow-up.

Insist on Best (or Good) Professional Practices

 Expect that police and other departments seek out best-practice 

information to inform their responses to specific public safety 

problems.

 Ask probing questions about strategies and tactics being applied to 

public safety problems, such as the following:

 Is this strategy recognized as good or best practice (remaining 

open to pioneering work)?

 Is this strategy based on evidence of its effectiveness?

 What alternatives have been considered?

 What data and analysis support this approach?

 Has the response strategy achieved measurable results in your 

community or elsewhere?

 What are the likely consequences (intended and unintended) of 

adopting this strategy?
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

26

 Engage local industry leaders—alcohol purveyors, planners, 

architects, motel owners, landlords, etc.—and their representative 

groups in developing, implementing, and enforcing industry-specific 

best practice.

Insist on Good Data Analysis to Inform Public 

Safety Policies and Practices

 When feasible, employ professionally trained crime analysts and 

ensure they have good analysis hardware and software, data 

management systems, and data-sharing agreements.

 Make sure analysts can focus on their core functions, are 

knowledgeable about public safety problems, and can influence 

operational strategies.

 Where available and useful, solicit research assistance from nearby 

colleges and universities.

Recommended for further information:

Clarke, Ronald V. and John E. Eck. Crime Analysis for Problem-Solvers: In 

60 Small Steps. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 2005.

Boba, Rachel. Problem Analysis in Policing. Police Foundation and U.S. 

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2003.

The COPS Office has available a number of publications and other resources 

pertaining to information sharing and technology that are accessible online at 

www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=111#IT. 

Related POP Guides

Enhancing the Problem-Solving Capacity of Crime Analysis Units

Researching a Problem

Using Offender Interviews To Inform Police Problem-Solving

Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police 

Problem-Solvers
27

The Local Government Executive's Role in Policing and Crime Prevention

Emphasize Prevention

As important as it often is for the police to apprehend offenders so 

that they can hold them legally accountable for their crimes, and as 

important as it is for police to comfort and assist crime victims, it is 

equally important that police and others work to prevent crime and 

disorder in the first place. At least in the long term, reacting to crime is 

nearly always more costly than preventing it.

Do not get bogged down in debates about the “root causes” of crime. 

While local government shares in the responsibility to remediate some 

of the social factors that contribute to crime and disorder, such as 

poverty, joblessness, homelessness, racism, education deficiencies, 

and class conflict, these factors do not necessarily directly cause crime 

and disorder. Moreover, many of the causes of crime that are inherent 

in some people’s character, such as greed, lust, laziness, anger, and 

hatred, are rather difficult for local government to change.

Instead, focus more on the near or immediate causes of crime, typically 

the situational and environmental conditions from which potential 

offenders take their cues as to whether or not to commit an offense at a 

particular time and place. It is these sorts of factors about which police 

and local government can do much more to prevent crime and disorder.

Recommended for further information:

Felson, Marcus. Crime and Everyday Life, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks (California): 

Sage Publications, 2002.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

28

Help Broker Responsibility for Addressing Public 

Safety Problems

As the previous section illustrated, many public safety problems are 

preventable, yet police and local government do not control many of the 

conditions that cause or contribute to them. If, through careful analysis, 

police and local government can establish how particular conditions are 

causing or contributing to specific crime and disorder problems, you 

can use your authority and influence to persuade or compel others—

businesses and corporations, property owners, citizens, etc.—to take 

responsible action that might prevent problems. A variety of methods 

and techniques exist—some merely advisory, some more persuasive, 

and some compulsory—that police and local government can apply, 

depending on the circumstances. Such methods might include public 

awareness campaigns, public shaming, legislative requirements, civil 

lawsuits, and so forth.

Related POP Guides:

Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety Problems
29

The Local Government Executive's Role in Policing and Crime Prevention

Develop Sensible Public Safety Indicators

Develop and routinely collect data for a set of public safety measures 

that might include the following:

 Reported complaints about crime and disorder

 Unreported complaints about crime and disorder

 Fear and concern about crime and safety

 Citizen confidence in local government, including police, to address 

public safety problems

 Visible evidence of blight, such as abandoned buildings and 

vehicles, litter, broken and poorly maintained infrastructure, and 

graffiti and vandalism

 Early warning indicators of neighborhood vitality and stability.

Some of these data are already routinely collected from, for example, 

police crime reports and calls for police service, but other data might 

not be and must be gathered through other methods such as citizen 

and environmental surveys.

31

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

How Local Governments Can Control and 

Prevent Crime and Disorder

General Approaches

The modern policing age has spawned many new approaches to 

policing operating under a variety of labels and terms, many of which 

you will have at least heard in passing, but perhaps never completely 

understood. And while you rely on your police chief executive to 

understand these approaches and to craft a sensible local approach 

from among them, having some familiarity with and understanding 

of the most common approaches will enhance your ability to provide 

knowledgeable support and oversight to your police agency. 

Community policing is perhaps the most familiar term in modern 

policing. Nearly all modern policing reforms, including most of those 

described below, have been variously associated with community 

policing, as variations on or subsets of it. The exact relationship 

between and among these concepts remains a matter of some 

academic debate. For our purposes here, community policing is based 

on the idea that police should work closely with citizens to cultivate 

public trust in the police and to better address citizens’ public safety 

concerns. The COPS Office defines community policing as follows:

Community policing is a philosophy that promotes organizational 

strategies, which 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.6

Recommended for further information:

COPS Office web site at www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=36. 

6 See the COPS Office web site 

at www.cops.usdoj.gov for further 

information.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

32

Below is a synopsis of the other leading policing and public safety 

approaches:

Problem-Oriented Policing 

This guide is part of a larger body of work known as problem-oriented 

policing, a comprehensive approach to policing and public safety that 

takes into account the variety and complexity of public safety issues.

The original proponent of the problem-oriented approach, renowned 

police scholar Herman Goldstein, of the University of Wisconsin Law 

School, summarized the approach as follows:

Problem-oriented policing is an approach to policing in which 

discrete pieces of police business (each consisting of a cluster 

of similar incidents, whether crime or acts of disorder, that 

the police are expected to handle) are subject to microscopic 

examination (drawing on the especially honed skills of crime 

analysts and the accumulated experience of operating field 

personnel) in hopes that what is freshly learned about each 

problem will lead to discovering a new and more effective 

strategy for dealing with it. Problem-oriented policing places a 

high value on new responses that are preventive in nature, that 

are not dependent on the use of the criminal justice system, 

and that engage other public agencies, the community, and 

the private sector when their involvement has the potential 

for significantly contributing to the reduction of the problem. 

Problem-oriented policing carries a commitment to implementing 

the new strategy, rigorously evaluating its effectiveness, and, 

subsequently, reporting the results in ways that will benefit other 

police agencies and that will ultimately contribute to building a 

body of knowledge that supports the further professionalization 

of the police.7

Problem-oriented policing is not a simplistic approach to crime, 

disorder, and public safety. It does not promise a single solution to 

all problems. Consequently, it can lack the pizzazz and sound-bite 

appeal of some other policing approaches. What it does offer is very 

7

 For this and further descriptions 

of problem-oriented policing, 

see the Center for ProblemOriented Policing web site 

at www.popcenter.org/

about/?p=whatiscpop.
33

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

real potential for local government to have a positive and sustainable 

impact on specific public safety problems. Considerable research 

and measurable practice back up the approach. For a comprehensive 

treatment of this body of research and practice, see the Center for 

Problem-Oriented Policing web site, www.popcenter.org.

Recommended for further information:

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

Goldstein, Herman. “Improving Policing: A Problem-Oriented Approach.” Crime 

& Delinquency 25(2) (1979):236–58. www.popcenter.org/library/reading.

Situational Crime Prevention

Situational crime prevention originated not as a policing approach, 

but more broadly as a scientific approach to crime prevention. The 

approach focuses on reducing crime by designing safer environments 

and more-secure consumer products. It shifts the crime prevention 

focus away from merely trying to deter offenders through punishment 

and rehabilitation, and toward convincing offenders that committing 

a particular crime in a particular place at a particular time is not 

worthwhile. In five main ways it does so by: 

1. Increasing the effort to offend 

2. Increasing the risk to offenders of getting caught 

3. Reducing the rewards of offending 

4. Reducing provocations to offend 

5. Removing excuses for offending

Situational crime prevention has implications well beyond just the 

police function. As a local government executive, you have significant 

influence over the design of safe environments through zoning, 

planning, and land-use regulations, and perhaps even some influence 

over the design and sale of some consumer products that are likely 

to be either stolen or used as tools in crime. The situational crime 
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

34

prevention approach is widely considered to be compatible with 

problem-oriented policing, and you can read more about its practice on 

the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing web site. 

Recommended for further information:

Felson, Marcus. Crime and Everyday Life, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks (California): 

SAGE Publications, 2002.

Felson, Marcus and Ronald V. Clarke. Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical 

Theory for Crime Prevention. London: U.K. Home Office, 1998. 

www.popcenter.org/library/reading/?p=2. 

Clarke, Ronald V. (ed.). Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, 

2nd ed. Guilderland, New York: Harrow & Heston, 1997. Now available from 

Criminal Justice Press, Monsey (New York).

Intelligence-Led Policing

Originating in British police forces, intelligence-led policing helps police 

managers to better use crime and intelligence data to direct police 

resources and investigations aimed at disrupting organized crime 

networks and activities, and apprehending active and prolific offenders. 

The concept has become a standard police management model among 

British police forces under its official title, the National Intelligence 

Model. The model heavily emphasizes data collection and analysis to 

inform policing operations. This approach, too, is generally considered 

compatible with community policing and problem-oriented policing, 

although its practice in American police agencies is still evolving.

Recommended for further information:

Ratcliffe, Jerry. Intelligence-Led Policing. Cullompton (Devon, U.K.) and 

Portland, Oregon: Willan Publishing, 2008. 
35

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

8

 For critiques of the zero-tolerance 

policing concept see Taylor, 

Ralph B., “Incivilities Reduction 

Policing, Zero Tolerance, and the 

Retreat from Coproduction: Weak 

Foundations and Strong Pressures” 

in Police Innovation: Contrasting 

Perspectives, D. Weisburd and A. 

Braga (eds.), Cambridge (U.K).: 

Cambridge University Press, 

2006; Dixon, David, “Beyond 

Zero Tolerance” in Policing: Key 

Readings, T. Newburn (ed.), 

Cullompton (U.K) and Portland 

(Oregon): Willan Publishing, 2005; 

Cordner, Gary, “Problem-Oriented 

Policing Vs. Zero Tolerance” 

in Problem-Oriented Policing: 

Crime-Specific Problems, Critical 

Issues and Making POP Work, T. 

O’Connor Shelley and A. Grant 

(eds.), Washington, D.C.: Police 

Executive Research Forum, 1998; 

Greene, Judith A., “Zero Tolerance: 

A Case Study of Police Policies and 

Practices in New York City,” Crime 

& Delinquency 45(2) (1999):171–

187; Sanders, Jerry, “Refreshing 

Copspeak.” The New York Times, 

April 16, 1999; and Pollard, 

Charles, “Zero Tolerance: Shortterm Fix, Long-term Liability?” in 

Zero Tolerance: Policing a Free 

Society, 2nd Ed., N. Dennis (ed.), 

London: The IEA Health and Welfare 

Unit, 1998.

Broken Windows Policing

“Broken Windows” is a phrase coined by political scientist James Q. 

Wilson and police scholar George Kelling. It asserts that unaddressed 

signs of minor disorder can cause more serious crime in an area. 

The idea has significantly influenced American policing over the 

past several decades, leading police to address lower-level disorder 

problems more than they previously have. This thesis has been the 

subject of significant critique by some criminologists who do not believe 

that low-level disorder causes serious crime, and that excessive police 

enforcement of low-level offenses can overwhelm the criminal justice 

system without necessarily reducing serious crime. Other scholars 

and practitioners firmly believe that police attention to minor disorder 

has substantially reduced more serious crime. Regardless of whether 

disorder causes more serious crime, it is more firmly established that 

disorder can generate apprehension among citizens, a matter worthy of 

police attention in its own right.

Recommended for further information:

Kelling, George L. and Catherine M. Coles. Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring 

Order & Reducing Crime in Our Communities. New York: The Free Press, 1996.

Harcourt, Bernard E. Illusion of Order: The False Promise of Broken Windows 

Policing. Cambridge (Massachusetts): Harvard University Press, 2001.

Zero-Tolerance Policing

Zero-tolerance policing refers to the strict enforcement of laws 

that police officers might otherwise not have enforced, exercising 

their discretionary authority. The concept has been linked, rather 

inappropriately and unfortunately, with the Broken Windows approach. 

While the idea of strict police enforcement is often popular with 

frustrated and frightened citizens, as well as with some police 

officers, widespread and indiscriminate police enforcement can have 

unintended negative consequences for both the local criminal justice 

system’s operations and for police-community relations. Many police 

officials and scholars are harshly critical of the concept.8
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

36

CompStat

CompStat (shorthand for “computerized statistics”) is a police 

management tool that originated in the New York City Police 

Department in the 1990s. It emphasizes statistics-based 

identification of crime patterns, rapid deployment of police resources 

to the locations where those patterns exist, and police-command 

accountability for reducing reported crime figures. Many police 

agencies have replicated this model, often with variations. To the 

extent that the approach emphasizes using data to inform police 

operations and focuses police commanders on crime control, it is 

commendable and compatible with problem-oriented policing. On the 

other hand, to the extent that it focuses exclusively on a few types 

of reported crimes rather than on the broader range of public safety 

problems of concern to the public, and to the extent that it emphasizes 

only short-term reductions in reported crime through intensive police 

presence and enforcement, it can yield only short-term and expensive 

responses to selected crime problems, and thus be incompatible with 

problem-oriented policing.

The Traditional Policing Model

As important as the distinctions between and among the above 

innovative approaches to policing and public safety are, it is equally 

important to recognize that all of these approaches represent in some 

respects improvements on what is known in the policing profession 

as the “traditional” or “professional” policing model. The traditional or 

professional policing model emphasized crime control through highvisibility policing, random police patrols, rapid response to all citizen 

calls to the police, and follow-up criminal investigations by detectives. 

All of these elements were intended to discourage crime by increasing 

the likelihood that police would catch offenders, who would then be 

punished through criminal prosecution. While it is not a completely 

flawed model, the evidence is quite strong that it has not controlled 

crime, increased the public’s sense of safety and security, or enhanced 

public confidence in the police and local government as much as was 
37

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

hoped. That is why most police scholars and many police officials have 

long concluded that while the traditional policing model represented a 

vast improvement over approaches that preceded it, more of the same 

is not likely to improve policing or public safety.

Recommended for further information:

National Research Council of the National Academies. Fairness and 

Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence. Washington, D.C.: The National 

Academies Press, 2004.

Specific Responses to Some Common Public 

Safety Problems

This section of the guide is intended to give you a sampling of what 

local government and police can do to effectively prevent and control 

specific crime and disorder problems. It is not a comprehensive set of 

recommendations for addressing all public safety problems or even for 

addressing any particular problem. It does, however, touch on many of 

the sorts of concerns that commonly generate public fear and therefore 

demand the attention of political leaders as well as police. Moreover, 

effectively controlling some of these problems can help prevent even 

more serious crimes. 

You can find more-complete coverage of how to address specific types 

of public safety problems, and the supporting research evidence and 

examples of good practice, in the various Problem-Oriented Guides 

for Police (www.popcenter.org). Titles of POP Guides related to each 

topic below are listed at the end of each topic section. You can find 

summaries of exemplary problem-oriented policing initiatives in this 

guide’s Appendix.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

38

Control Alcohol Distribution and Consumption

Alcohol abuse contributes perhaps more than any other factor to crime 

and disorder. It contributes strongly to noise complaints, disorderly 

conduct, public urination, litter, property damage, assaults, sexual 

assaults, domestic violence, drunken driving, and homicide. Strong 

policies governing alcohol distribution and consumption can have wide 

crime and disorder-control benefits. More specifically, you should do 

the following:

 Ensure there is meaningful enforcement of alcohol regulations.

 Set a tone that promotes responsible alcohol distribution and 

consumption in your community. Publicly acknowledge both the 

legitimate interest that licensed establishments have in making a 

profit, as well as their responsibility to serve alcohol in ways that do 

not generate crime and disorder problems. 

 Encourage and compel responsible licensed-establishment 

management. Responsible management is the most important 

factor in determining whether a licensed establishment is safe 

or unsafe.

 Ensure that sufficient alcohol detoxification and treatment services 

are available.

Related POP Guides:

Assaults in and Around Bars

Drunk Driving

Underage Drinking
39

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

Close Drug Markets 

If alcohol abuse is the primary contributor to crime and disorder, drug 

abuse—of both illegal and legal drugs—is a close second. Drug 

markets generate tremendous spin-off crime and disorder problems 

such as assault, robbery, prostitution, gangs, noise, hazardous 

waste, and loitering. Simply arresting drug dealers and users will not 

effectively address local drug markets and the problems they create. 

Work to disrupt and close known markets, especially those operating 

out in the open. Think of drug markets as business enterprises, albeit 

illegal ones. Do what you can to make it more difficult for those drug 

businesses to operate profitably. More specifically, do the following:

 Hold business and residential property owners accountable for 

managing their properties in ways that do not facilitate nearby drug 

markets. Use licensing, zoning, code enforcement, civil abatement, 

asset forfeiture, and other civil law tools to compel responsible 

property management. Make sure that your local government 

attorney’s office has the knowledge and skill to enforce property 

management laws. 

 Consider changing traffic or parking patterns to make it more 

difficult for drug dealers and buyers to conduct business.

 Solicit and facilitate community opposition to drug markets. A vocal 

and visible community stand against drug markets, when combined 

with effective drug enforcement, can be effective. 

 Support the development and operation of drug courts.

 Ensure there are sufficient community drug treatment services 

available. Enforcement approaches to drug control are not as 

effective without adequate drug treatment, and vice versa.

Related POP Guides:

Clandestine Methamphetamine Labs

Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets

Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

40

Expect Property Owners and Managers to Control Activity in 

and around Their Properties

Residential rental properties, and motels and lodging houses requiring 

the most police attention are usually those that are not managed 

or maintained properly. Sometimes, you simply need to remind 

property owners of their duties and nudge them toward compliance. 

Occasionally, owners may not know how to manage challenging 

properties and will benefit from property management training the 

local government or landlord association provides. Other times, owners 

refuse to accept their responsibilities, requiring more persuasive 

measures to get them to take remedial action.

Do not allow irresponsible owners to shift all responsibility for problems 

at their properties to the police. It is well established that responsible 

property management reduces crime and disorder problems at and 

around properties. Police can help, but the owners and managers 

should have primary responsibility.

Specific measures local government can take include the following:

 Establish a normal or acceptable level of problems at rental 

properties, motels, and lodging houses, and put owners and 

managers on official notice when problems exceed that level, after 

which special government interventions will apply. You might also 

direct them to resources to improve their management practices.

 Publicly praise responsibly run properties and publicly criticize 

irresponsibly run ones.

 Bring together property owners and managers to discuss specific 

problems and how they control them. Owners and managers 

themselves can pressure and educate one another toward better 

management. 

 Use nuisance abatement procedures to recover the costs associated 

with policing problem establishments.

 Enforce relevant building and health codes, and business license 

requirements.
41

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

 If the properties are financed, engage the mortgage holders to 

persuade property owners to address problems at the property.

 Ensure that zoning ordinances do not create incompatible land uses 

likely to generate crime, disorder, and fear.

Related POP Guides:

Disorder at Budget Motels

Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes

Design and Manage Parks 

Safety problems in public parks range from underage drinking, public 

urination, and gambling to prostitution, drug use, and sexual assault. 

Apply crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) 

principles to park design and maintenance. More specifically, do 

the following:

 Control access to the parks through signs, gates, locks, use of 

natural boundaries like waterways, etc.

 Ensure that park users can both see and be seen by means of 

lighting, landscaping, roads and paths, site orientation, equipment 

placement, etc.

 Clearly establish and promote legitimate park uses and prohibit 

and discourage illegitimate park uses through signs, landscaping, 

equipment, organized activities, enforcement, etc.

 Attract natural guardians to your parks, such as parents to 

safeguard their children, coaches to safeguard their players, and 

licensed park users to protect their park-use privilege.

Related POP Guides:

Dealing With Crime and Disorder in Urban Parks

Using Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design in Problem Solving
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

42

Promote Safe Schools 

Local government shares with parents and school officials a 

responsibility to ensure that students are safe in and on their way to 

and from school. Some public safety problems that affect the wider 

community have links to the schools, such as the following:

 Daytime residential burglary (that truant students might commit)

 Vengeance shootings (that might relate to bullying in school)

 Child abuse and neglect (that school officials might first detect)

 Bomb threats (that mischievous students might call in)

 Retail theft (that students might commit at nearby shops)

 Acquaintance rape (that students might commit)

 School break-ins and vandalism (that students might commit)

 Pedestrian safety (of students coming and going to school).

More specifically, local government can do the following:

 Help negotiate the respective responsibilities of local government, 

schools, parents, students, and neighboring businesses and 

residents for preventing and resolving school-related problems.

 Assign police officers in and around local schools to help maintain 

order, protect students, enforce laws, provide safety and security 

advice, and promote good behavior among students. 

 Work with school officials to improve the design and maintenance of 

school buildings and grounds to decrease crime and disorder risks.

 Work with school and transportation officials to reduce opportunities 

for conflict and violence as students arrive at and leave school by, 

for example, staggering class start and release times, monitoring 

paths and buses to and from school, creating and monitoring 

after-school activities, and regulating student conduct in the 

neighborhood during and immediately after school hours.

Related POP Guides:

Acquaintance Rape of College Students

Bomb Threats in Schools
43

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

Bullying in Schools

School Vandalism and Break-Ins

Traffic Congestion Around Schools

Underage Drinking

Reduce Vehicle Crime

Many crimes occur between people who are both somehow complicit 

in the crime, such as between drug dealers and buyers, prostitutes 

and clients, or mutual combatants. By contrast, thefts of and from, 

and vandalism to, parked vehicles account for a substantial number 

of crimes against innocent victims. These sorts of crimes therefore 

contribute significantly to the public perception that a community is 

not safe or secure. These crimes typically occur to vehicles when they 

are parked either on the street or in parking lots or structures. Careful 

crime analysis should show you where they are concentrated. Among 

the specific measures to prevent such crimes are the following:

 Concentrate prevention measures on those lots, structures, streets, 

blocks, and neighborhoods where the crimes are concentrated.

 Put people in the parking lots and structures. Attendants, whether 

stationary or roving, are effective in preventing thefts. Unattended 

lots and structures are especially risky.

 Design parking lots and structures properly: secure the lots’ and 

structures’ perimeters with transparent barriers, improve lighting 

and signs, use video surveillance, and/or require drivers to present 

a time-stamped ticket received at entry in order to exit.

 Develop a security rating system for parking facilities based on an 

audit of security features.

Related POP Guides:

Thefts of and From Cars in Parking Facilities

Thefts of and From Cars on Residential Streets and Driveways
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

44

Prevent Repeat Burglaries 

Most houses and businesses will never be burgled, but some are 

repeatedly and merit special attention. More specifically, you should do 

the following:

 Do not depend solely on alarms to prevent burglary. While alarms 

can help, once burglars trigger an alarm, they typically have 

sufficient time to steal and flee the scene before someone arrives to 

check the building. Police do occasionally apprehend burglars in the 

act, but the odds of doing so are low.

 Neighborhood watch programs, although popular, are not always 

effective in preventing burglary. High-crime neighborhoods that 

might benefit from watch programs often have difficulty organizing 

and sustaining them, while watch programs in relatively safe 

neighborhoods may increase residents’ fear of crime without 

actually reducing crime. 

 Modify building codes to encourage or require good burglaryprevention design and construction. 

 Monitor and regulate common outlets for stolen property, such as 

pawn shops, secondhand shops, and scrap-metal dealerships. 

Related POP Guides:

Burglary at Single-Family House Construction Sites

Burglary of Retail Establishments

Burglary of Single-Family Houses

Improving Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas

School Vandalism and Break-Ins

Stolen Goods Markets
45

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

Prevent Shoplifting 

Retail establishment managers—be they managers of liquor stores, 

grocery stores, big-box appliance outlets, or mall jewelry stores—are 

in the best position to prevent shoplifting through their security and 

merchandising practices. Depending on stores’ reporting policies, 

police can spend a lot of time processing shoplifting cases, many of 

which retailers could have prevented. Some retailers even account 

for unexplained losses by reporting them to police as thefts. Specific 

measures that local government can take to help retailers prevent 

shoplifting include the following:

 Clarify the circumstances under which police will respond to 

retail thefts, and the respective responsibilities of the police and 

merchants.

 Persuade retailers to improve store layout and merchandise displays 

based on an analysis of what types of merchandise are being 

stolen, and where.

 Work with the courts to establish a first-time offender program to 

streamline the adjudication process and minimize the costs to local 

government agencies. 

 Promote the use of effective shoplifting prevention and detection 

technology.

 Be sure that corporate loss-prevention managers and insurance 

carriers are aware of chronic theft problems.

Related POP Guide:

Shoplifting
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

46

Control Speeding in Residential Neighborhoods 

Regardless of your jurisdiction’s size, you are sure to hear complaints 

about speeders. Whether on a freeway, a county highway, a major 

arterial, or a residential street, excessive speed is dangerous and 

anxiety-provoking, particularly in residential areas and around schools. 

The most important principle in speed control is that motorists tend to 

drive at the speed at which they feel safe and comfortable, given the 

road conditions. Therefore, the key to reducing speed is to alter road 

conditions such that motorists feel uncomfortable speeding.

Consider the following specific measures:

 Identify the most problematic areas based on complaints and 

crashes, and focus enforcement resources accordingly. Enforcing 

speed laws merely to generate revenue tends to alienate the driving 

public and is not particularly effective anyway, at least not for 

very long. 

 Where permitted by law and warranted by complaint and crash 

data, use photo radar enforcement, varying the camera locations 

and operation hours. Bear in mind that photo radar enforcement 

is unpopular in some communities because it is viewed as unfair 

enforcement, too intrusive, or an unfair revenue generator. 

 Install traffic-calming devices like roundabouts, traffic circles, and 

speed humps or tables. Be cautious of speed bumps, however, 

as they can be dangerous to drivers and are problematic for 

emergency vehicles. Pay attention to design details; they can mean 

all the difference in whether citizens support them.

 Have your traffic engineer evaluate parking patterns, traffic flow, 

and street widths. Narrower streets—or streets that appear to be 

narrow—slow drivers down. 
47

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

 Encourage citizens to report speeding to police or conduct a 

publicity campaign to persuade motorists to slow down. Chronic 

neighborhood speeders—including the teenager with a new 

license, the commuter rushing to work, or the parent dropping 

children off at school—may respond to peer pressure from their 

neighbors.

Related POP Guide:

Speeding in Residential Areas

Minimize Graffiti 

Graffiti, or “tagging,” is generally categorized as either “artistic” or 

“gang” and can be found everywhere from street signs and public 

transportation to buildings and billboards. Many people consider graffiti 

unsightly and intimidating. Specific responses include the following:

 Clean graffiti early and often. It denies graffiti writers the 

satisfaction of seeing their graffiti on display, thereby undermining 

its primary purpose. 

 Enact an ordinance requiring property owners to remove graffiti 

within a certain amount of time (typically 24 to 72 hours after the 

graffiti is detected).

 Use some government funds to defray the costs to citizens of 

graffiti removal. 

 Set up a graffiti hotline to encourage citizen reporting. 

 Establish a graffiti abatement team that includes staff from the 

police, code enforcement, prosecutor’s office, and public works. 

 Design building walls and other surfaces so that they are not 

conducive to graffiti.

Related POP Guide:

Graffiti
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

48

Control Disorderly Behavior on the Streets

Panhandlers begging aggressively, chronic inebriates staggering 

around or passed out on the streets, mentally ill people acting 

strangely or menacingly, disorderly youth intimidating passersby, and 

other such disorder, particularly in busy commercial districts, can 

undermine the general public’s perception of safety and the area’s 

legitimate commerce. Police must handle such people and behavior 

with care. They are obliged to respect constitutionally protected 

speech and conduct, and protect even disorderly people from harm, 

while maintaining reasonable order and minimizing undue fear and 

intimidation. You should do the following:

 Recognize that most courts deem panhandling constitutionally 

protected activity, but governments can prohibit aggressive 

panhandling and panhandling at certain locations.

 Ensure that truly needy people have access to emergency food, 

clothing, shelter, and medical care. If you can ensure that, then 

discourage people from contributing to panhandlers because 

doing so typically only enables self-destructive lifestyles that also 

compromise community order. 

 Ensure that police can quickly access mental health services to help 

them deal with people in mental crisis.

 Restrict chronic inebriates’ access to alcohol. Prohibit the sale of 

alcohol to intoxicated people and known chronic inebriates, and 

enforce those prohibitions.

 Figure out why youth choose to hang out in places where they 

are disruptive to others and work with the youth to find more 

acceptable places to go. Condition any hanging-out privileges you 

might grant on the youths’ appropriate behavior.

Related POP Guides:

Disorder at Day Laborer Sites

Disorderly Youth in Public Places

Panhandling

People With Mental Illness
49

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

Control Street Prostitution 

Street prostitution demands police attention for various reasons: it 

offends uninvolved citizens, children may be involved in the prostitution 

trade, prostitutes are at high risk of being assaulted, prostitutes 

and their pimps sometimes rob clients, it undermines the area’s 

legitimate commerce, it is often connected with organized crime, 

and it contributes to the spread of disease. Arresting prostitutes and 

their clients in undercover operations can be an important part of an 

effective strategy, but will not suffice by itself. Other specific effective 

measures include the following:

 Change the physical and commercial environment where 

prostitution markets exist to make them less attractive to 

prostitutes. Enhance lighting, redevelop abandoned or blighted 

property, increase the legitimate use of space, and alter traffic 

patterns and rules to discourage vehicle soliciting. 

 Establish or support programs to educate, counsel, and deter 

prostitutes and their clients from continuing their activity. These 

programs are often more effective when reinforced by the threat of 

criminal prosecution for failing to complete them.

 Be careful about publicly shaming prostitutes or their clients. Some 

citizens and media outlets find this excessive or unnecessary, and 

its efficacy is unknown.

Discourage businesses near prostitution markets such as motels, 

rental housing, and taverns from allowing their properties to be used 

to facilitate prostitution. Use a variety of civil and criminal enforcement 

tools, as well as negative publicity.

Related POP Guide:

Street Prostitution
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

50

Don’t Waste Police Time

The most valuable police resource is officers’ time. They spend some 

of their time responding to crimes and incidents that have already 

occurred, and they should spend some of their time working to prevent 

crimes and incidents. Unless patrol officers have sufficient time free 

from handling calls for service and administrative duties, it will be 

difficult for them to address chronic crime and disorder problems 

proactively. While patrol officers cannot always control their time, given 

the emergency nature of some police work, some common demands 

on police time do not add much value to public safety. It might be worth 

reexamining the police response to the following types of incidents to 

minimize relatively unproductive police activity:

 911 hang-ups. These are calls to the emergency line in which 

the call-taker cannot ascertain whether a true emergency exists, 

and therefore dispatches a patrol officer to investigate. Many such 

calls are attributable to juvenile pranks, accidental misdialing 

(often when a caller seeks to dial a phone number beginning 

with “91”), inadvertent dialing by the jostling of a cell phone, and 

deliberate attempts to distract the police. Police should work with 

the emergency communications center to identify and remedy 911 

hang-up patterns.

 False burglar alarms. While properly functioning alarm systems 

help prevent burglary, typically over 90 percent of alarm activations 

are false, yet consume valuable police time responding to them. 

Consider various methods of reducing false alarms, including 

shifting the responsibility for verifying that an alarm is valid to the 

alarm company operating the system.

 Chronic and heavy users of police service. Some people and 

businesses repeatedly summon police for relatively trivial matters, 

or for persistent problems that they could prevent. Lonely people 

who just desire some companionship sometimes call police to 

report fictitious or trivial matters. Social service programs or access 

to nonemergency alternative phone numbers such as 311 or 

211 can better meet that need. Retailers with high-volume theft 

problems often fail to implement basic preventive measures. You 
51

How Local Governments Can Control and Prevent Crime and Disorder

might pressure them to do so. Some taverns and nightclubs rely 

too heavily on police to handle chronic trouble. You should pressure 

them to reduce the need to call police. Consider charging heavy 

and chronic consumers of police service extra fees if they refuse to 

take steps to prevent problems.

Also, continuously look for ways to make routine police tasks more 

efficient. Consider the following:

 Hire paraprofessionals such as civilian community service officers 

or use trained citizen volunteers to handle some duties that do not 

require a sworn officer’s expertise and authority.

 Establish a telephone (e.g., 211 and/or 311) and online reporting 

system for nonemergency and nonpolice matters.

 Enable citizens to file minor incident reports themselves—via 

mail-in, online, walk-in, or telephone reports.

 Speed up police report writing through field reporting systems or 

linked systems that reduce the need for duplicative data entry. 

Related POP Guides:

Bomb Threats in Schools

False Burglar Alarms

Misuse and Abuse of 911

53

Conclusion

Conclusion 

While it is impractical to think that police and local government can 

prevent all crime and disorder in a community, there is a growing body 

of research and good practice available to you and your staff that can 

greatly help you toward this goal. Realizing the maximum benefit of this 

knowledge, however, may require that local governments, police, and 

citizens alike challenge some long-held assumptions about how crime 

can be controlled and who bears responsibility for doing so. Availing 

yourself and your staff—police included—of this knowledge should 

leave your local government and your community better prepared to 

respond more effectively to problems as they arise, and to prevent at 

least some of those problems from arising in the first place.

55

Appendix

Appendix: Good Police-Community Problem Solving: 

Stories From the Field

Summaries of the Winning Projects for the Herman Goldstein Award for 

Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing, 1993–2008

The Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing recognizes outstanding police 

officers and police agencies—both in the United States and abroad—that engage in innovative and effective 

problem-solving efforts and achieve measurable success in reducing specific crime, disorder, and public 

safety problems. This international competition is named after the founder of problem-oriented policing, 

University of Wisconsin Emeritus Professor Herman Goldstein, and administered by the Center for ProblemOriented Policing.

You can find full details of the projects summarized below on the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing web 

site, under the Goldstein Awards. 

Santa Ana, California (1993)

Increases in Santa Ana’s homeless population and crime threatened businesses and tax revenues in a 

commercial district. Police devised a plan to remove transients, criminals, and aggressive panhandlers from 

the area, reduce crime and disorder through environmental design, and educate district employees and 

patrons. Businesses reported increases in revenues and less crime and disorder.

Los Angeles, California (1993)

The LAPD Rampart Division’s northwest section was experiencing increases in narcotic offenses, gangrelated activity, robberies, assaults, citizen complaints, and calls for service. Information obtained from 

citizens, police officers, and calls for service revealed that five area properties generated the increase in calls 

for service. The police contacted the property owners and solicited their assistance in renovating, securing, 

or eliminating the properties, and arrested several drug dealers. Calls for service decreased dramatically, as 

the majority of the transients and narcotics dealers inhabiting the properties left the area. 
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

56

Kansas City, Missouri (1994)

Kansas City’s Creston Apartments had experienced a dramatic increase in violent crime. Residents’ 

complaints and calls for service increased, while government officials pressured the police to respond to the 

growing problem. The area was draining police resources. The police examined police reports and computer 

printouts, revealing that the majority of the calls were related to drug sales in and around the apartments. 

The police cultivated information about the drug trade from the community’s residents. Assistance from other 

government agencies enabled the police to provide 24-hour security at the apartments, which were to be 

torn down because they were structurally unsound. The police arrested many of the drug dealers or evicted 

them from the apartments. Calls for police service decreased dramatically. 

Calgary, Alberta, Canada (1994)

Twenty-four bars bordered an inner-city residential community in Calgary. Over time, the area became a 

single-use bar destination from which businesses were forced to move due to the noise, crime, and filth. 

The area developed a reputation as “the place to go for a good time.” Residents complained about noise, 

garbage, and property damage. A crime-trend analysis revealed that street robberies, auto thefts, theft and 

damage to vehicles, and drunken disturbances were the primary crime problems. Regulatory, architectural, 

and operational changes were made to solve the underlying problems and reduce crime. A task force formed 

to encourage communication and cooperation among businesses and the police. A community partnership 

also formed to help the police identify and rectify problems. Violent crimes, property crimes, weapons 

complaints, complaints against police officers, and assaults on police officers decreased substantially. 

Georgetown, Texas (1995)

Alcohol-related crimes and accidents, litter, and ecological problems plagued Georgetown’s Blue Hole Park. 

A narrow road to the park created traffic problems and delayed emergency vehicles responding to calls. The 

lack of a designated parking area led to ecological damage to the riverbank. The police enacted a zerotolerance policy for Blue Hole Park and strictly enforced city ordinances and state laws. The cliffs, from which 

drunken visitors would jump and then climb back up, were located on private property, and “No Trespassing” 

signs were posted. Boulders were used to designate roads and prevent vehicles from parking on the 

riverbank. Ordinances were passed to alleviate parking and traffic problems. Blue Hole Park was transformed 

into a safe family park, virtually free of crime and disorder. 
57

Appendix

North Slope Borough, Alaska (1995)

Alaska’s North Slope Borough was experiencing substantial problems with alcohol-related crime and 

disorder. The costs of alcohol abuse were damaging the entire community. The alcohol-related incidents were 

attributed to legal sales of alcohol in the community and were more prevalent at social functions. The public 

safety director and the mayor initiated a campaign to ban alcohol from the borough. Barrow’s electorate 

then voted to ban the importation, sale, and possession of alcoholic beverages. The ban immediately and 

substantially decreased alcohol-related incidents. 

St. Petersburg, Florida (1996)

Over 6 months, there were 30 calls for police service from one location in St. Petersburg, 14 (46 percent) 

of which were either “911 hang-ups” or “playing on 911.” The deliberate misuse of the 911 emergency 

telephone system could prevent its legitimate use and unnecessarily commit police to responding to the 

calls. The problem location was a bank of pay telephones installed at a convenience store. School-aged 

children’s use of the area seemed to influence the problem. Dense shrubbery concealed the telephones from 

the view of passing vehicles’ occupants and of pedestrians. Moreover, the phones were purposely installed 

away from the store to discourage loitering. The shrubbery was trimmed, and the lighting was improved. 

The calls for service at the bank of pay phones were monitored from November 20, 1995 (the date the 

improvements were made) to July 1, 1996. There were no “playing on 911” calls, and “911 hang-ups” 

accounted for only 13 percent of total calls for service. 

Sacramento, California (1996)

Four years prior, two patrol officers were selected to work exclusively in what was then Sacramento’s most 

violent area. It consisted of 800-plus units of low-income housing owned and operated by the Sacramento 

Housing and Redevelopment Agency. A gang and narcotics problem created a neighborhood that effectively 

was a war zone. Police involved the community, used heavy enforcement, reached at-risk children, and 

formed partnerships to effect change. During the first 40 days, officers made 70 arrests for major narcotics 

violations. By 1994, police made more than 500 arrests. The partnerships formed with housing management, 

community associations, schools, local government, and other public and private agencies, improved the 

quality of life in this inner-city neighborhood. By the end of 1995, robberies were down 73 percent, felony 

assaults were down 74 percent, and narcotic calls were down 94 percent. A survey indicated that the 

residents are much more satisfied with their neighborhood. 
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

58

Fresno, California (1996) 

In just one year, El Dorado Park was responsible for 9 percent of the calls for service in Fresno’s northeast 

area. The most serious problem was a juvenile gang. The gang intimidated the community’s impoverished 

residents, who were hesitant to report crimes. The police cultivated relationships with neighborhood residents 

and encouraged them to report gang members and crime. The police also established the El Dorado Housing 

Authority, a coalition of city officials, property owners, managers, business owners, and volunteers, to discuss 

problems and suggest solutions. During the project’s first year, calls for service increased by 9 percent, while 

crime decreased by 26 percent. In the second year, calls for service decreased by 32 percent, with a 53 

percent reduction in crime. The area became cleaner, safer, and more desirable to live in. 

Peel, Ontario, Canada (1996)

Peel’s Turner-Felton Secondary School was experiencing problems with trespassers. While on school 

property, the trespassers would gather, loiter, and frequently engage in crime. The school was developing a 

reputation as being unsafe. Constable Tom McKay gathered information through interviews, crime statistics, 

and an examination of the school’s floor and site plans. He discovered some design deficiencies that 

contributed to the school’s disorder. Police used CPTED principles to improve the parking lot, pedestrian 

traffic flow, and security relying on the school’s existing structure. In the three years following the changes, 

police occurrences at the school dropped substantially. 

Glendale, California (1997)

A Glendale community experienced problems related to the activities of casual laborers, who congregated 

while waiting for work. Residents and business owners complained that the laborers blocked sidewalks and 

harassed pedestrians. They also urinated on buildings and in parking lots and left trash on the sidewalks, on 

streets, and in gutters. A managed site was developed where laborers could secure employment in a safe 

and orderly environment. A “No Solicitation” ordinance was enacted requiring laborers and employers to use 

the facility. The problems associated with the day laborers decreased. 

Boston, Massachusetts (1998)

In Boston, youth homicide increased from 1987 to 1990 and remained high from 1991 to 1995. Police 

geographically mapped youth homicides, analyzed gun markets, and collected the criminal histories of 

youth homicide victims, revealing that most youth homicides occurred in three neighborhoods, 75 percent 

of the homicide victims had been arraigned for at least one offense, and Boston gangs were responsible 

for 60 percent of the homicides. Police targeted illicit gun trafficking, and they disrupted street drug activity 

by focusing on low-level street crimes, serving outstanding warrants, and cultivating informants. Firearm 

homicides decreased by 60 percent among victims under the age of 24. 
59

Appendix

Green Bay, Wisconsin (1999)

A Green Bay business district experienced high crime rates. An investigation revealed that only 20 people 

were responsible for most of the neighborhood complaints. The police led a community effort to actively 

enforce public ordinances, increase liquor license regulation, mobilize citizens at city council meetings, 

modify the environmental design, use the courts as a liaison for alcoholic treatment, and have alcohol 

merchants refuse to sell alcohol to chronic offenders. The business district was revitalized, and calls for 

service decreased substantially.

San Diego, California (2000)

Graffiti impinged on the quality of life in San Diego. Police examined the nature, extent, and location of 

community graffiti. Most graffiti was located on multifamily housing units and businesses, and in the vicinity 

of the perpetrators’ home or school. The suspects were young males. The police formed a partnership 

with community and governmental agencies. Chronic offenders were identified, monitored by the police, 

and participated in bimonthly paint-outs. Volunteers were assigned to keep blocks graffiti-free. Mentoring 

programs were developed, and junior high school students painted murals on the most heavily tagged walls 

and helped police by reporting graffiti. Graffiti decreased, and youth became more involved in the community. 

California Highway Patrol (2001)

Inadequate shoulders, poor signs, short passing, merging lanes leading to an “unsafe turning movement,” 

and center line-crossing contributed to accidents in a California highway corridor. Many Spanish-speaking 

drivers were unfamiliar with traffic safety laws, and emergency services were difficult to access in the remote 

corridor. Intensified police patrol, improved emergency services delivery, and public education were used to 

improve safety. Both fatal and nonfatal collisions decreased. 

California Highway Patrol (2002)

During the 3-year period of 1997 through 1999, in the California Highway Patrol’s Central Division, there 

were an estimated 187 farm-labor vehicle collisions, resulting in 20 deaths and 121 injuries. The California 

Legislature passed two bills to enhance farm-labor vehicles’ safety. The bill made seat-belt use mandatory 

and strengthened safety requirements. Officers inspected over 3,000 farm-labor vehicles and took more than 

500 unsafe vehicles out of service. In 2000, no deaths were associated with farm-labor vehicle collisions for 

the first time since 1992. Farm vehicle collisions dropped 73 percent.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

60

Oakland, California (2003)

Recurring nuisance and crime at an Oakland motel gained a police officer’s attention. The motel’s problems 

included an inordinately high volume of calls for police service, prostitution, illegal drug activity, abandoned 

cars, an illegal auto repair business in the motel parking lot, and room rentals to minors. Data checks, site 

visits, interviews, undercover surveillance, and comparisons of management practices with those of other 

nearby motels led police to conclude that the motel’s poor management practices were allowing crime and 

nuisances to flourish. After meetings, the motel’s management failed to resolve the motel’s problems, and 

the police and city attorneys filed a drug nuisance-abatement lawsuit against the motel’s parent corporation. 

After intense negotiations, the parent corporation agreed to improve its management practices and to post a 

$250,000 performance bond and pay $35,000 to cover the costs of the police investigation. Improvements 

were made to the motel’s physical environment and management practices. Two years after the agreement 

was signed, there had been few calls for police service at the motel. 

Portsmouth, Hampshire, England (2004)

The Portsmouth initiative was launched in 2003 following increases in vehicle crime, despite being a 

priority and focus for the Crime and Disorder Strategic Partnership in the first year of the 2002–to–2005 

strategy. The initiative was based on crime-pattern analysis and evidence-based practice to combine 

“quick wins” with long-term sustainable actions. Key problem-solving areas explored through the initiative 

included maximizing forensic potential and intelligence-gathering, developing an extensive three-tier 

crime-reduction strategy, and initiating a high-profile media campaign. The Portsmouth City Council 

also worked with the police to redesign parking lots, support a proactive media campaign, and support 

specific initiatives in hot spot locations. Overall, Operation Cobra was responsible for a substantial 

decrease in vehicle crime, and the target reduction for the strategy had already been reached during its 

first 9 months of operation. The combination of enforcement and prevention work led to some dramatic 

“quick wins,” but was truly underpinned by prevention work designed to produce sustainable results. The 

initiative demonstrated the importance of effective partnerships’ working based on informed analysis and 

evidenced-based practice.
61

Appendix

Douglas, Isle of Man, British Isles (2005)

Project Centurion was a multiagency project established in January 2003 in response to public concern 

regarding alcohol-related crimes occurring on Douglas Promenade. It aimed to reduce crime and disorder 

there. Analyses revealed three primary contributory factors for the problem: 1. a concentration of assaults, 

criminal damage, and disorder when customers left nightclubs on weekends, particularly after “pay day”; 

2. a lack of late-night public transportation, which extended the waiting period for drunken customers on 

the promenade; and 3. a lack of facilities and activities for young people, leading to public intimidation 

by large gatherings of those with little to do. Responses included an increase in intelligence-led policing; 

the improved cooperation between the police, licensees, and Youth Service; the installation of five new 

taxi ranks and improved taxi-rank management; the issuance of 12 additional taxi licenses; the improved 

operating conditions for taxi drivers through a “Taxiwatch” initiative; and a range of events, activities, and 

facilities for young people. Since inception, a 33 percent reduction in the target crimes of assault, criminal 

damage, and public-order offenses has occurred. The project also improved working relationships between 

the project partners.

London, England (2006)

A Metropolitan Police Service analysis showed that illegal minicab drivers committed 212 sexual offenses 

between October 2001 and September 2002; 54 of these offenses entailed rape. Research revealed that 

unlicensed minicabs provided a cover for some of the most serious crime in London, including sexual attacks 

on women. The problem stemmed from a lack of public awareness relating to unlicensed cabs and their 

dangers, the unregulated and unenforced market of illegal cabs, and the lack of legitimate travel options at 

night. A partnership was formed to reduce the number of sexual attacks on women in illegal minicabs using 

both traditional police activity and crackdowns on illegal taxi touts; delivering improved late-night travel 

services and information; and raising public awareness about the risks of using illegal minicabs. Sexual 

assaults declined from an average of 18 women a month to 10 women a month being attacked in illegal 

minicabs since 2002. In addition, the percentage of women using illegal minicabs declined from 18 percent 

to 7 percent over this period.

Blackburn, Lancashire, England (2007)

In 2003, Blackburn’s Family Intervention Program was established to work with families at risk of losing 

their tenancies through antisocial behavior. The Blackburn project was set up in partnership with Darwen 

Borough Council, Twin Valley Homes (Registered Social Landlord), Lancashire Constabulary, and NCH 

Children’s Charity, but works closely with other landlords and partner agencies within the statutory, voluntary, 

and community sectors. Through these partnerships, families involved in the program were no longer a risk 

for antisocial behavior in the community in 51 percent of cases, and the risk had declined in a further 41 

percent of cases. The reduction in evictions also achieved considerable cost savings.
Effective Policing and Crime Prevention

62

Lancashire, England (2008)

An agricultural area ranked the third worst in the United Kingdom for collisions, with farm vehicles’ working 

a patchwork of fields over 5,000 acres in different parishes being a major contributor. Analysis revealed 

that collisions were attributable to mud on roads, farm vehicles’ emerging from fields with limited forward 

visibility, and farmers’ not using warning signs. With collaboration, a three-point plan was developed to 

increase awareness, to increase education, and to form partnerships. Warning signs were tested and 

implemented, and a road-cleaning trailer was put to use. Environmental changes were made at collision hot 

spots to improve visibility. A media campaign was launched that entailed multiagency “Safety Awareness 

Days,” a celebrity endorsement, and the distribution of leaflets and fliers. In 2007, farm vehicle collisions 

declined significantly for the first time in 3 years, with serious injuries reduced to zero, and slight injuries 

down to one. The project resulted in a substantial cost savings of $680,000.
63

About the Authors

About the Authors

Joel B. Plant

Joel Plant is a Madison, Wisconsin mayoral aide responsible for public 

safety and neighborhood issues. On the mayor’s behalf, he liaises with 

the police, fire, city attorney, municipal court, building inspection, and 

community development agencies on operations, policy, and budget 

matters. Plant also manages the city’s Neighborhood Resource Teams 

and liaises with the public schools. He was previously the city’s first 

alcohol policy coordinator. Plant has worked as a research assistant for 

the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing; a crime analyst in the Tempe 

(Arizona) Police Department; and a teaching assistant and adjunct 

professor. He also has some criminal prosecution experience, ranging 

from serving subpoenas to trying felony cases. Plant holds a bachelor’s 

degree from Marquette University, a master’s degree from Arizona State 

University, and a law degree from the University of Wisconsin–Madison. 

Michael S. Scott

Michael Scott is the director of the Center for Problem-Oriented 

Policing and clinical associate professor at the University of 

Wisconsin Law School. He was formerly chief of police in Lauderhill, 

Florida; served in various civilian administrative positions in the St. 

Louis Metropolitan, Fort Pierce, Florida, and New York City police 

departments; and was a police officer in the Madison (Wisconsin) 

Police Department. Scott developed training programs in problemoriented policing at the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), and 

chairs the judging committee for the Herman Goldstein Award for 

Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. In 1996, he received PERF’s 

Gary P. Hayes Award for innovation and leadership in policing. Scott 

holds a law degree from Harvard Law School and a bachelor’s degree 

from the University of Wisconsin–Madison.
Got a Problem? We’ve got answers!

Log onto the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing web site at 

www.popcenter.org for a wealth of information to help you deal 

more effectively with crime and disorder in your community, 

including:

•	 Recommended readings in problem-oriented policing 

and situational crime prevention

•	 A complete listing of other POP Guides

•	 A listing of forthcoming POP Guides

Designed for police and those who work with them to address 

community problems, www.popcenter.org is a great resource for 

problem-oriented policing.

Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services (the COPS Office).

Center for Problem-Oriented Policing

Effective Policing and Crime Prevention helps local government 

executives better understand how local government in general, and 

local police in particular, can more effectively meet public safety 

challenges through a problem-oriented approach.

For More Information:

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services

1100 Vermont Avenue, N.W.

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

July 2009

e070915216