U. S. Department of Justice

Department of Community Oriented Policing Services

Community Policing: 

Looking to Tomorrow

By

Drew Diamond

Deirdre Mead Weiss

www.cops.usdoj.gov

i

Community Policing: 

Looking to Tomorrow 

This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement 

Number 2005-CK-WX-K009 awarded 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 or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice, 

the Police Executive Research Forum, or its members. 

The opinions expressed are generally those based on 

the consensus of roundtable meeting participants; 

however, not every view or statement presented in this 

report can necessarily be attributed to each participant.

Web sites and sources listed provided useful information 

at the time of this writing, but the authors do not 

endorse any information of the sponsor organization or 

other information on the web sites.

Contents iii

Contents

Community Policing: Looking to Tomorrow . . . . . i

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 1

Section I: Roundtable Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 5

Community Policing Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 5

Current Challenges to Community Policing . . . . p. 8

Departmental Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 8

Community Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 12

Municipality Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 13

Nationwide Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 17

Advancing Community Policing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 20

Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 23

Section II: Next Steps in Community Policing . . . . . p. 25

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 31

About PERF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 35

About COPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 37

Appendix: Roundtable Meeting Participants . . . . . p. 41

Acknowledgements v

Acknowledgments

We are taking this opportunity to thank the many 

individuals who assisted us during the course of 

this project. Three police chiefs graciously agreed to 

host community policing roundtables as part of the 

development of this document: Commissioner Frank 

Straub of the White Plains (New York) Department of 

Public Safety, Chief Theron Bowman of the Arlington 

(Texas) Police Department, and Chief Chris Magnus of 

the Richmond (California) Police Department. Captain 

David Burpee, White Plains Police Department; Julie 

Spann, Arlington Police Department; and Deputy 

Chief Ed Medina, Richmond Police Department 

greatly assisted us with planning the roundtables and 

meeting logistics. We are also grateful for the support 

we have received from the Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services, especially Rob Chapman 

and Matthew Scheider, and for their excitement and 

interest in this project idea from its inception. Thanks 

are also due to Craig Fischer at the Police Executive 

Research Forum (PERF) for his assistance with editing 

this document. Finally, we would like to express our 

sincere thanks to participants who attended the 

roundtable meetings and the accompanying session 

at PERF’s 2007 Annual Meeting. Without their candid 

insights and frank discussions, this publication would 

not have been possible. 

Executive Summary vii

Executive Summary

In the early 1980s, a few progressive police departments 

were experimenting with a new approach to policing 

called community policing. These departments were 

trying to engage their community members with the 

police to jointly address recurring crime and disorder 

issues through problem-solving efforts. Twenty-five 

years later, community policing is the operating 

philosophy and approach to policing in most police 

departments across the United States.1

Community Policing: Looking to Tomorrow presents 

the current state of community policing according to 

police chiefs and other police leaders who attended 

community policing roundtable meetings in the spring 

of 2007. Section I of this document presents these police 

leaders’ views about what community policing looks 

like today and the challenges it faces, and summarizes 

their predictions about how community policing may 

evolve in the future. Section II of the document provides 

suggestions, based on the meetings, about how police 

departments and city leaders can work together to 

enhance their community policing efforts and continue 

to strive to take community policing to the next level. 

1 See, e.g., Mastrofski, 

Willis, and Kochel (2007), 

and Fridell and Wycoff 

(2004). In recent years, 

the Department of 

Justice’s Law Enforcement 

Management and 

Administrative Statistics 

and Local Police 

Department reports 

have detailed a range 

of community policing 

activities undertaken by 

local law enforcement 

agencies. Reports are 

available on the Bureau of 

Justice Statistics web site, 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/. 

Introduction 1

Introduction

The voices of the police chiefs heard in this report are 

varied and reflect a broad policing experience. What 

the chiefs have in common is a continuing interest 

in delivering the best quality police service to the 

communities they serve. The chiefs have come to 

understand that community policing is quality police 

service, and that it reflects the highest ideals of policing 

in a democracy. Democracy is always challenging and 

often may seem untidy; delivering on the promise of 

community policing can have those same qualities. 

Nonetheless, when it comes to policing in a democracy, 

there is nothing better than community policing.

During the last 25 years, many police executives have 

defined community policing as their philosophy and 

approach to policing. They have worked diligently 

to instill the community policing philosophy and its 

principles in their agencies. Agencies committed to 

community policing develop partnerships with their 

community, address recurring crime and disorder issues 

through problem-solving techniques, and transform 

the organization to support these efforts. Through 

these actions, police departments seek to provide the 

community with the best policing services possible, 

to promote integrity within the department, and to 

increase trust and cooperation between the police and 

the people they serve.
2 Introduction

The success of community policing can be seen 

across the country in agencies that define community 

policing as their way of doing business. In fact, one 

is hard pressed to find a chief who does not support 

community policing or a mayor or city manager who 

does not list community policing as part of the job 

description for the city’s police chief. Language referring 

to an agency’s commitment to community policing also 

can be seen in mission statements, recruiting materials, 

business cards, web sites, and many other places. 

Since the 1980s, police chiefs across the country 

have come to agree that three elements comprise 

the community policing philosophy: community 

partnerships, problem solving, and organizational 

transformation. While the precise wording of definitions 

may vary slightly from police department to police 

department and within academia, these three core 

elements have remained constant. 

How Did We Get Here?

Providing police services in America is essentially—and very 

important—locally organized and controlled. Historically, change in 

the nature and quality of police service has been more evolutionary 

than revolutionary. Community policing emerged on the scene during 

the 1980s in response to the realization by many police, community, 

and academic leaders that the police were not keeping pace with 

the complex and diverse nature of American society. This realization 

was preceded by and also led to a series of groundbreaking and 

sometimes controversial studies on police policies and operations.2 

The studies and related experimentation generally confirmed that 

although police services had become more technically adept, they 

were showing only minimal success in reducing crime and the fear 

of crime. Of particular concern was the continuing estrangement 

between the police and the poorest and most disenfranchised people 

they served. The philosophical construct of community policing has 

proved to be the best possible response to this concern. Community 

policing’s emphasis on developing partnerships to address 

community crime and disorder problems and supporting that effort 

through organizational change has transformed American policing. 

It places a much stronger—and needed—focus on developing and 

maintaining trust and positive relationships between the police and 

all the people they serve. During the last 25 years, we have seen that 

community policing is well-grounded in democratic principles and 

will continue to be well-equipped to guide police services through 

complex criminal and social justice landscapes.

2 Groundbreaking studies 

included the Kansas 

City Preventive Patrol 

Experiment (Kelling, Pate, 

Dieckman, and Brown, 

1974), The Newark Foot 

Patrol Experiment (Police 

Foundation, 1981), and 

the Flint Neighborhood 

Foot Patrol Program 

(Trojanowicz and Banas, 

1985), as well as research 

into rapid response 

to calls for services 

(Spelman and Brown, 

1984), problem-solving 

techniques (see, e.g., 

Eck and Spelman, 1987; 

Goldstein, 1990), and the 

broken windows theory 

(Kelling and Wilson, 

1982).
Introduction 3

A quarter of a century into this philosophical change in 

policing, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), 

with support from the U.S. Department of Justice Office 

of Community Oriented Policing Services (the COPS 

Office), held a series of three 1-day regional roundtables 

with police chiefs and other policing leaders to discuss 

the status of community policing today—both in their 

agencies and in the broader national context. These 

roundtable meetings also focused on the challenges 

to advancing community policing and what lies ahead 

for community policing in the near future. The three 

roundtables were held in February and March 2007 in 

White Plains, New York; Arlington, Texas; and Richmond, 

California.4

 More than 60 police chiefs, policing leaders, 

and academics attended the meetings. (For a list of 

participants, see the Appendix.) In addition to the 

roundtable meetings, a session on the challenges facing 

community policing was held at PERF’s Annual Meeting 

in April 2007.5 The annual meeting session provided 

an additional opportunity for chiefs and policing 

leaders to have their voices heard, particularly those 

who live outside of the three metropolitan areas where 

roundtable meetings were held. 

Community Policing Definition

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.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 2008. 3 3 This is how the U.S. 

Department of Justice 

Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services 

defines Community 

Policing. Description of Community Policing

Community policing focuses on crime and social disorder through 

the delivery of police services that include aspects of traditional law 

enforcement, as well as prevention, problem solving, community 

engagement, and partnerships. The community policing model 

balances reactive responses to calls for service with proactive problem 

solving centered on the causes of crime and disorder. Community 

policing requires police and citizens to join together as partners in the 

course of both identifying and effectively addressing these issues.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 2003. 

4 The White Plains 

Roundtable was held on 

February 27, 2007; the 

Arlington Roundtable 

was held on March 22, 

2007; and the Richmond 

Roundtable was held on 

March 29, 2007.

5 The PERF Annual Meeting 

session, titled “The 

Future of Community 

Policing—A Police Chief’s 

Roundtable,” was held on 

April 26, 2007
4 Introduction

Community Policing: Looking to Tomorrow is the result 

of these meetings. This publication is divided into two 

sections. The first section summarizes the meetings 

and reflects the comments, observations, and opinions 

of the participants and their discussions. The second 

section of this document, also based on the discussions 

at the meetings, focuses on how police and city leaders 

can continue to strengthen and add value to local 

community policing efforts. 
Community Policing Today 5

Section I: 

Roundtable Findings

Community Policing Today

“Community policing has evolved and become more 

complex. Initially, I viewed it as the police department 

opening up and asking for the community’s input and 

opinion, and incorporating that into police operational 

practices and philosophy. Over time, my perception has 

gone through a couple of iterations. Most recently, it 

means looking at neighborhoods and how we impact 

them. Community policing today also involves more 

than the police. Other city agencies must work in 

partnership with the police and each other to help the 

community.” 

– Chief Theron Bowman, Ph.D., 

Arlington (Texas) Police Department6

Roundtable meeting participants view community 

policing as quality police service—service that upholds 

democratic principles. As such, community policing 

seeks to improve public safety and the quality of 

life for all persons within the community. Yet police 

departments alone cannot do either of these things—

and those that try are not successful. Rather, public 

safety and improving quality of life are the responsibility 

of both the police and the community. The community 

is identified as community-based organizations, 

businesses, individual community members, and other 

government agencies at all levels (e.g., municipal 

code enforcement or public works or state corrections 

agencies). 

6 The titles and agencies of 

the participants are those 

that were current at the 

time of the roundtable 

meetings. Several have 

since changed.
6 Community Policing Today

The 10 Principles of Community 

Policing 

1. Change.

2. Leadership.

3. Vision.

4. Partnership. 

5. Problem solving. 

6. Equity.

7. Trust. 

8. Empowerment.

9. Service. 

10. Accountability.

Source: Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, 1998. 

Community policing today involves the police 

partnering with the community to address public 

safety issues and improve the quality of life. Police and 

the community work together to identify problems 

and to respond to community concerns and needs. 

These efforts help build community trust. Roundtable 

participants stressed that, as much as possible, police 

department efforts should focus on being proactive 

or co-active, instead of reactive. This includes taking 

steps to cultivate trusting partnerships in good times, 

instead of just during a crisis. It also involves looking 

at problems from a holistic perspective and analyzing 

them to identify trends or linkages. At the same 

time, these efforts do not diminish the ability of the 

police to pursue enforcement efforts to resolve public 

safety problems. Enforcement is an important tool in 

community policing—a point that participants felt was 

too often lost in the early days of community policing. 

“Through community policing, the community and the 

police department help each other be successful.”

– Chief Heather Fong, 

San Francisco (California) Police Department

Leadership has been essential to implementing 

community policing. It is important for community 

policing values to be well-articulated and for 

community policing behaviors to be continuously 
Current Challenges to Community Policing 7

modeled throughout the entire department—and 

not just by the chief. Community policing values and 

behaviors include concepts such as integrity, empathy, 

compassion, and trustworthiness. For the participants 

in the roundtable discussions conducted for this study, 

leadership means allowing staff members within the 

agency to become leaders within their own ranks 

and divisions and encouraging their professional 

development through continuing education, crosstraining, and networking opportunities. 

“For me, community policing comes down to three 

things: partnerships with businesses, the community, 

and other city departments; a problem-solving 

perspective; and accountability at all levels of the 

organization.” 

– Chief Larry Boyd, 

Irving (Texas) Police Department

Accountability and transparency were also stressed. 

Participants at the Richmond roundtable discussed 

the accountability of police chiefs to three groups: 

the community, local government (e.g., mayor or 

city manager and council members), and the police 

department. The challenge for a police chief is that each 

group has its own concerns and interests—which may 

or may not intersect with those of the other groups. 

Participants discussed transparency in sharing crime 

information with the public (e.g., through crime maps, 

web sites, e-mail trees, and listservs), jointly developing 

and sharing agency policies and procedures, and 

educating local government officials about the 

department and community policing.

The implementation of community policing has 

required a transformation within police departments 

to support the philosophy. These efforts include 

empowering officers and holding supervisors 

accountable for work within specific neighborhoods. 

To do this, officers must receive appropriate training in 

areas such as problem solving and supervisory support 

for working with the community on proactive efforts. 
8 Current Challenges to Community Policing

Current Challenges to 

Community Policing

Despite the advances in community policing and 

its widespread acceptance during the last 25 years, 

challenges still remain. To continue to make progress, 

the policing profession must address these challenges 

collectively. Participants at the roundtable meetings 

identified 10 present and future challenges to 

community policing and their efforts to advance it. 

These challenges focus on four areas: the department, 

the community, the municipality, and the nation. 

Departmental Challenges

Challenge 1: Recruitment, Hiring, and Retention. 

“A community policing agency must hire and promote 

people who embrace the philosophy. The philosophy 

should carry from one generation to the next.” 

– Chief Brent Larrabee, 

Stamford (Connecticut) Police Department

Recruiting, hiring, and retaining service-oriented officers 

is one of the biggest challenges facing the policing 

profession. Put simply, when departments are unable 

to do this they will face obstacles in maintaining, much 

less advancing, their community policing efforts. Many 

police departments across the county are operating 

with large staffing shortages. While some of these 

shortages are the result of budget cuts, others are 

caused by a lack of qualified candidates and by persons 

leaving the department for retirement, other law 

enforcement agencies, or other professions altogether. 

Participants noted that it is becoming increasingly 

challenging to fill police chief positions, as well. 

Across the board, participants reported challenges in 

finding applicants for available police officer positions, 

so much so that one North Texas police department 

now pays people to apply to the department. In some 

parts of the country, these challenges become more 

acute because officer tests are offered infrequently. 

In New York, for example, many police departments 

rely on a test given once a year to identify potential 

officers. Police departments also face challenges in 

keeping persons interested in becoming a police 

officer throughout delays in the application process 
Current Challenges to Community Policing 9

(e.g., between testing and getting results and through 

background investigations). Participants agreed that to 

find quality candidates in the future, departments will 

need to continue to be innovative with their marketing 

and branding efforts so they can attract a diverse pool 

of candidates who reflect their changing communities.7

Additionally, in the face of these personnel shortages—

some of which are severe—it is important, and easier 

said than done, to hire people who have the attitude 

and skills for community policing (e.g., problem 

solving, multitasking, service orientation, integrity, and 

interpersonal skills). These efforts remain essential to 

institutionalizing the community policing philosophy in 

the department.

Participants also discussed some of the challenges 

in retaining officers. These include long commutes, 

the lack of affordable housing in some urban areas, 

changing priorities as officers grow older and begin 

families, and officers looking for higher-paying 

departments. Some departments in North Texas report 

that switching to 12-hour shifts has helped somewhat 

by giving officers more days off. Meanwhile, some 

Northeast departments noted that their officers are 

becoming “burned out” because of long overtime 

hours. Northeast participants also discussed some of 

the challenges they face in keeping seasoned officers 

because some leave the department once they are 

eligible for full retirement benefits, often after 20 years 

of service.

Challenge 2: Reinforcing Community Policing.

“Supervisors need to be held accountable for their 

officers, but leadership must provide them with the 

resources to do their job.”

– Chief Francisco Ortiz, 

New Haven (Connecticut) Police Department

Police departments continue to face challenges 

when it comes to reinforcing the community policing 

philosophy in their agency. Department executives 

must emphasize community policing through their 

behaviors and actions, while recognizing that their 

efforts alone will not institutionalize the philosophy. 

Participants at the roundtables discussed the important 

role that first-line supervisors play in supporting 

7 For further discussion and 

examples of creative ways 

to recruit service-oriented 

officers see Scrivner 

(2006).
10 Current Challenges to Community Policing

community policing among line officers and how their 

resistance to community partnerships and problemsolving activities can severely harm the department’s 

efforts. They agreed that supervisors need to be held 

accountable for their officers’ community policing 

efforts and activities; yet they recognize that officers will 

concentrate on those areas in which they are evaluated. 

For example, officers who are evaluated based on 

tickets, or supervisors who are evaluated based on 

their officers’ tickets, may be turned off to community 

policing because they feel they are not rewarded for 

their partnership and problem-solving efforts. In these 

instances, community policing can get in the way of the 

officer’s success in the organization. Officer evaluations, 

therefore, need to reflect the transition from traditional 

policing to community policing. Additionally, 

officers should be recognized and rewarded for their 

community policing efforts. 

“We need to have the right officers involved in field 

training. They can help new officers start off on the right 

foot.” 

– Commissioner Pat Carroll, 

New Rochelle (New York) Police Department

Training can be used to reinforce community policing. 

Participants agreed that community policing concepts, 

such as accountability, problem solving, and partnering 

with the community, need to be incorporated 

throughout the training that officers receive, from 

academy to in-service training. For some officers, their 

training is not consistent with what the department 

asks of them. One way to make training more congruent 

with the department’s mission is to conduct scenario 

training with community members. Participants also 

noted that community policing needs to be stressed 

and modeled by field training officers as they work 

with new officers. Additionally, ongoing training and 

education are needed to assist with professional 

development. 

Participants stressed that what is taught in training 

must be adopted in practice by their officers in their 

day-to-day work. These efforts continue to align police 

department policies and practices with the community 

policing philosophy. As police departments continue 

to transform to meet the needs of community policing, 
Current Challenges to Community Policing 11

they should begin to examine organizational success 

through outcomes and not just outputs, such as arrests. 

This is a change in expectations that city leaders must 

support. 

Challenge 3: Inability to Institute Change.

“Consistency is a challenge. I am the seventh 

commissioner in the last five years.”

– Commissioner David Chong, 

Mount. Vernon (New York) Police Department

Instituting change can be difficult in community 

policing, and change is certainly slow in any police 

department or other large organization. For some 

chiefs, civil service rules and collective bargaining 

agreements may constrain the executive’s latitude in 

decision-making in areas such as hiring, promotions, 

and assignments. These areas need policies that support 

the transition from traditional policing to community 

policing. In addition, the short tenure of many chiefs 

can be an obstacle to community policing because the 

police department’s leadership may lack consistency. 

Consistency can be an important part of gaining trust 

with the community, and mutual trust between the 

community and the police is essential to successful 

community policing efforts. 

Solving Agency Problems through SARA

At the Arlington roundtable, Carrollton (Texas) Chief David James 

discussed how his department started promoting problem solving 

(Community Problem Oriented Policing – CPOP) as a way to deal 

with issues and problems within the department. When an agency 

employee comes upon a problem in the organization, he or she is 

encouraged to apply the SARA (Scanning, Analysis, Response and 

Assessment) model of problem solving. Problem solving becomes 

a habit, and officers become accustomed to using the model to 

examine the causes of a problem, the possible responses that can 

be adopted, and how to assess their efforts. Agency employees have 

used SARA to examine problems ranging from internal organizational 

issues to reducing burglary of motor vehicles, reducing false alarms, 

registered sex offender accountability, and other issues related to 

community quality of life.
12 Current Challenges to Community Policing

Community Challenges

Challenge 4: Disengaged Communities.

“The police department and the community each have 

their own roles and responsibilities and cannot be 

successful by themselves.” 

– Chief Ronald Davis, 

East Palo Alto (California) Police Department

Participants at the three roundtables discussed 

their concerns about reconnecting with disengaged 

communities and staying connected with often rapidly 

changing communities. When police departments are 

not able to connect with their community and engage 

its members in pubic safety matters, community 

policing efforts are hampered. Some of the challenges 

discussed at the meetings included how to hold 

the community accountable for its responsibilities 

in a community policing environment. Participants 

concluded that it is significantly easier to hold the 

police department accountable for its activities than to 

devise ways to hold the community accountable for its 

responsibilities. 

Participants’ concerns also revolved around how to 

engage people—many of whom have little free time—

in community safety and quality-of-life initiatives. 

While technology—in the form of the agency’s web 

site and its listservs—can provide transparency and 

communication with the public, participants noted 

that overreliance on technology could result in 

the department losing touch with segments of the 

community that are not technologically savvy or do not 

have access to the Internet. 

Enhancing Communication via E-Mail in San Francisco

At the Richmond roundtable, San Francisco Chief Heather Fong 

and Lieutenant Charlie Orkes described the agency’s efforts to use 

e-mails to enhance communication and information sharing with 

the community. District captains are required to send out weekly 

e-mails to the community detailing crime updates; some captains 

send these updates daily. The Captain’s Weekly Community Newsletter 

has increased the amount of information that it provided and now 

often includes details about community events and activities. This 

communication function serves as a way for the police to share 

information with the community and for community members to 

share information with the police and each other.
Current Challenges to Community Policing 13

In some communities, there still remains a general 

mistrust of police and an unwillingness among residents 

to share information about neighborhood crimes 

with the police. This information is essential to police 

enforcement activities as well as prevention efforts. 

While great strides have been made during the last 25 

years, challenges still remain regarding neighborhood 

and popular culture influences that discourage working 

with the police. Participants also noted that further 

efforts will be needed to engage youths in public 

safety issues. Youths are a critical, yet often overlooked, 

segment of the community.

Municipality Challenges

Challenge 5: Funding Shortfalls.

“Even with staffing shortages, community policing is still 

a core part of how police do their job.” 

– Chief Chris Magnus, 

Richmond (California) Police Department

Engaging Youths in White Plains 

At the White Plains roundtable, Commissioner Frank Straub talked 

about the City of White Plains’ youth-police partnership training 

program. Following a youth-involved shooting in the city’s largest 

public housing complex, representatives from the White Plains Police 

Department, Youth Bureau, and School District met with some of the 

involved youths and their parents. The meeting was quite challenging 

because the youths and their parents spoke openly about conflicts 

with the police and reported past incidents of hostile relations.

In response to the meeting, the city partnered with the North 

American Family Institute to develop and implement a youth-police 

partnership training program. The purpose of the program was to 

reduce arrests and violence among city teens while building a more 

positive relationship between youths and the police. Particular 

emphasis was placed on building stronger relationships between 

adolescents from the African-American and Hispanic communities 

and the police department.

The training program places youths and police officers in structured 

presentations and group learning experiences that create 

opportunities for the participants to explore and discuss their values, 

attitudes, and feelings about race, urban youth culture, and policing. 

Through a series of scenarios developed by the participants, police 

officers and youths identify behavior that can escalate situations 

and practice techniques to de-escalate problems and build effective 

communication. Follow-up interviews suggest that the program has 

improved interactions among police officers, adolescents, and their 

families in and around the public housing campus. 
14 Current Challenges to Community Policing

Funding shortages remain a challenge to sustaining 

community policing efforts. Many cities are 

experiencing budget shortfalls, and police departments 

are often among the agencies that need to cut their 

budgets. Decreasing budgets can result in fewer officers 

who can respond to calls for service, engage in crimeprevention efforts around identified problem areas, 

and maintain partnerships with the community. Some 

participants contended that these budget cuts and 

staffing shortages have left their officers “married to 

the radio,” responding to calls for service with little or 

no time left to develop community partnerships and 

examine and address longer term community problems. 

Others countered that some police departments use 

staffing shortages as a rationale to neglect community 

policing. Still other participants felt that, in light of 

decreased funding, further research needs to be 

conducted into how officers use their time; alternative 

ways to report incidents, such as by telephone or 

through the web; and further debate about what 

services police should and should not provide. 

“City government must concentrate on its core business. 

That should be what makes people come to the city and 

stay there.”

– Chief Doug Kowalski, 

McKinney (Texas) Police Department

Participants at the Arlington roundtable addressed 

funding challenges in a slightly different manner. 

They discussed the need for cities to return to and 

focus on their “core business.” In other words, what are 

those key things the city will focus on providing? Also, 

what services will the city decline to provide? These 

discussions demonstrated that, in an environment in 

which resources are limited, collaboration between 

city agencies becomes even more important in a 

municipality’s efforts to provide its community with the 

best services possible. 

“We base budgets on calls for service, crime rates, and 

response times—not broader community-building 

activities. We need to develop a model for the cost and 

allocation of resources in community policing.”

– Dr. Richard Smith, 

University of Texas—Arlington 
Current Challenges to Community Policing 15

Roundtable participants also discussed the challenges 

they face in budgeting for community policing. As 

their organizations have adopted the community 

policing philosophy and the agency’s activities have 

become more focused on proactive responses and 

long-term solutions to community problems, the 

budgeting mechanism generally has remained the 

same. Participants questioned whether their current 

way of budgeting is outdated and inconsistent with 

the community policing philosophy and what changes 

need to be made to resource allocation—as well as ways 

of measuring outcomes (e.g., identifying qualitative 

outcome measures). 

Challenge 6: Politics of Public Safety.

“If we see violent crime continue to rise and resources 

stagnate or diminish, then there will be strong pressure 

on police to react by focusing solely on enforcement. We 

need to demonstrate the need to continue to develop 

community policing.” 

– Commissioner Frank Straub, 

White Plains (New York) 

Department of Public Safety 

Short-term politics are a challenge to community 

policing. Participants noted that local elected leaders 

are often pushed by their constituencies to seek 

quick fixes to public safety issues. Similarly, newlyelected leaders often look to put their own mark on 

public safety issues and develop their own initiatives 

regardless of existing activities and their successes. 

Police chiefs expressed their concern that they are being 

pushed to be reactive rather than proactive by local 

leaders, especially regarding problems like increasing 

violent crime rates, gangs, and youth violence. 

Long-term efforts to effect change in public safety 

matters are often hard for police chiefs to sell to local 

elected leaders because they do not produce results 

quickly enough—yet these long-term solutions are a 

cornerstone of community policing. 

“Education and outreach efforts with city managers 

about police work can do nothing but help the 

profession.” 

– Commissioner William Connors, 

Rye (New York) Police Department
16 Current Challenges to Community Policing

Participants also discussed whether the policing 

profession is doing enough to educate local political 

leaders about community policing. Nearly all mayors 

and city managers want their community’s police 

department to practice community policing, but 

many chiefs are not sure that city leaders have a 

clear understanding of what this means in real-world 

terms for the police department and the rest of city 

government. Many new police chiefs also would benefit 

from receiving training about the issues facing city 

leaders and their responsibilities. Education efforts must 

be ongoing because political leadership changes at 

the local level (as well as at the state and federal level) 

where policymaking can enhance or inhibit community 

policing efforts. These education efforts can also be 

helpful in clarifying the roles of the police chief and city 

management. 

“One of the next steps in community policing is 

to develop throughout the profession a better 

understanding of politics: how it affects community 

decisions and the appropriate role of police in politics.” 

– Chief Chris Magnus, 

Richmond (California) Police Department 

Participants also discussed how politics and 

policymaking remain a mystery to most officers within 

their organization—including some at high ranks. 

Educating officers about the effects of public policy 

on the department; how the department’s budget 

is allocated; and the chief’s accountability to the city 

manager or mayor, the community, and the department 

remains a current challenge to community policing.

Challenge 7: Poor Collaboration Between Local 

Government Agencies.

“Other city agencies need to get involved in community 

policing. The philosophy should be ingrained across the 

city.”

– Chief Tommy Ingram, 

Colleyville (Texas) Police Department 

Poor collaboration between city departments is a key 

challenge to advancing community policing. Police 

alone cannot solve public safety problems effectively, 

and one of the essential partners in community policing 

is other local municipal agencies. These agencies play 
Current Challenges to Community Policing 17

an important role in improving public safety and the 

quality of life in the community. Making that case to 

city leaders and other department heads has been a 

challenge for some police chiefs. 

Participants stressed the need for the rest of the city 

to embrace the service orientation that underlies the 

community policing philosophy. Participants believe 

that to address community issues, city departments 

must collaborate with each other and the community 

in problem-solving efforts to address specific 

community problems. City departments can no longer 

operate as distinct silos; rather, they must realize that 

each specializes in an area that contributes to the 

community’s overall quality of life. 

“It is important for us to have a partnership with cities 

where our transit system has stops. First we need 

cooperation, and then we jointly work together to solve 

problems.” 

– Chief James Spiller, 

Dallas (Texas) Area Rapid Transit Police

In areas where there are large numbers of police 

departments or other regional agencies that serve the 

community, participants stressed that collaboration 

across the region is especially important. These 

relationships often need to expand beyond the city 

itself to include other regional police departments and 

government entities (e.g., other municipalities and 

counties and the state).

Nationwide Challenges

Challenge 8: Policymaking.

Policymaking at the all levels of government—local, 

state, and federal—can affect police department 

policies and procedures, as well as the department’s 

relationship with the community by dictating through 

statute the activities and tasks that police departments 

are required or prohibited to undertake. Policymaking 

can have a positive effect on police departments 

and their relationship with various segments of the 

community or it can have negative consequences. 

Furthermore, lack of political leadership on pressing 

issues can prove troublesome and confusing for 

local police departments. Participants’ discussions of 
18 Current Challenges to Community Policing

policymaking focused on two main areas of concern: 

immigration enforcement and offender reentry. 

“The word constitutionality is in our mission statement. 

Our activities and policies need to uphold constitutional 

rights.”

– Chief David James, 

Carrollton (Texas) Police Department

Participants at the Irving and Richmond roundtables 

voiced their concerns about the growing debate 

about the role of local law enforcement in immigration 

enforcement.8 These concerns included what effects 

local policies—such as city or county ordinances and 

enforcement training by Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement (ICE)—may have on the department’s 

relationship with immigrant communities. Many chiefs 

are concerned about policies that can foster mistrust 

and fear of the police in immigrant communities. They 

worry that these policies could lead to a citizen’s greater 

unwillingness to report being a victim of a crime. 

Furthermore, the chiefs also discussed their concerns 

about the community not understanding the difference 

between the local police department and ICE. Overall, 

participants stressed that they want to ensure that their 

department is acting in a manner that upholds both the 

state and federal Constitutions. 

“Returning offenders are the biggest issue we are facing. 

This truly is a public safety issue.” 

– Chief Steve Krull, 

Livermore (California) Police Department

Participants at the Richmond roundtable discussed in 

detail some of the issues facing California’s immense 

prison population. The chiefs recognize that nearly all 

of the state’s prisoners will eventually be released back 

to the community and they are concerned about these 

offenders’ ability to reintegrate successfully. They talked 

about the need for criminal justice agencies to work 

with social service providers to decrease the likelihood 

that a person will relapse.9

 Participants also talked 

about the need for political leadership, especially when 

it comes to reexamining the way the criminal justice 

system operates. 

9 The Council of State 

Governments and the 

Police Executive Research 

Forum—with support 

from the COPS Office—

developed a toolkit for 

law enforcement agencies 

to plan and assess their 

reentry efforts. Planning 

and Assessing a Law 

Enforcement Reentry 

Strategy was released 

in 2008. The COPS 

Office has also funded 

reentry research by the 

Urban Institute and the 

International Association 

of Chiefs of Police. See 

La Vigne, Solomon, 

Beckman, and Dedel 

(2006) and International 

Association of Chiefs of 

Police (2007a).

8 For a further discussion of 

policing and immigration 

issues see International 

Association of Chiefs of 

Police (2007b).
Current Challenges to Community Policing 19

Challenge 9: Making the Case for “Community 

Policing.”

“When I came to my department, I tried to stay away 

from buzz words. I put it simply—the focus is on good 

police work.” 

– Chief Sidney Fuller, 

Farmers Branch (Texas) Police Department

Community policing is quality police service, and it 

should be discussed as such. Despite this agreement, 

challenges remain, and some police officers resist 

the transition to community policing. To this day, the 

term community policing in some departments is still 

problematic; because community policing includes 

elements that go beyond enforcing the law, some 

officers consider it “soft” or “not real policing.” Yet its 

principles and elements are generally accepted. To 

counter some of the push-back from officers, some 

chiefs at the roundtable simply have referred to this 

style of policing as quality policing or simply good 

police work. 

“Academies are emphasizing the edicts the profession 

is receiving—homeland security and intelligence—not 

problem solving or community policing.”

– Chief Betsy Hard, 

Bloomfield (Connecticut) Police Department

“Information is our currency, yet to get information we 

must be trusted.” 

– Chief Richard Melton, 

Napa (California) Police Department

Participants also briefly discussed homeland security.10

They agreed without question that community policing 

serves the mission of homeland security, but felt this 

view has not been adequately conveyed to elected 

officials at all levels of government. Instead, they 

feel that the government’s focus—and some police 

academies’ focus—has been placed much more heavily 

on tactics and equipment in recent years. To sustain 

and advance community policing, the focus needs to 

remain on developing partnerships and addressing 

recurring crime and disorder issues collaboratively 

through problem-solving techniques. Roundtable chiefs 

also stressed that without trusting relationships with 

the community, local police will not have actionable 

intelligence—intelligence that can prevent crimes, 

10 For further discussions 

about community 

policing and homeland 

security see Murphy and 

Plotkin (2003); Davies 

and Murphy (2004); and 

Scheider, Chapman, and 

Seelman (2003).
20 Advancing Community Policing

including terrorist acts, from occurring. Roundtable 

participants concluded that the profession needs to 

improve its marketing of community policing and 

communicate more effectively to elected officials 

that the community policing model works. For it to 

be successful in addressing public safety matters 

and improving community quality of life, though, 

community policing needs to be nurtured through 

funding and long-term support from all levels of 

government. 

Challenge 10: Traditional and Nontraditional News 

Media.

“As a profession we do not invest as much as we should 

in working with the media, nor have we orchestrated 

a way to market community policing. When it gets 

covered, it is pretty much by accident.”

– Chief Chris Magnus, 

Richmond (California) Police Department 

Participants also noted some of the problems they face 

in working with the news media and in communicating 

the importance of community policing. These 

challenges include how to get positive news covered, 

how to get stories covered accurately, and how to work 

with the unofficial media, such as blogs and YouTube. 

People increasingly turn to unofficial media sources for 

both information and entertainment, and they trust 

these sources. Participants agreed that more time and 

effort needs to be given to the police department’s 

relationship with the media so that accurate, relevant 

information reaches the public in a timely fashion. 

These efforts shed light on the police department 

and its activities. Agency transparency is important 

in community policing because it contributes to 

community trust and confidence in the police. 

Advancing Community Policing

“One of my greatest challenges is ensuring that 

community policing moves forward. It is who we are and 

what we do. It isn’t who other departments are yet. As 

police officers and experts on the community policing 

philosophy, we need to take a leadership role and show 

other departments what the community orientation is 

all about.”

– Chief Theron Bowman, Ph.D., 

Arlington (Texas) Police Department
Advancing Community Policing 21

The participants at the community policing 

roundtables discussed where community policing 

should go from here and how to strengthen it and 

take it to the next level. The chiefs see community 

policing advancing to community governance in 

the coming years. Community governance takes 

the principles and elements of community policing 

city-wide.11 For any community, this means that 

community orientation cannot reside solely in the 

police department, but rather must be embraced 

across the city by all agency staff members, managers, 

and executives, as well as elected leaders. 

“City managers need to stress with all city 

departments that we are here to serve the public. The 

future is in partnering together.” 

– Chief David James, 

Carrollton (Texas) Police Department

In cities operating under a community governance 

philosophy, departments work collaboratively 

with the public to address community problems 

and issues. With leadership from mayors, city 

managers, council members, and police chiefs, city 

departments can begin to develop a holistic approach 

to addressing public safety issues and improving 

the quality of life in specific neighborhoods 

and throughout the city.12 Through education 

and training, city departments can develop an 

understanding of the community policing philosophy 

and operationalize what it means for various city 

agencies (e.g., where roles and responsibilities 

intersect and what being responsive, transparent, and 

accountable means to each agency and the city). 

“The discussion needs to be moved to communitybased government. CompStat should be used 

city-wide to engage other departments to look at 

community issues and problems.” 

– Chief Ronald Davis, 

East Palo Alto (California) Police Department

Participants stressed that the move to community 

governance will be a slow, incremental transition, just 

as community policing was in police departments. 

The policing profession has learned a lot about how 

to garner support for the community orientation and 

can draw on the lessons learned from community 

11 PERF, with funding 

support from the COPS 

Office, has developed 

a document on 

community governance: 

Advancing Community 

Policing through 

Community Governance: 

A Framework Document. 

It will be published in 

2009.

12 For a further discussion 

about the role of mayors 

in advancing community 

policing, see Chapman 

and Scheider (2006, p. 

3-4).
22 Advancing Community Policing

policing. For example, the city must build capacity 

within individual departments as well as within the 

community. This includes focusing on certain skill sets, 

such as developing partnerships, problem solving, 

and conflict resolution. Participants also noted that 

tools such as CompStat and geographic information 

system-based mapping, which are used in many police 

departments across the country, have the potential 

to be used at a city-wide level to assist municipal 

departments as they identify problems, coordinate 

efforts, or plan for the future. 

Building Capacity in Irving, Texas 

At the Arlington roundtable, Irving (Texas) Chief Larry Boyd discussed 

how the City of Irving is taking steps to build capacity in support of 

community governance. Chief Boyd noted that the city must build 

the capacity to develop partnerships and work collaboratively on 

community problems before it rolls out any specific programs or 

efforts. In Irving, capacity-building occurred during the course of 

approximately 1 year and took the form of training city department 

heads and their senior staffs on the SARA model of problem solving, as 

well as how to work collaboratively on problem-solving efforts. Once 

city employees were well-versed in the language and techniques, city 

departments began engaging community members in one Irving 

neighborhood to address community problems. At a community 

engagement held in February 2007, city department representatives 

facilitated small group discussions among community members 

and city employees. This is a work in progress for Irving—one that it 

believes has been successful thus far, thanks to the up-front efforts to 

build capacity.
Advancing Community Policing 23

Summary of Findings

Participants at the roundtables clearly reported that 

community policing is alive, well, and strong—both 

in its philosophy and what it means operationally 

for police departments. Participants agreed that 

community policing is quality policing in a democracy, 

and the profession needs to communicate this more 

clearly and effectively with elected leaders and 

department personnel. Although participants identified 

a number of current challenges to community policing, 

none is insurmountable. In fact, the chiefs believe 

that with strong leadership from police chiefs and 

clear support from mayors and city managers, these 

challenges can be addressed and have the potential to 

become opportunities for advancement. As the chiefs 

look forward to the next 5 to 10 years, they see the 

field taking the elements and principles of community 

policing—along with the lessons learned during the 

last 25 years—to the rest of city government. With 

consistent, forward-looking leadership from police 

chiefs and city leaders, these chiefs believe that the 

result will not only be stronger community policing, but 

also an entire city structure that is more collaborative, 

responsive to problems, transparent, and accountable 

to the community. 

Next Steps in Community Policing 25

Section II: Next Steps in 

Community Policing

The chiefs’ discussions at the community policing 

roundtables highlighted the fact that community 

policing is still evolving in police departments across 

the country. As police and city leaders look to tomorrow 

and plan how they most effectively can meet the 

needs of their continually changing communities, 

they should seek ways to work collaboratively with 

their communities to address crime and disorder 

problems and to sustain those efforts at improving 

the community’s quality of life over time. This section 

discusses important areas of consideration for police 

chiefs and city leaders as they engage in strategic 

thinking about the future of their police department 

and city. The recommendations were gleaned from the 

discussions at the roundtable meetings. They focus on 

areas that police and city leaders should consider when 

asking themselves, “Where are we now, and where do 

we want to be in the future?” 

Exert leadership. Consistent, progressive leadership 

is necessary to advance community policing to the 

next level. The police chief and agency leaders must 

convey the fact that community policing is not a shortlived program, but rather a philosophical approach to 

delivering police services in a democracy. Community 

policing is the agency’s way of conducting business 

that has the full support of the police department 

and city leadership. Police chiefs should demonstrate 

their commitment and leadership by addressing 

organizational barriers that impede the department’s 

and the individual officer’s ability to engage in 

partnership and problem-solving activities. 

Ensure that rank-and-file officers support the 

community policing philosophy. Agency officers are 

the front-line of community policing. These officers 

work directly with the public and should have the 

authority to develop partnerships and solve recurring 

crime and disorder problems. Agencies need to stress 

to new officers—throughout recruitment, training, 

and in their daily service—that the agency adheres 

to the community policing philosophy. Through the 

recruitment process, departments should seek to adopt 

screening processes that select-in persons who have a 
26 Next Steps in Community Policing

service orientation and are committed to community 

policing, rather than merely selecting-out so-called 

bad apples. Since new officers are strongly influenced 

by their field training officers and sergeants, persons in 

these leadership positions should epitomize a model 

officer in the department. To make sure officers remain 

committed to community policing, agencies need to 

ensure that policies and procedures are congruent 

with the community policing philosophy: officers are 

evaluated in a community policing context; officers with 

exemplary problem-solving and partnership activities 

receive commendations for their successes; and officers 

who can serve as role models to others in the agency 

and have exhibited leadership are promoted.

Cultivate a new generation of leaders. Police 

department and city leaders should support 

professional and leadership development at all levels 

and ranks of the police department. The department 

should take advantage of training opportunities not 

only to improve specific skills of their officers and 

civilian personnel, but also to increase their leadership 

abilities. Many of these opportunities currently focus on 

the highest ranks in the organization (e.g., FBI National 

Academy and PERF’s Senior Management Institute for 

Police). Leadership development for midlevel managers 

(e.g., sergeants and lieutenants) also is important, 

although harder to come by. The policing profession 

must continue to develop and support professional 

development through leadership training, networking 

opportunities, and other pursuits that encourage crossfertilization of ideas and ongoing education. These 

opportunities will help nurture and develop the next 

generation of police leaders committed to community 

policing. 

Engage the community in a recommitment to the 

principles of community policing. Many police 

departments see an ebb and flow in the engagement 

of the community in community policing. When the 

public feels safe and is not concerned about crime and 

disorder issues, it often is less active than when there 

are pressing concerns about crime and disorder after a 

critical incident occurs. At these times of relative calm, 

police departments need to continue to engage the 

community in public safety efforts and stress mutual 

accountability and responsibility for crime and disorder 

issues. Likewise, the police department should continue 
Next Steps in Community Policing 27

to reach out to communities that have historically been 

less engaged in order to develop trust between the 

community and the police. These groups may include 

youths, minority communities, and residents of specific 

geographic areas. 

Assess current community policing efforts. Police 

departments need to make an honest assessment of 

the status of their problem-solving and community 

partnership efforts, as well as the organizational 

changes they have implemented to support these 

activities. One way to do this is to utilize the COPS 

Office’s community policing self-assessment tool. This 

tool operationalizes the philosophy of community 

policing and allows agencies to measure and 

evaluate their implementation efforts across three 

elements (community partnerships, problem solving, 

and organizational transformation) and associated 

subelements. This tool helps to identify the strengths 

and weaknesses in a department’s community policing 

efforts and will serve as an indispensable resource for 

police departments and sheriffs’ offices.13

Engage in activities that support a broader 

community governance approach to public 

safety. Police chiefs should continue to take steps 

to collaborate with other city agencies on efforts 

that improve community quality of life and they 

should engage other municipal agencies and their 

leadership in public safety efforts. Together with 

city leadership, police departments should take a 

leadership role in supporting the implementation 

of community governance—the application of the 

principles and elements of community policing at the 

city-wide level. The department’s leadership role can 

take a number of forms, such as educating other city 

departments, training other agencies on specific skills 

sets, participating in cross-training activities, engaging 

in collaborative problem-solving activities with the 

community and other municipal agencies, sharing 

lessons that the agency has learned as it implemented 

community policing, and other activities jointly 

identified by the department and city leadership. 

Institutionalize and sustain efforts. Frequent changes 

in both police department and city leadership can be 

an impediment to the implementation of community 

policing. During challenging times, short-term, reactive 

13 Caliber, an ICF 

International 

Company; PERF; 

and the COPS Office 

recently developed a 

community policing 

self-assessment tool 

for police departments 

to assess their efforts 

at implementing 

community policing. 

Community Policing 

Self-Assessment Tool: 

Documenting Today and 

Planning for Tomorrow 

– A User’s Guide will be 

published in 2009.
28 Next Steps in Community Policing

responses to public safety challenges may be preferred 

over proactive, long-term measures that show success 

at a much slower pace (yet are potentially more 

sustainable over time). City leaders should expand 

their focus to include long-term goals and efforts that 

may extend beyond their own tenure. To the extent 

possible, police and city leaders should seek to make 

community policing and community governance part 

of the police department and city-wide agency culture 

through internal organizational changes (e.g., hiring, 

reward systems, promotion systems, and policies and 

procedures) and through engagement efforts with the 

community (e.g., partnerships and problem-solving 

efforts). When these efforts are institutionalized in the 

community and within the city, residents likely will not 

accept any other style of policing and local governance.
Next Steps in Community Policing 29

Conclusion

Police department and city leaders who engage in 

strategic thinking about the preceding topical areas 

will be able to quickly get a general sense of where 

their department and city are, and where they are 

most likely to move in the future. Examining the 

police department’s activities in these areas, as well 

as local political support for these efforts, can help 

highlight gaps in the implementation of community 

policing and help identify the department’s next 

steps in further institutionalizing the community 

policing philosophy within the agency. This review 

can also assist with city leaders’ efforts to implement 

community partnerships, problem-solving efforts, and 

organizational change throughout the city structure. 

While community policing has matured and evolved 

during the last 25 years, more remains to accomplish 

to take community policing to its next level and bring 

it closer to its ideal. 

References 31

References

Chapman, Robert and Matthew Scheider. Community Policing for Mayors: A 

Municipal Service Model for Policing and Beyond. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 

2006.

Council of State Governments Justice Center and Police Executive Research 

Forum. Planning and Assessing a Law Enforcement Reentry Strategy. 

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

Policing Services, Forthcoming.

Davies, Heather J. and Gerard R. Murphy. Protecting Your Community from 

Terrorism, Volume 2: Working with Diverse Communities. Washington, D.C.: 

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

2004. 

Eck, John E. and William Spelman. Problem Solving: Problem Oriented Policing 

in Newport News. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 1987.

Fridell, Lorie and Mary Ann Wycoff, eds. Community Policing: The Past, Present, 

and Future. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 2004.

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

Hill, 1990.

International Association of Chiefs of Police. Offender Re-Entry: Exploring 

the Leadership Opportunity for Law Enforcement Executives and Their 

Agencies. IACP/COPS National Policy Summit Final Report. Alexandria, 

Virginia: International Association of Chiefs of Police, 2007a.

International Association of Chiefs of Police. Police Chiefs Guide to Immigration 

Issues. Alexandria, Virginia: International Association of Chiefs of Police, 

2007b. 

Kelling, George L., Tony Pate, Duane Dieckman, and Charles E. Brown. The 

Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment: A Summary Report. Washington, 

D.C.: Police Foundation, 1974.

Kelling, George L. and James Q. Wilson. “Broken Windows,” Atlantic Monthly, 249, 

No. 3 (1982): 39–38.
32 References

La Vigne, Nancy G., Amy L. Solomon, Karen A. Beckman, and Kelly Dedel. 

Prisoner Reentry and Community Policing: Strategies for Enhancing Public 

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

Oriented Policing Services, 2006. 

Mastrofski, Stephen. D., James J. Willis, and Tammy Rinehart Kochel. “The 

Challenges of Implementing Community Policing in the United States.” 

Report for the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 2007. 

Murphy, Gerard R. and Martha R. Plotkin. Protecting Your Community from 

Terrorism, Volume 1: Improving Local-Federal Partnerships. Washington, 

D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing 

Services, 2003. 

Police Foundation. The Newark Foot Patrol Experiment. Washington, D.C.: Police 

Foundation, 1981. 

Scrivner, Ellen. Innovations in Police Recruitment and Hiring: Hiring in the 

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

Community Oriented Policing Services, 2006.

Scheider, Matthew C., Robert E. Chapman, and Michael F. Seelman. “Connecting 

the Dots for a Proactive Approach,” BTS America, (Quarter 4 2003):158–162.

Spelman, William and Dale K. Brown. Calling the Police: Citizen Reporting of 

Serious Crime. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice, 1984. 

Trojanowicz, Robert C. and Dennis W. Banas. The Impact of Foot Patrol on 

Black and White Perceptions of Policing. East Lansing, Michigan: National 

Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center, 1985.

Trojanowicz, Robert C. and Bonnie Bucqueroux. Community Policing: How to 

Get Started, 2nd ed. Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Publishing Company, 1998.

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

“Community Policing.” 2008. www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=171. 

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

“What Is Community Policing?” 2008. www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.

asp?Item=36.


About PERF 35

About PERF

The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) is a 

national organization of progressive law enforcement 

chief executives from city, county, and state agencies 

who collectively serve more than half of the country’s 

population. Established in 1976 by 10 prominent 

police chiefs, PERF has evolved into one of the leading 

police think tanks. With membership from many of 

the largest police departments in the country and 

around the globe, PERF has pioneered studies in 

such fields as community and problem-oriented 

policing, racially biased policing, multijurisdictional 

investigations, domestic violence, the police response 

to people with mental illnesses, homeland security, 

management concerns, use of force, and crimereduction approaches. To learn more about PERF, visit 

www.policeforum.org.

About COPS 37

About COPS

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 

(the COPS Office) is an innovative agency that has 

been the driving force in advancing community 

policing throughout the nation. The COPS Office has a 

unique mission to directly serve the needs of local law 

enforcement, and COPS Office grant programs and 

products respond specifically to those needs.

The COPS Office was created through the Violent 

Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. 

As a component of the Justice Department, the 

mission of the COPS Office is to advance the practice 

of community policing as an effective strategy to 

improve public safety. Moving from a reactive to 

proactive role, community policing represents a shift 

from more traditional law enforcement practices. By 

addressing the root causes of criminal and disorderly 

behavior, rather than simply responding to crimes 

once they have been committed, community 

policing concentrates on preventing both crime 

and the atmosphere of fear it creates. Additionally, 

community policing encourages the use of crimefighting technology and operational strategies 

and the development of mutually beneficial 

relationships between law enforcement and the 

community. By earning the trust of the members 

of their communities and making those individuals 

stakeholders in their own safety, law enforcement 

can better understand and address the community’s 

needs, and the factors that contribute to crime.

The COPS Office awards grants to state, local, and 

tribal law enforcement agencies to hire and train 

community policing professionals, acquire and 

deploy cutting-edge crime-fighting technologies, 

and develop and test innovative policing strategies. 

COPS Office funding provides training and technical 

assistance to advance community policing at all 
38 About COPS

levels of law enforcement, from line officers to law 

enforcement executives, as well as others in public 

safety. Because community policing is inclusive, COPS 

training also reaches state and local government 

leaders and the citizens they serve. The COPS Office 

has compiled an unprecedented array of knowledge 

and training resources on community policing. This 

includes topic-specific publications, training curricula, 

and resource CDs. All COPS Office-developed materials 

are available as resources to law enforcement and their 

partners. 

•	 Since 1994, the COPS Office has invested more 

than $12 billion to add community policing officers 

to the nation’s streets, enhance crime fighting 

technology, support crime prevention initiatives, 

and provide training and technical assistance to 

help advance community policing. 

•	 Nearly 500,000 law enforcement personnel, 

community members, and government leaders 

have been trained through COPS Office-funded 

training organizations.

•	 The COPS Office has distributed more than 

1.2 million knowledge resource products (i.e., 

publications, training curricula, white papers, etc.) 

dealing with a wide range of community policing 

topics and issues. 

•	 At present, approximately 81 percent of the nation’s 

population is served by law enforcement agencies 

practicing community policing.

•	 By the end of FY 2008, the COPS Office had funded 

approximately 117,000 additional officers to more 

than 13,000 of the nation’s 18,000 law enforcement 

agencies across the country in small and large 

jurisdictions alike. The most recent survey of COPS 

Office grantees indicated that approximately 

109,581 of these officers have been hired.

40 Appendix: Roundtable Meeting Participants
Appendix: Roundtable Meeting Participants 41

Appendix: 

Roundtable Meeting Participants

White Plains, New York

February 27, 2007

– Deputy Commissioner Cedric Alexander

New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services

– Chief James Bradley

White Plains (New York) Police Department

– Captain David Burpee

White Plains (New York) Department of Public Safety 

– Commissioner Pat Carroll

New Rochelle (New York) Police Department

– Commissioner David Chong

Mt. Vernon (New York) Police Department

– Chief John Comparetto

Passaic County (New Jersey) Sheriff’s Department

– Commissioner William Connors

Rye (New York) Police Department

– Deputy Chief Neil Dryfe

Hartford (Connecticut) Police Department

– Carlos Fields

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

Services

– Assistant Chief Anne FitzSimmons

White Plains (New York) Police Department 

– Deputy Chief Frank Fowler

Syracuse (NY) Police Department

– Chief Michael Geraci

Schenectady (New York) Police Department

– Chief Betsy Hard

Bloomfield (Connecticut) Police Department
42 Appendix: Roundtable Meeting Participants

– Chief Patrick Harnett (ret.)

Hartford (Connecticut) Police Department

– Chief Robert Hertman

Wallkill (New York) Police Department

– Jim Isenberg

North American Family Institute

– Kevin Kennedy

Westchester County (New York) District Attorney’s Office

– Judith Kornberg, Ph.D.

John Jay College of Criminal Justice

– Chief Brent Larrabee

Stamford (Connecticut) Police Department

– Deputy Commissioner Byron Lockwood

Buffalo (New York) Police Department

– Brian Nickerson, Ph.D.

Pace University

– Chief Francisco Ortiz

New Haven (Connecticut) Police Department

– Captain James Quinn

Ramapo (New York) Police Department

– Chief Merritt Rahn

Greece (New York) Police Department

– Marilyn Simpson

New York-New Jersey Regional Center for Public Safety Innovations

– Commissioner Frank Straub

White Plains (New York) Department of Public Safety 

– Chief Thomas Sweeney

Glastonbury (Connecticut) Police Department

– Al Thompson

New York-New Jersey Regional Center for Public Safety Innovations

– Detective Lieutenant Ron Walsh

Nassau County (New York) Police Department
Appendix: Roundtable Meeting Participants 43

Arlington, Texas

March 22, 2007

– Chief Mitch Bates

Garland Police Department

– Chief Theron Bowman, Ph.D.

Arlington Police Department

– Chief Larry Boyd

Irving Police Department

– Chief Barbara Childress

Richland Hills Police Department

– Chief Tom Cowan

Burleson Police Department

– Chief Sidney Fuller

Farmers Branch Police Department

– Assistant Chief Ricardo Gomez

University of Texas – Arlington Police Department

– Chief Tommy Ingram

Colleyville Police Department

– Chief David James

Carrollton Police Department

– Interim Chief Russ Kerbow

Lewisville Police Department

– Chief Doug Kowalski

McKinney Police Department

– Gilbert Moore

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

– Chief Jimmy Perdue

North Richland Hills Police Department

– Deputy Chief Rhonda Robertson

Forth Worth Police Department

– Nancy Siegel

City of Tulsa (Oklahoma)

– Richard Smith, Ph.D.

University of Texas – Arlington

– Chief James Spiller

Dallas Area Rapid Transit Police
44 Appendix: Roundtable Meeting Participants

Richmond, California

March 29, 2007

– Chief Bill Bowen

Rio Vista Police Department

– Chief Ronald Davis

East Palo Alto Police Department

– Chief Heather Fong

San Francisco Police Department

– Captain Alec Griffin

Richmond Police Department

– Chief Susan Jones

Healdsburg Police Department

– Chief David Krauss

Tracy Police Department

– Chief Steve Krull

Livermore Police Department

– Chief Chris Magnus

Richmond Police Department

– Deputy Chief Ed Medina 

Richmond Police Department

– Chief Richard Melton

Napa Police Department

– Chief Don Mort

Dixon Police Department

– Lieutenant Charlesws

San Francisco Police Department

– Tony Ribera, Ph.D.

University of San Francisco 

– Chief Walter Tibbet

Alameda Police Department

– Captain Diane Urban

San Jose Police Department

www.cops.usdoj.gov

For More Information:

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

1100 Vermont Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20530

800.421.6770

May 2009 e050920207