U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Service Innovations in Police Recruitment Hiring Hiring in the Spirit of Service By Ellen Scrivner, Ph.D. This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement # 2001-CK-WX-K094 by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Points of view or opinions contained in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Hiring in the Spirit of Service Cover Design by Ayonna Johnson, Northrop Grumman contractor to U.S. Department of Justice COPS Office Contents Executive Summary .................................................................. 1 Acknowledgements ................................................................... 5 Introduction ....................................................................... 7 Chapter One Objectives of the Report ............................................................9 History of the Project ............................................................ 10 Five Demonstration Sites .......................................................... 11 HSS Initial Project Objectives .................................................... 12 Chapter Two Overview of Law Enforcement Selection History ..................................... 15 Recruiting and Selecting Police Candidates ......................................... 15 100,000 New Cops on the Beat ....................................................... 17 Objectives of HSS as Major Change Effort ........................................... 17 HSS Implementation Strategies ...................................................... 18 Chapter Three Selecting and Supporting Demonstration Sites ....................................... 21 Case Studies of Sites: Real-World Stories .......................................... 22 Sacramento Police Department: A Call to Serve ...................................... 22 Burlington Police Department: Work that Matters .................................... 30 Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office: Could you answer the Call? ......................................................... 36 Detroit Police Dep rtment: Give Back. Get More ..................................... 43 King County Sheriff’s Office: Accept the Challenge ................................. 50 Chapter Four Commonalties Across HSS Sites ...................................................... 59 Chapter Five HSS Lessons Learned ................................................................ 65 Menu Of Promising Practices ........................................................ 71 About the Author ................................................................... 75 About the Community Policing Consortium ............................................ 77 About the Cops Office .............................................................. 79 Appendices Appendix A: California Commission on POST Patrol Officer Psychological Screening Dimensions. Sacramento Police Department ....................................................... 81 Appendix B: Report on Findings from Focus Groups of Sacramento Female and Minority Police Officers. Sacramento Police Department ....................................................... 91 Appendix C: Community Focus Group Discussion Guidelines Sacramento Police Department ....................................................... 99 Appendix D: Performance Appraisal of Police Officers Sacramento Police Department ...................................................... 103 Appendix E: Use of Hilson Job Analysis Questionnaire (HJAQ) for Identifying Desired Characteristics of Community Oriented Police Officers Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office .............................................. 120 Appendix F: A Plan for Community Inclusion Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office .............................................. 127 Appendix G: Recruiting Ambassadors Program Detroit Police Department ......................................................... 147 Appendix H: Focus Group Report. Detroit Police Department ......................................................... 149 Appendix I: Site Contact Information .............................................. 152 Executive Summary Executive Summary Hiring in the Spirit of Service (HSS) is federally funded project that reflects major change in policing. In designated communities, HSS-participating agencies re-enlisting the community to help them carry out one of the most significant and fundamental processes in law enforcement agency—recruiting and hiring of service-oriented law enforcement personnel. This report presents findings from the HSS project. It was supported by cooperative agreement awarded to the Community Policing Consortium (CPC) by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Police Services (the COPS Office). Under the agreement, the CPC undertook full examination of law enforcement’s best practices to recruit and hire officers and deputies who have the skills and abilities necessary to be effective as community police officers. The CPC set out to examine the components of traditional screening procedures and to create innovative ways to revise traditional practices to make them consistent with the principles of community policing. As such, the CPC was particularly interested in strong emphasis on community engagement—the core of community policing—which enables the building of trust, the development of collaborative problem-solving partnerships, and greater accountability to the community. These emphases set community policing part from the professional model of policing and have been instrumental in introducing change to the police culture. Information in this report shows how HSS takes community policing to new level and expands beyond the familiar tasks of information sharing and problem solving to include major change effort in fundamental org nization processes that have significant policy implications. It tells the real-world stories of the five law enforcement agencies that were selected through competitive process to serve as demonstration sites. These sites represent the gamut of law enforcement in the country. They range from small department seeking to represent growing multicultural community (Burlington, Vermont), to state capital recovering from mass retirements and concerned about the impact on its community policing mission (Sacramento, California), to large urban department with an increasing incidence of violence and all of the challenges of big city policing (Detroit, Michigan), to two full-service sheriffs gencies (Hillsborough County, Florida and King County, Washington) that saw HSS as a vehicle to expand community policing initiatives and to take sheriffs’ deputies to broader dimension of performance. The report details how these sites went to great lengths to involve citizens in substantive ways and how the communities influenced strategies and outcomes. It describes how the sites used community input to create new recruitment methods and marketing initiatives to reach service-oriented candidates, particularly those from diverse communities, and how they revised selection procedures based on this input. These revisions re-institutionalizing hiring practices that are based on the identified personal characteristics and required competencies necessary to perform the community policing function. These same competencies will become increasingly critical as law enforcement takes on expanded roles that are collateral to greater involvement in the homel and security mission. The report highlights unique ccomplishments and challenges faced at each site and reports on commonalties experienced across all sites as well as the lessons learned from their experiences. It concludes with menu of best practices that can be explored by other law enforcement agencies who seek to implement recruitment and hiring practices that will advance their community policing mission. It also shows that the HSS project evolved into much more than federal grant focused on hiring. Within this context, HSS became value-added initiative that is influencing other organizational practices in the agencies involved in the project. As a result of HSS, there is better definition of community policing’s law enforcement ctivities and the required behaviors, personal characteristics, and competencies needed to perform as a community policing officer. One of the most compelling features of the spirit of service orientation, as reflected in this body of work, is the recognition that community policing appears to have tapped into what may be an underlying motivation of law enforcement officers nationwide: the drive to make difference and to give something back to their communities. NOTE: Despite the best of intentions there are sometimes unforeseen circumstances that may negatively impact efforts underway. After the conclusion of this project, the Detroit Police Department was confronted with one such challenge. A budget crisis forced the department to lay off approximately 150 recruits and officers. This will impact efforts to advance minority recruitment and hiring service-oriented officers. However, what was accomplished through HSS can still be utilized once the city is in a better financial position to resume its officer recruitment efforts. Acknowledgements Acknowledgements The author acknowledges the pioneering work of the Community Policing Consortium (CPC) in undertaking project to further the advancement of community policing. Special thanks to the CPC project partners who worked tirelessly to bring Hiring in the Spirit of Service to conclusion despite many unanticipated setbacks. The following individuals represent the CPC partnership and are acknowledged for their efforts: • David Bostrom, International Association of Chiefs of Police • Thomas Rhatigan, National Sheriffs’ Association • Karen Amendol , Ph.D., Police Foundation • Raquel Manso, Police Foundation • Drew Diamond, Police Executive Research Forum • William Harrison, National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives The steady leadership provided by CPC Executive Director William Matthews helped overcome obstacles. A longtime advocate of developing trust with, and accountability to, the community and ensuring that community policing is fully supportive of the civil liberties of citizens, Mr. Matthews provided the stewardship that brought the project to successful conclusion. The author also acknowledges the cooperation of the five demonstration sites. Project staffs were continuously accessible, answered an unending number of questions, and willingly shared their experiences and frustrations in an open and direct manner, but not without humor. They submitted to long interviews and provided documents in manner that created transparent grant process. Recognizing that the successful completion of the project was the result of the efforts of many people at each site, the glue that held the project together was the untiring efforts and dedication of the site project managers. The author acknowledges the efforts of the following individuals: • Samantha Brinkley, Sacramento Police Department, Sacramento, California • Lorelei Bowden, Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office, Hillsborough County, Florid • Deputy Chief Stephen Wark, Burlington Police Department, Burlington, Vermont • Ralph Cady, King County Sheriff’s Office, King County, Washington • Elsie Scott, Ph.D., Detroit Police Department, Detroit, Michigan All worked diligently to advance the project and see it through to completion. Finally, the author acknowledges Thomas Frasier, past Director of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), who brought the idea of hiring in the spirit of service, rather than adventure, to the COPS Office; current Director of COPS, Carl Peed, for his support of grant program that enhances COPS hiring programs by ddressing the requisite skills of the officers recruited and hired through those initiatives; Kenneth M. Howard, the COPS Project Manager, who assiduously managed and approved all details of this initiative; and Amy Schapiro from the COPS Office who assisted in seeing this project to completion. The potential to change the quality of law enforcement has been substantively advanced by this COPS Office value-added initiative. Introduction Introduction Hiring in the Spirit of Service (HSS) is bringing major change to policing in designated communities. In five HSS demonstration sites, law enforcement agencies have enlisted the community to help them carry out one of the most significant and fundamental processes in law enforcement agency—recruiting and hiring law enforcement personnel. These five agencies are asking their communities to help shape how public safety services are delivered and to assist them in hiring the right people to carry out the policing function. This fundamental change is the outcome of the federally funded HSS project, undertaken by the Community Policing Consortium (CPC), which provided support to examine critical baseline tasks that are essential to recruiting and hiring law enforcement personnel. The goal of the HSS examination involved developing recruitment and selection methodology that is consistent with requirements of community policing. As such, it placed heavy premium on increasing community involvement in all facets of these processes. It came at a particularly critical time because law enforcement agencies nationwide had adopted the community policing philosophy with little guidance to ensure that the officers and deputies who were being hired were indeed capable of carrying out the community policing role. There is little question that the quality of policing services is linked directly to the individual behavior of officers and deputies and to the organizational philosophy that supports their behavior. When the organization l philosophy shifts, however, it calls into question whether the traditional models that have been used to recruit and hire are sufficient to support the requirements of the new community policing model. Therefore, different selection models need to be explored. Such was the HSS mission undertaken by the CPC. The CPC’s long history of providing support for community policing positioned the organization to initiate comprehensive examination of all elements of accepted law enforcement selection processes and to introduce fundamental change, where possible, in the five law enforcement agencies that were selected as demonstration sites. The goal clearly has been realized: all five sites have adapted innovations in their recruitment and hiring models, innovations that are consistent with their community policing philosophy. As the HSS project unfolded, it was clear that it was evolving into much more than a grant simply focused on hiring. Rather, it began to influence other organizational practices in the agencies involved in the project. HSS heightened awareness throughout the organizations that ensuring public safety involves more than law enforcement “catching bad guys” and making good arrests. It also involves commitment to providing service and that realization brings renewed appreciation for what law enforcement service really means. In essence, that appreciation may be the driving force that motivates law enforcement officers nationwide—the drive to make difference and give something back to their communities. History of the Project Chapter One HIstory of the Project Objectives of the Report This report tells the story of each site and describes the real-world issues that emerged when implementing significant change in existing processes designed to recruit and select law enforcement officers. It also discusses how each site progressed to meet its goals of hiring service-oriented law enforcement recruits, and it describes the challenges encountered long the way. At the outset, it acknowledges that recruiting and hiring quality candidates has become a larger problem for law enforcement than it has been in the past. For many years, concerns about gender and racial biases against protected classes dominated the hiring landscape. Yet law enforcement agencies had the luxury of meeting affirmative action goals while making their selections from long lists of willing and eager candidates and hiring only those who met rigid criteria—what many referred to as the cream of the crop. In today’s world, gender and race remain as critical issues but candidate lists are much shorter because competition from other sectors of the economy provides broader opportunities for quality candidates. These opportunities can make positions in public safety seem less attractive. Moreover, negative media accounts of rogue officers, as well as those tha t describe the substantial challenges faced by professional law enforcement officers trying to do their jobs, may discourage many from considering law enforcement career opportunities. Further, potential candidates from diverse communities, the very people whom law enforcement seeks to attract, may shy away from these opportunities because history of acrimonious relationships may present a skewed picture of what law enforcement is all about; potential candidates may fear active disapproval from community peers for joining up with the perceived enemy. The long–standing gender and race issues have become further complicated by the need to ensure that the country’s burgeoning immigrant populations are represented in law enforcement. Law enforcement agencies across the country are struggling to attract officer and deputy candidates who can respond to, and communicate with, multi-cultural communities. With Hispanic communities estimated to be the fastest growing segment of the population, bilingual candidates are becoming priority and many agencies now provide Spanish lessons for tenured officers. However, equally important to language skills are candidates who understand the ethnic complexities of Hispanic and Asian populations as well as the unique strains experienced by Middle Eastern communities. Consequently, the capacity to bridge cultural gaps with communities of color is becoming important for law enforcement and adds a new dimension to the candidate competencies sought by law enforcement. Accordingly, major issues that need to be confronted in recruitment and hiring include law enforcement looking like the communities they serve and getting the right people into the job while avoiding attracting the wrong people, particula rly those who abuse authority. Abuse of authority is antithetical to effective policing and particularly so for community policing, which places a premium on developing trusting relationships with the community. The information contained in this report sets out to show how the five law enforcement departments met the challenges inherent to this major change effort that was designed to bring innovation to selection processes. It also describes how each site engaged the community in reshaping recruiting and hiring practices, and how they sought community input to create powerful messages that tell the story of what policing is all about. These messages became their “brand”, the image they seek to convey to the community and to potential candidates—messages that reflect the spirit of service that is integral to the philosophy and values of community policing. History of the Project Funded by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), the Community Policing Consortium (CPC) proposed to examine recruitment and hiring practices in five sites cross the nation. It sought to explore methods and practices for hiring police candid tes who were motivated by the spirit of service—in contrast only to the spirit of adventure—candid tes who could develop dynamic and working partnerships with the community and work collaboratively to solve community problems. This emphasis evolved following the unprecedented infusion of hiring and training funds that were provided by the COPS Office to promote proactive law enforcement, and the realization that to advance community policing, the COPS Office needed to go beyond the traditional selection models that hired incident-driven, command-and-control officers. Rather, there needed to be focus on recruiting officers who were representative of the community and who brought the skill sets, competencies, and personal characteristics that were necessary to fully implement community policing. Fully cognizant of the complexity of community policing, the CPC saw the need to identify the critical balance of knowledge, skills, and abilities as well as the traits, characteristics, and background experiences that would ensure requisite blend of effective enforcement, service orientation, and officer safety. Collaterally, the CPC also looked at how to attract individuals of interest, how to hire and retain them, and how to engage the community to help them achieve these goals. Within this context, the CPC encouraged sites to elicit community feedback through focus groups and subsequent participation in facets of the screening process. The CPC also encouraged sites to explore the use of marketing techniques, as though selling a product, and to develop “brands” that would uniquely signify what their community policing organization stands for. Borrowing from the corporate world, the concept of “branding” typically involves use of logo that presents vibra nt image that signifies universal recognition of an organization’s dedication to their product. In the world of law enforcement, the ”brand” and/or logo should communicate simila r message and illustrate department’s dedication to their mission. Further, the message needs to be communicated in such way that each department’s service orientation uniquely resonates with the community. Within this context, each site is marketing product— an interesting and challenging career that presents an opportunity to make difference in the community. Traditionally, there have been limited resources applied to marketing in law enforcement agencies. As a result, the stories of police and sheriffs are told through media accounts that typically focus on incidents of brutality, corruption, ineptness, or notorious actions described as abuse of the innocent. In these accounts, it has been rare to find focus on the service aspects of policing or on the courage and bravery of law enforcement personnel. Consequently, Hiring in the Spirit of Service (HSS) provided the sites with an opportunity to tell their own stories and to use methods that pushed the envelope—not typical occurrence in law enforcement agencies that are known to be largely conservative. This facet of the project provoked new ways to talk about law enforcement. Moreover, it clearly drove innovation in the five sites selected to participate in this hallmark project. Five Demonstration Sites The five sites that became the centerpiece of HSS were selected through competitive process. They were charged with developing models that had the potential to become promising practices for recruiting and hiring law enforcement candidates who have strong community service orientation. The criteria for selection included the following: • First and foremost, there needed to be strong commitment to the community policing philosophy. • Potential site candidates also needed to be engaged in an ongoing recruitment process wherein there was an available applicant pool to fill open positions. • They needed to be willing to adjust an existing multiphased recruitment and selection strategy. • They needed to have collected baseline data in earlier selection efforts so that they could assess the impact of HSS. • Most critical was their willingness to include the community in the hiring process and concurrence that this involvement would mount to considerably more than passive particip tion. • An added requirement was an absence of current litigation involving hiring practices. • Finally, the law enforcement chief executive officer (CEO) and local governing body needed to be willing to accept the monitoring processes developed by the CPC. At the outset, it was agreed that the site sample should be representative of the national spectrum of law enforcement agencies and include both police departments and sheriffs’ agencies. Although numerous sites expressed interest in being considered for funding, their interest diminished when they learned that the project plans called for more than tweaking current systems. Also, some felt they were unable to devote the resources that would be needed to bring the project to completion. Others were uncertain because of concerns about collective bargaining greements, and still others were not prepared to take on the required level of community engagement. Consequently, though numerous sites competed, for v arying reasons many were unable to satisfy all criteria . The five sites that met the CPC criteria and were selected to participate included the following three police departments and two sheriff’s agencies: • Sacramento Police Department, Sacramento, California • Burlington Police Department, Burlington, Vermont • Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office, Hillsborough County, Florida • City of Detroit Police Department, Detroit, Michigan • King County Sheriff’s Office, King County, Washington As it turned out, meeting the selection criteria was the first of several challenges encountered by these five sites in what came to be very complex project. Others included satisfying the requirements of an Institutional Review Board, confronting a range of professional issues relative to the use of valid assessment tools for applicant screening, leadership changes in the CEO position in each agency, and accomplishing objectives within the timelines specified by the grant. HSS Initial Project Objectives Five project objectives framed the task for the CPC and became the ground rules for site participation. The five objectives are as follows: 1. Identify methods of service-oriented recruitment and selection for use in the field. 2. Modify existing screening processes or develop new screening techniques that are compatible with the HSS mission. 3. Identify methods to ensure that elements of the screening process such as oral interviews, background information, and occupational and psychological testing are capable of identifying service-oriented candidates. 4. Engage the community to assist in these efforts. 5. Field-test revised processes in the selected law enforcement agencies. These objectives are compatible with the interests of community policing, the organizing philosophy of both the COPS Office and the CPC. Further, they bring community policing values and expectations directly into the recruitment and selection process. Finally, they support the capacity for officers and deputies to engage in problem-solving methods and collaborate with citizens to effectively deter crime and improve the quality of life in their communities. These objectives also endorse change in direction that has implications for the multiple-hurdle selection strategies, the methods traditionally used in the hiring of incident-driven, reactive law enforcement officers. Rather than base selection decisions on a candidate’s ability to pass successive phases of the process, “jumping the hurdles,” so to speak, they call for shifting to strategy that provides broad-based perspective of each candidate. More recently referred to as the whole-person strategy pre–employment assessment, this perspective is critical to ensuring that those hired can advance the mission and values of the department while respecting the civil liberties of others. This emphasis also opens the door for introducing other changes into the police human resource system including, but not limited to, changes in training, field training officer experiences, and modifications to performance appraisals as well as to criteria used in promotional systems. As will be noted throughout this report, the CPC met multiple challenges to accomplish the HSS objectives that culminated in the field testing of innovative recruitment and selection strategies. Further, it shows how building community involvement into the project was critical to ensuring long-lasting effects. The latter goes far beyond lip service, adding cosmetic value to existing procedures, or engaging citizens in role that primarily is passive in nature. Rather, the five sites, in varying degrees, have committed to institutionalizing community involvement in recruiting and hiring practices to achieve the spirit of service objectives. Chapter Two Overview of Law Enforcement Selection History Overview of Law Enforement Selection History Brief History of Recruiting and Selecting Police Candidates At the outset of the project, the Community Policing Consortium (CPC) acknowledged the impressive history that resulted in substantive improvements in how law enforcement selected officers and deputies. Over time, recruiting and selecting law enforcement candidates had become decidedly more professional as agencies enacted the recommendations of prominent law enforcement commissions. They lso benefited from the advent of the 1967 Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) with LEAA funds clearly supporting the advancement of law enforcement selection practices. Collaterally, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and affirmative action goals became instrumental in improving selection processes. They required public employment selection methods to be job-relevant, valid predictors of performance, and free of bias and adverse impact on protected classes. The latter issues became particularly important when psychological assessments were introduced into law enforcement selection bec ause of fair employment and professional practice requirements for demonstrating the reliability, validity, and job-relatedness of the psychological assessment tools. Despite these progressive changes, arguments remain today that pertain to the extensive focus on hiring officers and deputies who are interested in the adventure side of the job, in contrast to those who are service oriented. An adventure orientation can be characterized as over-emphasizing the p art of the job that involves chasing and catching bad guys, engaging in hot pursuits, kicking in doors, or resorting to intimidation as a way to maintain the edge and keep peace in the community. Inevitably, this orientation produces distancing from the community and creates negative stereotypes that result in the all too familiar we-they syndrome. In contrast, service orientation balances enforcement activities and good police work with humane caring for the community and values prevention and trusting relationships as a means to solving problems and controlling crime. These relationships build through the myriad day-to-day activities that position the officer to be seen as trusted partner committed to keeping peace and order in the community and protecting citizens. As early as 1977, Herman Goldstein observed that more of police officer’s time was spent in service-related activities than time devoted to enforcement, fact subsequently confirmed by many rese rchers. 1 Traditional recruitment and hiring practices, however, have used models that emph size strong focus on enforcement capabilities. Notwithstanding the criticality of enforcement responsibilities nd the need to maintain such in the hiring equation, it is equally important to understand the characteristics and job-related behaviors that attach to the service orientation. The widespread acceptance of, and adaptation to, the community policing model intensifies the need for better understanding of what constitutes community policing behavior and service orientation. 1. For more inform tion bout this ple se see Herm n Goldstein’s book Policing Free Society, (C mbridge, MA: B llinger Publishing Comp ny), 1977, p. 77. Other arguments pertain to the long-standing practice of selecting out candid tes, rather than selecting in, and to the use of the multiple-hurdle approach to selection. There is extensive literature on the differences in these selection methodologies. Briefly, nd for the purposes of this report, selecting out implies se rch for flaws or indicators, whether cognitive, behavioral, or psychological, that flag that something is wrong with the candidate. Thst “something” disqualifies candidates and precludes their opportunity to move through the other selection hurdles. A common criticism of this approach suggests that selected-out candidates never get a chance to perform in the job, therefore, there is no opportunity to evaluate if they were selected out for the right reasons. In contrast, selecting in looks at what is right with the candidate, how he or she meets the criteria that the department is seeking, and evaluates his or her potential for effective job performance. Subsequently, if terminated from employment, it is because of failure in job performance. Performance f ilures can then be evaluated within the context of the officer or deputy’s over all pre–employment assessment results, thereby strengthening the case for valid nonselect decisions of future candidates. The multiple-hurdle approach drives screening out process. In this model, candidates are passed from one screening hurdle to the next and can be screened out in any phase of the process. Flexibility is somewhat limited and the process precludes the development of comprehensive assessment of candidate’s capacity to fulfill all elements of the policing role. Selecting out through multiple hurdles became the method of choice when police selection systems were seeking candidates to perform reactive and action-oriented police role. In many respects it remains the method of choice today. Complications, however, were introduced as community policing became the predominant policing philosophy. Gradually, it was recognized that shift in emphasis was needed to select candidates who balanced strong service orientation with the requisite skills to engage the community in proactive problem solving to achieve public safety. Moreover, it became increasingly apparent that the recruitment and selection models that were linked exclusively to command-and-control mode of policing were outdated because they did not accommodate the emphasis on community policing. It was within this framework that the CPC sought to introduce significant change. The CPC was fully cognizant that even the best recruitment and selection strategies can not sustain high performance indefinitely or override other factors that influence performance in the course of law enforcement career. And, the CPC also acknowledged the inherent challenge in any effort to modify existing selection practices that had been developed to standardize hiring practices and ensure that they were fair, equitable, and job related. Clearly, no one would be eager to tamper with what law enforcement did well in recruitment and hiring. The prospect of modifying and/or supplementing systems, however, was not out of the question, provided that the same level of rigor was applied to what had become standard operating procedures in selection models. Hiring in the Spirit of Service (HSS), therefore, sought to build on the substantial history of law enforcement selection and to introduce new chapter to selection history that would incorporate innovations that meet the demands of today’s environment. These innovations are consistent with how policing is changing and reflect the influences of community policing. However, they also have implications for preserving homeland security in that community policing officers are becoming the first responders and preventors in the anti-terrorism environment. As such, HSS represents major change effort that is endemic to what the CPC, in partnership with the COPS Office, sought to accomplish. Accordingly, it came t time when police and sheriffs were building their agencies through the substantial infusions of new officers and deputies dedicated to community policing, and it represents much needed turning point for innovation in recruitment and hiring. 100,000 New Cops on the Beat Following passage of the landmark Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 2 there was an unprecedented level of support to hire community policing officers. Funding was distributed through the COPS Office, venue that also helped the law enforcement community learn more bout effective community policing. However, as the COPS Office focus began to change from a primary goal of meeting hiring numbers, questions emerged about the kind of officer who would be needed to implement the community policing role effectively. Concurrently, research studies of community policing also began to suggest that community policing may require different skill sets that are more cognitively complex and require strong emphasis on the critical thinking that is central to problem solving. It was only a matter of time before the question was raised about whether selection models that hired officers entrenched in the reactive mode could accomplish the goals of community policing or were at cross purposes with what a department committed to community policing was trying to achieve. In this regard, community policing requires greater working collaboration with the community and calls on officers and deputies to balance their enforcement role with that of becoming facilitators with other local government agencies, and with citizens, to achieve the crime-control mission. This emphasis is believed to produce less of the we- they syndrome as officers begin to perceive citizens as consumers and as coproducers of public safety, and/or as partners taking an active role to improve the quality of life in their geographical beats. As result, officers gather information from citizen partners, learn to be more analytical, and use data and information to shape their responses to prevalent crime problems that now include homeland security emphasis. Moreover, they use technology as crime-fighting tool with methodologies such as crime mapping and information-sharing enterprise systems becoming more routine. Over ll, these trends are creating substantive changes in how American law enforcement officers conduct business and these changes are reverberating throughout other components of the law enforcement system, not the least of which is changing how officers and deputies are recruited and selected. Objective of HSS as a Major Change Effect The changes detailed in the previous section were the foundation of the HSS project. However, because of the inherent difficulties in achieving this level of comprehensive change, the CPC required the identified sites to focus their efforts on five distinct target areas. The five target areas are as follows: • Recruiting and marketing which included the development of an gaency brand or image • Engaging the community in recruiting and hiring • Revising selection models including occupational screening • Revising selection models including psychological testing • Institution lizing range of new hiring practices that reflect readiness to accept change. 2. The COPS Office was created as result of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. As component of the Justice Dep rtment, the mission of the COPS Office is to advance community policing in jurisdictions of ll sizes cross the country. COPS has invested $11.9 billion to add community policing officers to the nation’s streets and schools, enhance crime-fighting technology, support crime prevention initi tives, and provide training and technical assistance to advance community policing. HSS Implementation Strategies From the outset, the CPC recognized the criticality of the need for consistent buy-in from all stakeholders. Consequently, several project modifications became necessary, including some changes in the sites originally identified for participation in the project. In seeking to revitalize recruitment and selection culture that had been widely accepted, even if somewhat rigid and driven by civil service requirements, the CPC knew full well that this would not be simple task. Thus, it determined to provide strong level of project management to improve the ch ances of changing recruitment and selection strategies while also integrating them into traditional practices that had been accepted, even if somewhat flawed. Further, while acknowledging what had become well-developed parameters inherent to an existing selection culture, other issues would need to be addressed that could influence implementation and possibly impede project completion. These issues areas follows: • The literature on police recruitment and selection was somewhat sparse, in contrast to what was available in the industrial psychology arena, and an emphasis on community policing was virtually nonexistent in the literature. The CPC, therefore, commissioned Leatta Hough, Ph.D., of the Dunnette Group, to review existing literature for its relevance to community policing. Her thorough review concluded that there was relevant literature on predicting performance in non–law enforcement jobs that have performance dimensions similar to those required by community policing. She contended that this information, particularly as it relates to valid predictors, could be expected to apply generally to community policing. Moreover, her review presented a wide range of promising selection measures that could be considered in the HSS project. • Given the nature of the project and the research component involving the use of human subjects in law enforcement selection, the CPC determined that an Institutional Review Board (IRB) process would be required. The introduction of the IRB precluded some of the sites from meeting their timetables because of the delays inherent in the review process and the project had to be extended beyond the original timetable. Conversely, however, the introduction of the IRB ensured that the project would be accomplished within the framework of acceptable research practices. • Since many of the sites were engaged in arrangements that involved using commercial tests and contractual vendors, there was less flexibility in modifying proprietary products. These products had been subjected to rigorous validation studies, as required by professional standards of the testing industry, and were not subject to manipul tion. • Any change in selection procedures, particularly those used in public employment, require the concurrence of multiple stakeholders. Even when local government concurred, there remained the issue of achieving internal buy-in at each selected site. • At the outset, it was acknowledged that the leadership and support of the law enforcement chief executive officer (CEO) would be critical to the success of the project. Midway through the project, three of the five sites experienced change in the chief executive of the agency. As with any agency experiencing transition to new leadership, difficulties in meeting predetermined schedules could be expected to influence implementation. The incoming CEO had to be fully briefed on the project to ensure that full participation in the project would continue and that the same level of commitment and cooperation would be forthcoming. As an aside, by the conclusion of the project, all five sites had new CEOs. • Shortly after initial project plans were developed, the United States experienced the unprecedented assault of September 11, 2001. This catastrophic event affected implementation of the plans. Accordingly, some prospective sites were subject to military call-ups while others experienced resource drains brought bout by an immediate shift in mission. As such, there were concerns bout having adequate resources to complete the project and to fulfill the rigorous criteria developed by the CPC. An added concern was the question of whether community policing efforts would lose ground following the events of 9/11. Rather than rush to hasty conclusion, the CPC elected to allow sites the needed time to absorb the impact of these critical changes. This proved to be wise decision, particularly in light of the concern about the continued impact of community policing, because it soon became clear that community policing could play a critical role in the efforts to ensure homeland security. Case Studies Chapter Three Case Studies Selecting and Supporting Demonstration Sites The Community Policing Consortium (CPC) was acutely aware of the potential impediments to completing such comprehensive project; therefore, it built in a range of safeguards to ensure completion of the project. The CPC also provided technical assistance to support the selected sites in achieving their goals. • The CPC partners provided data-driven resources to each site in the form of findings from preliminary research conducted on the five selection elements that were the core of the project. Each CPC partner was responsible for providing review of baseline research for one of the core elements of the project, and to provide each site with the previously referenced comprehensive analysis by Dr. Leatta Hough. • The CPC partners also provided each site with CPC project manager who made periodic site visits, reviewed the required monthly progress reports, and provided ongoing feedback. They became site champions and fielded multiple issues relative to federal funding and contractua l concerns. • The CPC partners encouraged the sites to form steering committees with diverse and multidisciplinary expertise that would inform and guide the project. The committees were envisioned as building capacity for bringing fresh ideas to recruitment and hiring and to encouraging innovative practices that would enhance diversity. • The CPC partners convened series of site participant roundtables throughout the life of the project. These meetings served as forum for reaffirming project guidelines and reviewing status reports. They also presented an opportunity for sites to share common problems and frustrations associated with the project. • The roundtables also provided the opportunity for sites to report on their successes and for the CPC to identify common issues that needed follow-up. The forums highlighted achievements of the individual sites and acknowledged group issues, thereby creating level of cohesiveness cross sites. Further, through the roundtables the sites developed the capacity to learn from each other and culminated in the development of network of law enforcement agencies that were engaged in recruitment and selection innovations. • The sites were supported and encouraged to deliver presentations of their work in progress at national law enforcement meetings. The meetings helped them meet established short-term goals and maintained the level of momentum that was necessary to keep the project moving forward. Participation in these meetings provided the sites with opportunities for invaluable peer feedback. In summary, these activities were central to ensuring that the project moved toward completion and that the sites met their stated goals. Despite this assistance, all sites encountered difficulties in completing all tasks related to their proposed activities within the original time frame of the grant. Consequently, two no-cost grant extensions were required because of the complexity of the project as well as the unforeseen interruptions of project activities. Case Studies of Sites: Real-World Stories What follows summarizes the experiences and lessons learned by the five police or sheriff departments that participated in Hiring in the Spirit of Service (HSS). Their stories show the real-world struggles that promoted their particip tion, the challenges they encountered long the way, how they met these challenges, as well as the barriers to implementing their projects. More pointedly, their experiences tell the story of innovation and change in traditional recruitment and hiring practices. Sacramento Police Department—A Call to Serve “It could not have come at a better time,” said Samantha Brinkley, when referring to the Sacramento (California) Police Department’s HSS project. As director of personnel for the police department and HSS project director, Ms. Brinkley was well aware of two interrelated issues affecting the department. One, the police department w as struggling to maintain the credibility of its community policing efforts; and second, looming just around the corner was the threat of wholesale retirements of the generation of officers who were hired fter they returned from serving in Vietnam. In addition, California’s severe budget problems were clearly a problem for the state capital where policing encounters its own set of unique challenges. Given these conditions, there were serious concerns about the department’s capacity to maintain sworn strength. Morale in the department was low, officers were discouraged about having to pick up the slack, and rash of media accounts fanned union concerns about the potential for unfulfilled contractual obligations. The HSS initiative emerged amid this atmosphere of apprehension and with it came A Call to Serve. Changing recruitment and hiring was something of sea change for Sacramento bec ause it ha d been fairly tradition-bound in its recruitment and selection practices. The police department had relied on time-honored approaches, particularly for recruiting. These traditional pra ctices changed dramatically both by full-fledged award-winning advertising campaign made possible by HSS (Employment Management Association’s Merit Award for Full Page Campaign),3 and by the inclusion of community members as an integral part of the process. Beyond selecting candidates, other changes were forthcoming in the department and in the end more than recruiting and hiring had changed. Morale of tenured officers improved as the HSS- funded media campaign helped to restore pride in how the Sacramento officers perceived their challenging role in the community. Officers began to view the results of HSS with certain amount of pride, seeing it as recognition of their professionalism and validation of what they are seeking to accomplish as they go about doing difficult job from day to day. History of the Project Training and deployment of the specialized units began in earnest in 1993 through 1995. Arturo Venegas (Ret.), the former Sacramento police chief, launched the department’s involvement in the project and sought to have the department considered as a pilot-testing site for HSS. At the outset, he saw HSS as an opportunity to evaluate Sacramento’s hiring practices within the context of community policing. Following his retirement, the project was endorsed by current Chief Albert Nájer , and it continued to enjoy strong support. 3 A series of the “A Call to Serve” ads received the Employment Management Association’s Merit Award for Full Page Black nd White Campaign. Chief Nájer saw the project as intricately related to the department’s mission and values. Under his direction, the project became a dynamic influence throughout the department and it helped the department succeed in identifying service-oriented traits for police officers and in modifying selection practices so that they were consistent with those traits. Further, his support helped in responding to administrative delays and to extending the project beyond the initial plan, thereby opening new doors for HSS in the Sacramento Police Dep rtment. By the conclusion of the project, the service message had expanded beyond recruitment and hiring and had been incorporated into training, evaluation, promotions, and internal/external communication. Collaterally, Sacramento came to refer to HSS as “the way we do business.” Steering Committee At the outset of the project, the Sacramento Police Department organized a steering committee that would be responsible for providing oversight and guidance throughout the project. The membership included representation from the police department, city Human Resources and Risk Management, occupational and clinical psychologists, community represent tives, and members of the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST). This comprehensive group also included the vendors and consultants involved in the project as well as representatives from the union who were invited to participate. The breadth of expertise and diversity of background represented on the Steering Committee provided collaborative framework for providing input, direction, and review throughout the life of the project. As such, it could be considered as a model for problem solving in projects of this nature in that the partnerships represented mirror the goals of community policing. Project Goals The Sacramento Police Department sought to create major changes in recruitment and hiring by addressing four critical functions: • Recruitment and community outreach • Occupational screening • Psychological testing • Institutionalizing change through revised policies, procedures, and longitudinal validation of hiring processes Use of Focus Groups: Recruitment, Community Outreach, and Marketing Sacramento relied heavily on focus groups to achieve project goals. In contrast to open-ended discussion groups, however, their focus groups had an applied research orientation that was used effectively to address recruitment, community outreach nd marketing initiatives. Recruitment and community outreach: The Sacramento Police Department set out to attract police candidates with strong histories of giving back to their communities and had a particular interest in candidates who were involved in community and volunteer activities. However, they also sought to ensure greater diversity in their applicant pool. Hence, they invited the focus group participation of citizens who had an edge in minority communities, including vocal community advocates. These citizens initially were involved in the department’s recruitment and hiring processes as participants in the focus group research led by Insight Research, Inc., marketing company that helped the groups brainstorm ideas and identify service-oriented traits. These discussions were structured round behavioral dimensions identified by the California POST (see Appendix A) which became the research protocol for collecting data on service-oriented traits in a consistent and uniform manner. This protocol was used with all focus groups. One focus group was comprised of officers while three other groups were composed of citizens. In addition to consensual agreement on the service-oriented traits reflected in the behavioral dimensions, all reached the conclusion that the department was understaffed, under–funded, in need of training, and experiencing morale problems. Three additional sworn focus groups were convened to counterbalance what was initially limited involvement of sworn participation, and to ensure adequate representation from the department. These groups were identified as “branding” groups and were designed to generate information that would shape a marketing message reflective of service-oriented traits. Much later in the project, separate set of focus groups were established to assess specific concerns of female and minority employees. These groups were developed in response to the realization within the department that they needed to do more to improve their success rate in recruiting diverse applicant pool. Recommendations from this latter group included dispelling negative images of police officers, recruiting young, early, and repeatedly, and creating diverse images in the advertising while also communicating “you can do it” attitude (see Appendix B for the report). The community focus groups were composed of community leaders who represented neighborhood and community organizations, minority group organizations, and business owners. All were paid a $50 stipend to participate. This factor was seen as responsible for the 100 percent show rate, an experience that was quite unlike that of the sites that did not pay a stipend. However, since ll p rticip nts were seen s f ns of the dep rtment, the police dep rtment subsequently questioned if the perception of service-oriented traits would have been different had they enlisted those who were not fans. In all likelihood, the structure provided by using the C alifornia POST behavioral dimensions as guidelines for discussion may have overridden this concern, but at this point it remains an unknown (see Appendix C for focus group discussion guidelines). Notwithstanding the above concern, the results of the focus groups were instrumental in revising selection processes to include formalized recruitment plan. Subsequently, community members were invited to participate as members of police cadet oral interview panels and these panels are now convened routinely. They consist of one community member and two sworn personnel per panel and all panel members have an opportunity to question and independently rate each candidate for the patrol position. Despite some initial trepidation about working together, the experience proved to be fruitful as sworn officers began to see value in community input. Moreover, the candidate ratings by trained citizens are remarkably similar to those of the sworn panel members. Given this success, the department now includes community members on police sergeant appraisal oral boards. Finally, the results of the focus groups substantially influenced other department functions and their impact was decidedly strong in arriving at the decision on how the department would market itself. Marketing the Image: A highly effective outreach strategy involved marketing an image that would draw service-oriented candidates. Insight Research worked with the focus groups and collected data on service- oriented traits by having focus group participants respond to a questionnaire containing a range of items about community policing. Information distilled from all groups identified the desired traits as follows: integrity, honesty, wisdom, empathy, patience, communication skills, strong work ethic, and adaptability. The groups did not believe that these traits were adequately represented in the existing print or television advertisements used by Sacramento. Also, they did not feel that service or diversity, including non-stereotypical roles for women, were emphasized. Consequently, they called for substantive change in the image that the department presented to potential recruits and to the community. Given that feedback, the marketing firm used the identified traits to develop the message that best described what focus group participants defined as important to portray to the community. The results were series of major themes that defined core values embedded in the service-oriented traits. They included courage, involvement, compassion, dedication, commitment, integrity, and communication. These themes then drove the marketing group’s recruiting campaign. However, the focus groups rejected the first offering from the marketing firm that portrayed the officers in the department as heroes through the message, So Many Ways to be a Hero. All had concerns that the hero theme would be perceived as over-used and of less relevance to the concept of service orientation. The officers, in particular, expressed the concern that it did not capture their motivation to join the department. Rather, they supported message conveying that law enforcement was calling to make difference. Thus, A Call to Serve was born. A Call to Serve has become the Sacramento Police Department’s brand and is now at the heart of multimedia advertising campaign that received the Employment Management Association’s Merit Award for Full Page Campaign. That message is the lead on all recruiting materials including brochures, video, recruiting booths, billboards, an Above and Beyond television series, and a new web site. In all products, these key words reinforce what the police department is looking for in its employees. This reinforcement is particularly important for the updated web site, an integral part of the recruitment strategy, because initial research demonstrated that 60 percent of candidates typically learned about the department and hiring opportunities from the web site. As of this writing, that figure approached 70 percent. At the conclusion of the project, the S cramento Police Department was compiling statistics to identify its most effective recruiting methods and was rolling out Community Recruiter Program. The program will train community leaders to recruit qualified police candidates from neighborhood and business associations, faith-based and educational institutions, and ethnic community groups. The goal of the Community Recruiter Program is to provide more personalized style of recruiting to attract and hire diverse candidates who reflect the city’s demographics. By increasing diversity in hiring, it is believed that relationships with the community will be enhanced. Collaterally, Sacramento is developing series of manuals for candidates that will address issues in oral examin tions and in the pre–employment psychological ssessment; they are also preparing writing skills assessment video. The Sacramento Police Department is a clear example of how community outreach started with basic focus group research to identify service-oriented traits but then became entrenched in other significant recruitment and hiring processes. Occupational screening: The Sacramento Police Department undertook full examination of its occupational screening processes to determine which elements could be modified to incorporate the service orientation. Interest came at a fortuitous time because the California POST was reexamining dimensions of the law enforcement job throughout the state and was seeking to incorporate occupational parameters relevant to community policing into the job description and state requirements for testing processes. The Sacramento Police Department initiated involvement with the POST at the outset of the project and project staff participated in the working groups convened to advance the POST project and were represented on the POST Oral Interview Advisory Committee. The POST had conducted job analysis research on the position of peace officer in California. The research resulted in formulating the dimensions that defined various components of the selection process, including behavioral job dimensions, psychological screening dimensions, and oral interview factors. The POST behavioral job dimensions were used as framework for the focus groups that the police department convened and were used to promote discussion on range of service-oriented behaviors. These behaviors included communication skills, problem-solving ability, learning ability, judgment under pressure, observation skills, willingness to confront problems, interest in people, interpersonal sensitivity, desire for self improvement, appearance, dependability, physical ability, integrity, operation of motor vehicle, and credibility as a witness in court. There is some overlap between the behavioral job dimensions and the POST oral interview factors. The latter were rated by citizens and officers in terms of importance for targeting in the oral interviews and agreed upon targets are as follows: experience, problem solving, communication skills, interest and motivation, interpersonal skills, community involvement, and awareness. Subsequently, these factors were incorporated into the standardized ora l interview component of the assessment process. This effort will be substantially facilitated by an oral interview examination manual to guide the process and four-minute video on how to use oral interviews, both of which are being developed by the POST. Several state occupational processes had been standardized throughout the state and could not be changed. Therefore, Sacramento elected to assist candidates by developing tools to supplement these occupational components, such as an examination preparation guide, orientation workshops, and a video on assessing writing skills. The police department also worked with the state and city to provide candidates with opportunities to retake the POST written exam. Further, they revised the educational requirements for newly created police recruit training classification—the police recruit, which differs from the traditional police cadet position. In this program, police recruits must be 18 years old and will be required to attend college while working part-time for the department in non-sworn position until they are ready to attend the police academy. At tha t time they will be upgraded to the position of police cadet. Modifying these elements required extensive coordination with the city’s Human Resources department, as did revising other process benchmarks that were considered unreasonable, such as wall climbs on the physical agility test and trigger pulls for female candidates. With the help of Human Resources, those benchmarks eventually were either eliminated or modified substantively and the changes culminated in an agreement to provide candidates with an opportunity for retesting. An outgrowth of HSS that is clearly linked to occupational screening has been the development of mentoring program that positions department staff, particularly those assigned to recruiting, to become more involved with candidates throughout the selection and training processes. Within this context, peer support groups are initiated during the hiring process and continue while the recruit is in the academy and throughout the probationary year. These groups acknowledge variable family situations and attempt to keep single officers and married officers in independent groups to ensure that there is comfort in addressing unique personal adjustment needs. The goal of this program is focused on retaining the new recruits and helping them, and their families, adjust to the demands of the law enforcement career. As an additional measure to meet retention goals, the police department is paying the costs for prospective applicants to attend orientation classes at the community college and has modified entry level educational requirements for the new police cadet classification of recruits. In different venue, Sacramento also proposes to develop police officer job performance evaluation that will include community input. The system under development is based on the 360o Performance Evaluation System Design, which has been used in the private sector (see Appendix D). Using this type of model, performance ratings are gathered from a range of sources rather than relying only on unitary performance rating from single supervisor. As such, the 360o evaluation model gathers performance data from those familiar with the individual’s performance, including peers, and also incorporates administrative information into the rating ensuring that a broad range of information is included in the appraisal. In the case of Sacramento, a very unique function will be the integration of information from the community into the performance evaluations of officers. They also are developing a manual that will provide guidelines for using this form of performance appraisals for police officers. Psychological screening: Throughout the course of the project, the psychological screening dimensions developed by the POST also were under review. The current iteration of psychological dimensions includes social competence, capacity for teamwork, adapt ability-flexibility, conscientiousness, depend ability, impulse control, attention to safety, integrity, emotional regulation and stress tolerance, decision making and judgment, assertiveness, persuasiveness, and voiding substance buse and other risk taking behaviors. Each dimension is defined and examples of positive and counterproductive behaviors are provided. Current consensus is that these dimensions may be more accurately assessed by responses to psychological evaluations instead of citizen interviews. Initi lly, Sacramento had proposed to conduct psychological testing research on the two psychological tests currently administered to candidates (MMPI-2 nd CPI) and to examine a new group of tests developed by Hilson Research using sample of c demy recruits. The department was precluded from completing this research within the initial time frame of the grant because of Institutional Review Board requirements. Subsequently, the department eliminated ll empirical analyses of psychological tests and concluded that the psychological dimensions identified by POST should be evaluated by licensed clinical psychologist after a conditional job offer has been presented to the candidate. By the conclusion of the project, the Sacramento Police Department was completing its Police Cadet Psychological Screening Manual that draws on recent psychological research as well as findings from other HSS sites. The department plans to give that manual to all contract psychologists who provide psychological screening of their applicants and to incorporate it into future requests for proposals (RFP). In contrast to the issues that precluded psychological test research, there was less difficulty in incorporating the POST Oral Interview Factors into the oral board component. This component will be significant to selecting candidates who are people-oriented recruits who strive to serve the community and who will derive enjoyment from their jobs. Institutionalizing change: The Sacramento Police Department increased its probability of institutionalizing HSS by combining the traits identified in the HSS project with the POST behavioral dimensions and the 360o performance evaluation model. These changes are accompanied by collateral modifications in policies and procedures including use of the community as recruiters through the Community Recruiter Program. In essence, the department is creating system changes that will institutionalize service-oriented performance. These changes start with the mentoring program that inculcates department values early in the career life of Sacramento police officer. Together, all of these practices demonstrate that the Sacramento Police Department is meeting its goal of making HSS part of the fabric of the everyday life of police officer. Unique Accomplishments The Sacramento Police Dep artment’s work in HSS resulted in the following five unique accomplishments: • Focus Groups with an applied research paradigm • Occupational screening linked to partnership with the California POST • Recruitment-selection guides • Innovation in performance appraisals • Community Recruiter Program Focus groups with an applied research paradigm: Rather than relying on open-ended discussion groups, the Sacramento Police Department structured its focus groups by using a research paradigm that systematized the methodology used to determine desired traits for community-oriented police officers. Similar groups helped to develop service-oriented m arketing recruitment materials and worked with the community to validate the identified brand. Occupational screening linked to partnership with the California POST: A strong partnership with the California POST influenced the police department’s approach to occupational screening and was integral to the modification of the selection processes. The police department went to great lengths to ensure that its occupational screening was consistent with community policing traits and behavioral dimensions that were being identified in POST’s ongoing work. These factors were integrated into all elements of the occupational screening procedures. Sacr amento also took highly practical approach to its review of all components of its occupational screening process and elected to focus only on those components that could be integrated realistically into the community service framework. Recruitment-selection guides: The Sacramento Police Department developed formal recruiting plan and range of recruiting tools, including series of manuals, to guide the recruitment and selection process as well as a writing assessment tool. Many of the guides have companion video of instructions. These guides are important as supplements to help potential candidates get through the process and are particularly critical as support information for the state-wide mandated selection components that could not be changed. The police department also developed guide for clinical psychologists who conduct the psychological assessment component of the screening process and that guide is now part of the RFP process. Performance appraisal innovations: Combining the traits identified in the HSS project with the POST behavioral dimensions, the Sacramento Police Department set out to develop 360o evaluation model. In contrast to using unitary ratings from individual supervisors to evaluate performance, this model gathers performance data from number of different sources. Data sources can include, but are not limited to, direct supervisor observations, peer input, existing personnel files, and overall performance of the respective work unit. Within this context, Sacramento will be eliciting community component relative to officer performance which is quite unique in law enforcement. Overall, the successful completion of this process will allow the department to provide formative appraisal of an officer’s job performance and will permit supervisors to deliver highly specific performance feedback, particularly as it relates to community policing (see Appendix D). Although no stranger to private industry, the 360o performance appraisal model presents quite a contrast to the traditional performance appraisal methods used in law enforcement. Consequently, it stands to make a substantive contribution to the field. Community Recruiter Program: Seeking partners who were part of the minority communities enabled broader recruitment strategy in diverse communities and culminated in the police department’s intent to develop the Community Recruiter Program. The program will train community leaders to recruit qualified applicants from groups where they have strong presence. Such groups include, but are not limited to, neighborhood and business associations, faith-based and educational institutions, and ethnic communities. Community recruiters will receive instruction on the full range of selection activities to help prepare potential recruits to meet hiring standards and will function as liaisons with department recruiters. Sacramento’s research approach resulted in a detailed examination and modification of recruitment and selection practices and ensured that they would be consistent with service oriented traits as well as with POST requirements. Perhaps the most significant change that occurred has been the involvement of community members on the interview board and their significant influence on the hiring process. The design of the 360o Performance Evaluation Model that incorporates the parameters of community policing is also unique. Unique Challenges Changes in the recruiting and selection environment are likely to produce other systemic change. In the case of the Sacramento Police Department, some of these changes have been positive, while the long-term impact of others remains unclear. One such change is the number of applicants who are first exposed to the department through the Internet. With 70 percent of recruits responding through the Internet, at this time it is unknown if there will be a corresponding change in the quality of patrol performance of these new applicants. Clearly, Internet contact precludes personal contact and direct familiarity with the department at the outset of the process. Moreover, while there is little question that computer-savvy candidates will bring a range of different skills to the job that will be particularly important in the information ge, it remains to be seen if this advantage will translate into effective police patrol behavior. Or, will applicants who may be seen as computer savvy bring new range of issues that can become problematic? Despite the extensive level of community involvement in recruitment, at the conclusion of the project community members had not generated the number of recruits that had been anticipated. Also, there were more recruit dropouts in the field training officer phase of training as of January 2004. In the preceding year, however, Sacramento ha d trained two recruit classes, in contrast to the traditional single class, and it is not clear if that had something to do with the higher number of recruit dropouts. Although increasing diversity in the applicant pool was a m ajor goal for the Sacramento Police Department, the majority of recruits are still white males. While increasing diversity remains a go l, it has not been fully attained; however, the data provided by the focus groups conducted with minority and female employees are providing instructive information on how to increase diversity and, in all likelihood, will improve this situation. Future of HSS in the Sacramento Police Department The Sacramento Police Department is determined to meet its HSS goals and is well on the way to linking all that it does to a common goal, purpose, and philosophy. In addition to changing the face that the police present to the community, substantive revisions are being integrated throughout the selection system and these changes involve training as well as promotional processes. Systemic changes to these fundamental processes clearly advance the police department’s capacity to institutionalize the HSS mission. Moreover, the fact that it has linked its efforts to those of the California POST increases the chances of institutionalization. Finally, the Sacramento Police Department is clear that HSS is now the way to do business and that message is resonating both internally and externally. Burlington Police Department: Work That Matters “Hiring in the spirit of service…that is the Burlington Police Department, that’s who we are,” said Deputy Chief Steve Wark. In the Burlington Police Department, the spirit of service started out as the police department’s brand, but it turned out to be great deal more than just a slogan on a brochure. The police department sought to embed the spirit of service and community involvement into everything it does in its quest to create a department that was fully responsive to the growing multicultural needs of the community. By the end of the project, the spirit of service had been converted into a new hiring slogan that Burlington saw as fully embracing what the service orientation means to the life of a Burlington police officer: Work that Matters. Ensconced in the Green Mountains of Vermont and fronting on Lake Champlain, the city of Burlington is unique with its low general crime rate and particularly low incidence of violent crime. Home to the University of Vermont, the city enjoys the distinction as one of the most livable cities in the country. Although it is small and has a popul tion of approximately 40,000, it is the largest city in the state. In contrast to other sites, its strong tourist industry attracts vacationers across all seasons—sailing in summer, viewing fall foliage, and skiing in wha t is comparable to a winter wonderland. However, this beautiful setting also can create problems for a new recruit because harsh winters also are a part of this picture-postcard environment and they present unique adjustment problems that go beyond adjusting to life in a police dep rtment. Functioning as a police officer in long stretches of below-zero temperatures and blizzard conditions are not necessarily conducive to attracting and retaining an ethnically diverse applicant pool, particularly when people in this multicultural city immigrated from countries that have very temperate climates. Of the five sample sites, Burlington is the smallest police department with sworn strength of 104. At the beginning of the project, however, only 92 officers were available to discharge the law enforcement function. Although a decrement of 12 officers may not seem substantial in many police departments, in a department of this size it becomes major factor and strains human resources. Burlington, therefore, was eager to take on this project in hopes of attracting candidates who would serve the multicultural community well because they were attracted to, and motivated by, work that matters. History of the Project The Burlington Police Department adapted community policing in 1999 under the leadership of then Chief Alana Ennis. Through her stewardship, the department built on an existing array of community relations efforts. But it was the HSS grant that allowed the department to integrate extant partnerships into the fabric of the police department and to create community focus cross the department. When Chief Thomas Trembley assumed the position after Chief Ennis retired, he endorsed the community policing philosophy and committed to making it the driving force of how the department does business in this multicultural community that continues to grow in diversity. Burlington is a refugee resettlement center and people from Vietnam, Somalia , Bosnia , and other ethnic groups associated with the university now call this city home. Many have preconceived ideas about police practices that are based on experiences with police in their native countries. Additionally, as a university town with a strong menu of multicultural offerings, the focus on creating a community that welcomes diversity is becoming the norm. The police department supported that norm, partnered with the Community Economic Development Office (CEDO) in its efforts to expand community development into public forums on race, culture, and class, and sought to intensify that focus in the department. While the Burlington Police Department’s community policing mission was consistent with the above trends, federal funding allowed the department to further institutionalize practices and to integrate its community policing mission into the everyday operations of the department. In this regard, it galvanized the department to systemize how police are working together with citizens in this increasingly multicultural community and to develop what it has termed “partnerships with purpose”—partnerships that prevent crime and create safer city. Project Goals Given the background of strong tradition of service-oriented activities, the Burlington Police Department adapted four-phase project strategy. • Create a model-officer psychometric profile. • Change the selection system by supplementing state-sponsored selection tools with HSS strategies. • Engage in outreach with a goal of increasing diversity through the use of marketing tactics involving radio and television advertising and community involvement. • Provide professional development for recruits and mentoring. The overall goal of the project sought to raise the quality of policing services by intensifying police work with citizens to achieve safe, healthy, and self-reliant community with problem solving as the primary strategy to achieve the mission. Model officer profile: The Burlington Police Department proposed to create model officer profile in the first HSS phase and to study group of tenured police officers through their performance on series of tests developed by Hilson Research. The contract psychologist identified these instruments as appropriate for screening police officers, in both pre-and post–conditional offers of employment. Although the police department initially sought to test a large sample of officers, the sample ended up being much smaller (N=28) than originally intended, in part because of changes in sample selection that were required by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). Also, in department this size, opportunities are somewhat limited for scheduling groups of officers to participate in research activities because of concerns about depleting patrol coverage. Consequently, this phase of the project is still ongoing. This less than fully successful assessment research focus had implications for the next HSS phase that proposed to supplement state-sponsored selection tools. HSS supplements to state-sponsored tool: In the second project phase, the Burlington Police Department had planned to develop new test that would supplement the processes mandated by the state, primarily the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). The fact that the first-phase research design could not be accommodated within the time frame of the grant affected the capacity to meet this objective. The police department, however, had greater success in overcoming impediments to the goal of developing an online, entry-level practice test for potential recruits. These impediments involved proprietary and copyright issues related to using copies of out-of-service entry-level tests that had been used as part of the initial state assessment process. Although the recycling of past tests involved issues beyond the scope of the HSS grant, they were subsequently resolved and the police department was able to develop an online practice test. Originally this test was available online at www.workthatmatters.net, but the information has since been transferred to the Burlington Police Department’s website at www.bpdvt.org. Outreach activities: In the third phase of the project, the Burlington Police Department’s initial focus on using marketing as an outreach tool was twofold. First it sought to initiate “messages” that would attract diverse candidate pool. Second, it wanted to improve its web site, use it to provide the online pre–employment sample test that potential candidates could use for practice, and also attain individual feedback on their performance. As such, the police department planned to use its web site primarily for informational purposes and was less focused on developing an advertising and media campaign. The department contracted to develop site that was visually attractive with easy-to-navigate links, sections, chapters, and passages— all of which would contain messages attuned to conveying the spirit of service, but with the intention of informing candidates, rather than attracting them, through advertising. Initially, Burlington approached this phase of the project from the framework of information dissemination. It took the position that marketing could frame the message, but also believed that regardless of what brochures and videos would say about the department, it was what happened when recruits were inside the department that was most important. The partnership with CEDO was a major influence on developing this perspective because the CEDO network had confirmed that while candidates were concerned about getting hired, they were equally apprehensive about what would happen after they were hired. Although the police department maintained the information dissemination priority throughout most of the project, the department did come to recognize the value of broader marketing strategy when they saw it being used successfully at the other sites. Before the completion of the project, the Burlington Police Department dramatically revised its ideas about how to use its web site as well as its ideas about the value of advertising. As a result, the department adopted marketing techniques that were similar to those of other sites and eventually completely revised its web site. By the conclusion of the project, the advertising campaign and web site had attracted wide media attention which signified that its media market had expanded. A further indication of the success of the web site was reflected in the substantial increase in the number of hits following the implementation of the changes to the site. The Burlington Police Department is the one site that did not convene formal focus groups and did not develop a steering or advisory committee. Rather, it convened team meetings that included project staff, consultants, and citizens. The team meetings were an integral part of their outreach strategy. They were used to identify the service-oriented traits that the department was seeking in applicants and, equally important, they provided forum for developing the Community Consultant component of the project. Having fully endorsed the need to build trust with diverse populations that felt marginalized, the police department developed its Community Consultant program as a major front-end outreach activity and as the core of its recruitment strategy. CEDO provided community coaching services as a way to connect the community consultants to diverse citizen groups and to help them to educate the groups and advocate for the community policing philosophy in culturally relevant ways. The outreach coach also participated in the team meetings and provided expertise on how to create effective recruiting strategies and to develop mentoring program to retain potential recruits in the system. The police department used the Community Consultant vehicle to adopt a people-to-people approach that it eventually supplemented through mass media messages. Community members were involved in the initial phases of the project as well as in other components of the selection process. Citizen participation expanded considerably beyond the team meetings through the community consultant component. Community members provided feedback on the design of the police department web site and now participate regularly in recruiting, oral board interviews, and training police candidates. Finally, involvement of the community has been built into the agency’s operational plan by soliciting systematic feedback from citizens at community meetings convened to assess how the agency is performing. Professional development through mentoring: The final phase of the project resulted in mentoring program to help recruits from diverse communities adjust to what for many is very different environment, and to facilitate retention of police officers committed to the spirit of service. The department saw the mentoring program as particularly important in helping candidates from diverse communities become comfortable with the police identity and to adapt to the police culture. But it also was important for other reasons. Over and above acclimating to the police culture, problem for law enforcement recruits nationwide, the environmental conditions in Vermont provoke realistic adjustment difficulties for new recruits. Although the city of Burlington has been designated as one of the most livable small cities in the United States, 2003’s 53 inches of snow and 6-degrees-below-zero temperatures, not unusual for the mountains of Vermont, pose valid questions for potential recruits. The mentors have become important in translating how the quality of life in Burlington overrides seasonal climactic conditions. Finally, professional development has been enhanced by providing tutoring for recruits whose second language is English. Unique Accomplishments The Burlington Police Department’s unique accomplishments in its HSS program are the following: • CEDO partnership and outreach coach • Community Consultant program • Mentoring policy and English language tutoring • Online entry-level practice test CEDO Partnership and Outreach Coach: A hallmark contribution to HSS is the Burlington Police Department’s investment in strengthening the involvement of the multicultural community. In addition to creating the Community Consultant program, the department worked with CEDO and used their VISTA volunteers as well as respected businessmen to develop an outreach capacity that was designed to develop credibility with diverse citizen groups. Credibility was particularly important because concerns of diverse candidates related to working with the police could become an impediment to the success of the project. Consequently, the department used the services of CEDO outreach coach to work with the consultants and assist them in learning how to recruit a diverse applicant pool. This decision not only supported community involvement in the selection process, the use of the CEDO network helped to communicate steadfast message to police candidates about the department’s commitment to the multi-cultural community and their intent to involve the community in recruitment and hiring. Community Consultant Program: The community consultants are adjunct recruiters for the Burlington Police Department. They participate in outreach at job fairs, town meetings, and workplaces and are an integral part of the recruitment team that engages in formal recruitment activities. Also, they are involved in the recruit orientation program where they address the concept of community and culture in the city of Burlington and discuss their perspectives on the social, economic, and cultural aspects of the city. As part of the recruitment team, they are paid a volunteer stipend from funds outside of the project to work with professional staff and engage in outreach, and they now have a vote in the oral board’s interview process. In essence, they have become significant part of the hiring process and have recruited 28 potential recruits to the department since the inception of the program. That number takes on greater significance in light of Burlington’s sworn strength of 104 officers. Mentoring Policy and English Language Tutoring: The mentoring program was particularly important for this multicultural community and the police department sought out individuals in diverse communities to help with this process. Since many of the potential recruits come from countries where the experience with police has been less than favorable, there was a need to not only attract these individuals to law enforcement but to help them feel comfortable with their decision and to sustain them throughout the process. This has been a learning process for the police and for the community. They have found that even when ideological barriers to becoming police officer have been resolved, language and writing skills can be major obstacles to completing the process successfully. As result, the mentoring program now involves much-needed component of English language tutoring. On Line Entry-Level Practice Test: The Burlington Police Department resolved the impediments to using back issues of state-sponsored entry-level tests and now offers an online entry-level practice test that clearly approximates what recruits will encounter when they apply for a position as a Burlington police officer. This effort is particularly important for recruits whose second language is English. The test can be viewed online at the Burlington Police Department’s website. Unique Challenges Creating the model psychometric profile was most challenging. As a small, homogenous department, the sample of officers (both patrol officers and detectives) tested was not large enough to render statistically significant information. Moreover, implementation of pilot testing was delayed because of IRB concerns and because Burlington became an HSS site later in the process. Despite these challenges, there were attempts to expand the size of the designated sample of police officers; it is unclear how many officers eventually completed the proposed assessment battery. Because of the small sample, the patterns under consideration need to be interpreted with caution because validity may be questionable. The current sample is too small to make reliable generalizations; therefore, test findings are being compared to larger samples from the other sites that used the same tests. According to the consulting psychologist, some similarities are emerging but as of this writing findings are still inconclusive. Another challenge involved tracking the movement of recruits through the process. The Burlington Police Department is required by the state to retain applicants’ files for seven (7) years and identify at which point applicants drop out or are disqualified. The process, though, is less formally systematized primarily because only one recruiting officer is assigned to manage the process, a feature not uncommon in small departments. Also, confidentiality requirements pose stringent limitations on circulating information about potential candidates, a concern that can take on greater significance when volunteers living in a small community are involved in the process. The lack of formal system to track recruit progress in a small department does not reflect poorly on the progress of the HSS initiative but it does make it more difficult to gauge overall success of the project. Also, it becomes difficult to determine where corrections need to be made in recruitment and hiring. However, such limitations clearly did not dampen the enthusiasm for the process since community consultants continue to deliver new recruits. Future of HSS in Burlington The initial goal of the project was to hire eight officers by the original project end date. Before the grant was extended, four recruits had been hired and trained at the Vermont Police Academy, which provides fairly rigorous and rigid paramilitary training protocol. Of an additional 28 new candidates who were qualified by recruiters to sit for the initial test administered by the academy, 10 showed up for testing and of that number, three passed and were able to meet the hiring requirements. Although this lower success rate has been something of a disappointment to project staff, they did come close to meeting their goals and percentage-wise may end up with selection rates that are closer to the larger departments. Further, their ability to learn from the process and introduce new methods in response to challenges faced by candidates suggests a certain resiliency that is consistent with maintaining the spirit of service. According to Burlington officials, recruitment activity continues and community enthusiasm remains high. Moreover, the hit rates on the web site have increased dramatically and the department hopes that through mentoring and tutoring it will meet its goal to become multicultural, diverse police department in state that is 92 percent Caucasian. The department’s commitment to community policing has not wavered and the tenured officer testimonials on its web site suggest that the spirit of service is alive and well in the Burlington Police Department and that these officers clearly are engaged in work that matters. Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office—Courage, Integrity, Compassion: Could you Answer the Call? The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office serves the Tamp Bay (Florida) area . It is the 34th largest county and the ninth largest suburban county law enforcement agency in the country. The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office is full-service agency with staff of 3,000 including 1,200 deputies and 900 detention deputies. Initiating community policing in the late eighties, Sheriff Cal Henderson saw HSS as an opportunity to expand the office’s community policing mission. Having hired 124 community resource deputies (CRD) since 1993, Hillsborough sought to develop and implement model recruitment strategies and selection systems that would attract and employ the best-qualified individuals as service-oriented deputies to serve Hillsborough County. The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office is committed to community policing and Sheriff Henderson and Chief Deputy David Gee (who succeeded Sheriff Henderson in 2005) were willing to make the commitment required of Hiring in the Spirit of Service (HSS) sites. Having dedicated the 124 CRDs to fixed geographic areas, Hillsborough was poised to use these deputies as a resource pool that would permit it to examine methods to formalize a selection process that expanded its service-oriented deputy hiring goals. Moreover, Hillsborough sought to reach candidates who could answer the call. Enjoying long–standing relationship with the University of South Florida, the sheriff’s office had the capacity to partner with the university and establish a team that would carry out the significant research tasks that are necessary when making changes to a selection process. Subsequently, the university researchers joined with other consultants to form the research team that guided the work of the HSS grant. The team helped Hillsborough meet its selection goals of attracting and hiring candidates who “could answer the call.” History of the Project A research focus was the core of the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office HSS strategy. It was used to determine the personal characteristics essential in service-oriented deputies and to incorporate the spirit of service into job analysis. Integrally related was the intention to involve the community in its research. Since job analysis provides the foundation for all subsequent selection procedures, the efforts to include the community in the job analysis research phase of the project represented a major innovation in selection methodology. Project Goals To achieve its objectives, the sheriff’s office developed the following four goals: • Administer procedures, including testing, to determine personal characteristics essential in service-oriented deputies within Hillsborough County and partner with the community to achieve this goal. The goal involved conducting pre–employment research on job analysis and sample test results from exemplary agency deputies (the CRDs) to determine the personal characteristics essential to service-oriented deputies, and to administer such testing to law enforcement applicants. • Change and increase recruitment efforts to provide a more diverse applicant pool and develop a marketing campaign designed to attract those candidates. • Conduct statistical research to determine the impact of project activities on hiring goals and to build the methodology required for longitudinal research that will assess the related impact of HSS strategies on subsequent officer job performance. • Create a law enforcement recruitment and hiring model that will increase the capacity for recruiting and selecting service-oriented deputies and which complies with generally accepted selection practices. These goals confirm the strong applied research strategy of the Hillsborough project. Further, they are laying the groundwork for subsequent longitudinal validation research to assess the predictive ability of the selection procedures developed through HSS strategies. Research team The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office engaged faculty from the University of South Florida to form a research team specific to the project. The team was comparable to the steering and/or advisory committees used by other sites but differed in that the team also managed the data collection processes, the focus group procedures, and examined appropriate validity strategies. Other researchers who were part of the team included community inclusion specialist and law enforcement selection expert with specific expertise in test development and law enforcement applicant screening. Pre–employment research: At the outset of the project, Hillsborough commissioned study of departments that had undertaken similar projects. The results showed that only limited number of departments were serious about incorporating community inclusion into their selection ctivities. Community Inclusion Specialist David Bachrach recommended developing opportunities for recruits and citizens to interact throughout recruitment, selection, and training. The information from his report informed subsequent Hillsborough decisions to elicit community evaluation of recruit performance during the field training career phase. The sheriff’s office also acted on his recommendation to create opportunities to introduce recruits to the communities where they would serve in order to enhance familiarity with the community and to emphasize the importance of developing positive relationships with the community at the very outset of their careers. The sheriff’s office, however, did not accept his recommendation to include community members on an oral interview board because Hillsborough did not use oral board interviews in their selection process. To act on this recommendation would have required adding a new step to the existing process, which would not have been an easy process, and Hillsborough was unable to do that. The pre–employment research focus also was applied in the effort to identify service-oriented traits that were defined in a job analysis questionnaire. Recalling that there is little in the selection research literature on what is involved in community policing, Hillsborough sought to define job-related characteristics that describe the community-oriented deputy. Rather than engage in the lengthy process that is necessary to create comprehensive job analysis, it used the Hilson Job Analysis Questionnaire (HJAQ) developed by Hilson Research. Although the HJAQ is not a traditional job analysis instrument, it enjoys extensive use in other law enforcement agencies and provides an opportunity to question respondents about the behaviors and charateristics that are required for successful job performance in policing. The Hillsborough research team placed community members, CRD deputies, and supervisors into focus groups and had them to complete the HJAQ. Analysis of the HJAQ results from 291 individuals showed remarkable agreement between citizens and deputies in how they described the characteristics needed to perform the service-oriented role. Despite some initial concerns about working together, the researchers found consensual agreement as well as mutual appreciation for what each group brought to the table when it came to describing what they wanted to see in Hillsborough CRDs (see Appendix E). Focus group research: Hillsborough selected focus group particip ants from existing int act groups that comprise the sheriff’s office and community network rather than a random selection of independent groups of citizens or the use of an at-large strategy. The network included neighborhood associations, advisory councils, particul rly those representing minority communities, citizen police academy participants, and other community groups such as those representing the interests of senior citizens, and Neighborhood Watch captains. The research team found it necessary to prepare focus group participants about what to expect. A protocol was developed that included meeting with each group before their participation and explaining goals of the project as well as expectations for participation and anticipated outcomes. The team convened eight community focus groups along with separate groups of CRDs to help them define service orientation. To develop this information, all participants completed the HJAQ and endorsed items that identified the characteristics they believed are essential, important, or not important for success as a community policing officer. This critical first step laid the groundwork for what would be assessed in a subsequent assessment process. The ratings cross groups were remarkably similar to the point that the top five rated behaviors were the same for all groups, though their order varied. Items that were consistently identified included the following: • Willingness to admit shortcomings • Communication skills • Frustration tolerance • Avoiding procrastination • Strong work habits The characteristics that were consistently defined as most important, both by citizens and deputies, included honesty, patience, trust, integrity, tolerance and compassion, listening to the concerns of others, social skills to work effectively with angry or dissatisfied individuals, ability to make level-headed decisions, and getting along well with others. Other essential behaviors that received high scores included lack of asocial behaviors, attention to safety issues, self–confidence, and loyalty to the organization. In some ways, these characteristics and behaviors reflect an emotional intelligence component because it requires capacity for self-awareness and awareness of others in contrast to focusing only on enforcement skills. These dimensions suggest that community members are seeking officers who have a fair degree of self- honesty, are able to communicate with the public, and who are able to control themselves in the face of the many frustrations encountered by law enforcement. In order of importance, the top three characteristics identified by the community matched those that were identified independently by group of Hillsborough supervisors who participated in the project. Further, the ratings of the CRD group were consistent on the first two dimensions (ability to admit shortcomings and communic tion skills) but they rated lack of procrastination as the third most important dimension, with frustration tolerance being fourth. Despite what seems to be remarkable convergence, these results are subject to longitudinal validation to determine their relevance to job performance; however, they hold considerable promise for identifying the dimensions that characterize the community policing officer. Occupational screening research: Hillsborough did not involve clinical psychological screening activities in its project; however, it examined occupational screening tests that could be administered as precondition of employment. The data collection and analysis in this type of research is lengthy process, at best, but it was further delayed by questions from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) regarding safeguards for human subjects participating in this type of research. Consequently, until Hillsborough received IRB approval it had to delay its plans for using experienced CRDs in pilot test of the Hilson Research screening battery. This initial testing was a critical element of the overall validation strategy. Consequently, the delay affected the ability to fully assess the four-test battery of screening instruments with applicants. As it neared the conclusion of the project, Hillsborough had gathered base line assessment data from the Hilson battery on 250 tenured officers. While a sample size of 250 is not insignificant, the capacity for prediction in public hiring process requires a much larger sample as well as broad range of performance information. Consequently, Hillsborough acknowledged that it would need to continue its selection research beyond the life of the project to meet the goal of developing a hiring model unique to service-oriented deputies. Extending the research base also will permit further examination of extant methodological questions concerning exploratory research with a goal of predicting successful candidates versus defining personality constructs of successful deputies. Hillsborough wisely determined that these issues would need to be reconciled so as not to overstate conclusions. After the completion of its HSS project, the HCSO and their project consultant Dr. Robin Inwald continued to give all law enforcement applicants the four-test batery and integrate new scores into ongoing research and valid tion, an ctivity that continues at the time of this reporting. In the long term, questions about methodological issues related to reliability, validity, and the capacity for prediction can only strengthen a selection project. For the short term, however, these questions cannot be resolved within the context of this report. Suffice it to say that valid tion of the assessment ba ttery will continue beyond the life of the project, as it should, and that Hillsborough’s intent to develop valid process is consistent with professional standards. Accordingly, this is an important qualification because some of the other HSS sites have used this same battery of tests and they, too, will need to engage in longitudinal validation. Changing Recruitment through Marketing The results of the HJAQ were key to other project activities, particularly the marketing campaign that was designed to create a proactive recruitment strategy that reflected community values. In this regard, focus group responses helped the marketing consultant develop materials that used imagery and media to convey the complexity of skills and personal characteristics of most value for law enforcement in Hillsborough County. The desired imagery was incorporated into human interest brochures, posters, personal testimonials, recruitment video, and a new web site. The marketing campaign developed the brand—Courage, Integrity, Compassion: Could You Answer the Call? A collateral message is the question—Do you have what it takes to wear the star? These messages were personalized through series of stories about deputies, their backgrounds, and their statements, or testimonials, of what their work means to them. Clearly, this campaign introduced a new type of war story to the law enforcement world. Elaborating on the recommendation of the community consultant, Hillsborough is institutionalizing the community focus by introducing the community as an influential factor early in each deputy’s career. In this regard, it plans to expose recruits to the different groups in the community and introduce them at community meetings, such as those convened by the Chamber of Commerce. Also, the sheriff’s office is soliciting citizen feedback on recruit performance during the field training phase of the recruit probationary process. Within this context, field training officers (FTO) ask citizens to fill out a stand ard form that assesses recruit performance from the community perspective and then provide feedback to recruits before they complete the FTO phase of their training. This information will be discussed with each recruit deputy as part of his or her on-the-job training and will serve as a form of quality control. 4. Funded in FY2002, the objective of this grant program was to build on and strengthen the police integrity initiatives developed by COPS for purposes of creating community policing environments that foster trust and mutual respect between police and citizens. This plan builds on past initiatives but expands COPS efforts to create a culture of integrity in police departments. 5. Problem-Based Le rning (PBL) is learner centered teaching method that uses problem solving as the vehicle for learning. For more information you can refer to “PTO: An Overview and Introduction, A Problem-Based Manual for Training and Evaluating Police Trainees” at www. cops.usdoj.gov. By the conclusion of the project, Hillsborough had extended the emphasis on hiring to include major changes in how it supported recruits while in the state police academy. In this regard, it combined resources from its COPS Office Creating A Culture of Integrity grant4 with the HSS strategy to ensure that recruits remained focused on the values that brought them to the department. For the first time, recruits entering the academy will have been nominated by citizens, will receive a stipend that supports their training, and will have ongoing coaching by tenured Hillsborough deputies while in the academy. Further, Hillsborough planned to implement problem-based learning model, developed for police training officers (PTO)5 and supported by the COPS Office, to field train this particular group of recruits. This field training model is based on adult learning principles and integrates critical thinking and problem solving into all fields instruction. Rather than the trainer checking off recruit performance on a series of scales, the trainer acts as a coach who helps the recruit officer apply analytical skills to address the range of community problems that contribute to crime and disorder. However, while the HCSO began initial planning for the PTO program, the State of Florida moved forward to adopt the “Curriculum Maintenance System” (CMS) standards for law enforcement certification which adopts many of the recommendations and methods of the PTO program. As with the PTO program, under the new CMS law enforcement certifcation process, community policing and SARA problem-solving components were built into the entire Florida law enforcement training curriculum, rather than as separate class. Additionally, the CMS curriculae, like the PTO curriculum, prioritizes scenario-based, interactive training which challenges students to continuously identify ethical considerations, and develop ways to bring the community into crime prevention. Accordingly, the HCSO sponsored the first law enforcement academy class in their are to take the new community-oriented CMS training, and was one of the earliest supporters of their local communitiy college making the permanent transition to the CMS law enforcement curriculum. These innovations present a striking picture of how department can leverage multiple resources and integrate a range of initiatives to achieve broader goals. Unique Accomplishments The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office cited the following unique accomplishments in its HSS project: • Involving the community in job analysis research • Leveraging other grants to expand the HSS mission • Innovation in marketing Involving the community in job analysis research: In selection methodology, the job analysis is critical to developing predictive measures and provides the capacity to link subsequent test measures to job performance. Seeking community input through the use of the HJAQ clearly lays the groundwork for continued development of traditional job analysis that will be linked directly to community policing activities and to the characteristics necessary to perform these activities. This is a substantial achievement for community policing because it will permit community policing tasks to be formally integrated into selection methodology. Further, there is little question that the research approach to this phase of the project has advanced the process for selecting in service-oriented deputies despite the fact that further work is needed to achieve this goal. Leveraging other grants to expand the HSS mission: Hillsborough demonstrated ingenuity in layering the HSS grant and its COPS Office Creating A Culture of Integrity grant to produce a recruit class that for the first time will be the outcome of citizen-involved recruitment. Further, these recruits will have the benefit of training experiences that directly reflect the department’s values. This approach becomes particularly unique when considering Florida’s academy process. Traitionally, recruits have attended the state academy on their own, were hired by Hillsborough only after successfully completing training, and generally did not see anyone from Hillsborough until they walked through the door. In contrast, members of the current recruit class were nominated by citizens to attend the academy, were paid a stipend through another grant while in the academy (Creating A Culture of Integrity Grant), and were mentored by Hillsborough staff during their academy training. Consequently, it is anticipated that upon graduation they will have different level of commitment to the Hillsborough Sheriff’s agency and to the community when compared to candidates hired through the prior system. Moreover, they will have a fuller understanding of how integrity relates to the values of a service- oriented department. Hillsborough’s plan to pilot test the PTO training model with this group of recruits provides an added example of how an agency can leverage other sources of federal funding and literally re– engineer the early stages of the deputy career experience. Innovations in marketing: Hillsborough took a risk when it engaged a cutting-edge advertising firm to help create a proactive media campaign that would be a distinct contrast to traditional and reactive approaches. That risk paid off because the resulting marketing materials were both innovative and engaging and tell stories about individuals who derive satisfaction from their jobs as deputies in Hillsborough County—individuals who are more than a uniform and a badge. The use of well-designed testimonials that talk about the satisfaction of making a difference in the lives of citizens present a dramatic difference from brochures that portray law enforcement as a paramilitary organization, tanks and all. In essence, the testimonials present a face to the community that is highly consistent with service orientation and they clearly convey compelling revision of traditional police war stories. Unique Challenges Resolving methodological issues related to validation strategies and developing the hiring model became the biggest challenges for the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office. Within this context, Hillsborough encountered long-standing issue in pre-employment selection research: the debate over appropriate validation strategies. These issues are complex and time consuming and generate considerable discussion in professional journals or scientific forums. Generally, the heart of the debate is seeking to validate tests for predicting performance in contrast to confirming job-related personality constructs that are related to performance and assessed by tests. Although not unrelated, they do imply different strategies and perspectives that have implications for interpreting the results of validity analyses. This level of debate also enriches selection research and can only improve the final product. For Hillsborough, these challenges speak to the need for longitudinal validation to support a new selection model. Although Hillsborough’s initial goals may have been too ambitious to accomplish within the time frame of a single grant, the intention to elect a longitudinal validation strategy that will permit it to select in candidates is commendable and suggests that from the outset Hillsborough knew that this project would continue long after the completion of the grant. Clearly, Hillsborough has made a quantum leap in meeting its initial goals and there is little question that the final product will make an important contribution to building capacity for selecting community policing officers and deputies. Future of HSS in Hillsborough County Hillsborough County has made a substantive contribution to HSS and to the selection field by laying the groundwork for job analysis that will create the needed link to community policing. It also has attempted to institutionalize community input into other phases of the system. In all likelihood, Hillsborough’s ongoing longitudinal validation work will become an important contribution to the field. Moreover, the link with the university and other researchers suggests that there is more a than passing interest in seeing that HSS becomes institutionalized. Hillsborough’s innovative media campaign supports this interest. Finally, in merging the work with other grants it has set a new direction for reengineering recruitment and selection process that is proactive and consistent with the goals of community policing. Case Studies CITY OF DETROIT POLICE DEPARTMENT: Give Back. Get More. Whether you call it Motown or Motor City, Detroit represents the heart of the American labor movement and highly influential unions, particularly where law enforcement is concerned. Other landmarks such as the Red Wings, legalized gambling, and easy access to the Canadian border all have an impact on policing in the city of Detroit. Of the five HSS sites, the Detroit Police Department provides public safety to an urban area with all the problems and rewards of big-city policing and is the largest police department in the project. Thirty-eight hundred strong, the Detroit Police Department was unique in the project because of size, types of crimes, and the political landscape. In addition, growing level of violence, which included two police officers killed in the line of duty, had gripped the city. Yet the Inspector in charge of recruiting, a long-time veteran of Detroit policing who had seen it all, imparted an unsolicited message that was similar to those heard at the other sites…”It’s more than just being the police—HSS means giving back to the community, and that is what policing is all about”. History of the Project Hiring in the Spirit of Service (HSS) was initiated under the tenure of Chief Jerry Oliver, a known proponent of innovative community policing initiatives. He believed that community policing was the responsibility of every officer and should not be confined to the traditional community policing units in place at the precinct level. Consequently, to ensure that the changes brought about through HSS would be institutionalized, he disbanded the community policing unit, a move that created concern with community advocacy groups. When Chief Oliver left the department midway through the project, it was unknown if a change in chief executive would affect the project. Fortunately, the new law enforcement chief executive officer, Chief Ella Bully-Cummings, elected to continue the department’s involvement in this project and she remained equally committed to advancing the department as community minded. In response to community concerns, she reinstituted the community policing unit and redefined it as a centralized liaison unit to serve as the eyes and ears of the chief. It was supplemented by community relations councils in each precinct. Her stated goal is to ensure a department-wide implementation of the community policing philosophy. Project Goals The following objectives framed Detroit’s strategic approach to the project: • Define the type of police officers whom community members would like to see policing their communities • Add community components to the recruitment and selection process • Modify recruitment and selection strategies to target potential community oriented applicants, particularly service-oriented professionals and minority and women candidates— a modification that links to a marketing strategy to reach internal and external customers • Institutionalize service as an organizational philosophy These objectives involved targeting more community-minded applicants, developing recruitment materials to attract them, assessing the existing selection model to determine which component could best achieve their goal, and modifying training to incorporate curricula consistent with the concept of hiring in the spirit of service. Defining service-oriented police officers: To achieve this objective, the Detroit Police Department contracted with the IRI marketing firm to conduct eight nondirective focus groups. Four groups consisted of community members, while police officers populated an additional four groups. The department also engaged a consultant with requisite expertise to examine recruitment and selection strategies and to determine the components that had the greatest potential to incorporate the spirit of service. Further, the department developed a communication plan for marketing itself and its recruitment efforts, as well as a recruitment strategy that built on its Recruiting Ambassadors Program. The latter had been designed to provide incentives and reward department members of all ranks who successfully recruited service-oriented officers. As result of HSS, this program was expanded to include citizens. The IRI marketing firm used nondirective focus groups, also known as data input groups, to provide a wealth of information about the knowledge, skills, and abilities that are necessary to perform the community-oriented role. The patterns of community comments concentrated on characteristics related to job performance, interpersonal relations and personal characteristics, followed by competencies, systems, and policies and procedures. Detroit police officers identified the same dimensions, though in different order. Their ratings, however, did not coincide with the community identification of residency rules, personal appearance, skills, and physical fitness as important job dimensions. IRI concluded that, despite some divergent viewpoints, the community and police consistently agreed that on-the-job performance and interpersonal relations best defined service oriented officer. Both groups endorsed sense of responsibility as a dominant theme and agreed that officers should abide by the laws and not feel they are above the law. Further, they should avoid unnecessary delay in responding to police calls for service, using cell phones while on patrol, or evading job assignments. They should perform job duties in a safe manner, work well as team members, vaoid jumping to conclusions, and have the ability to de-escalate rather than inflame situations. Interpersonally, officers should treat other people, and each other, with respect. They need to be polite, show compassion and empathy, get to know the people they are serving, and interact with citizens in an overall positive manner. Positive attitudes, courage, flexibility, even temperament and good morale were common themes related to an officer’s appropriate demeanor. Finally, there was agreement that law enforcement is more than just a job. They concluded that Detroit police officers should have a sense of purpose, pride, and commitment to serving the public. These data provided a foundation that guided the implementation of the other HSS objectives. Recruitment and marketing: A second set of focus groups drove the development of Give Back. Get More, the brand that Detroit presents to the world in its recruitment ads and public service announcements. The materials that highlight this brand depict policing in Detroit as a fulfilling, life-changing, and rewarding career that involves giving back to the community. Before convening this set of focus groups, the Detroit Police Department had been developing a comprehensive communication strategy to kick off HSS. The strategy was launched through an initial press conference that conveyed the message that the Detroit Police Department was serious about recruiting community-minded officers and that this initiative would be decidedly different from anything that it had engaged in before HSS. As a follow-up to the press conference, the department also convened a mayor’s media summit and invited media representatives to hear its strong case for media cooperation. The summit provided a platform to preview recruitment campaign materials and to stress the urgency of changing the nature of recruitment and hiring. By eliciting up-front media support, the department intended to counter what had been a history of negative perceptions of the department and fostered to a large extent by previous media accounts. The department wanted the opportunity to tell the HSS story accurately instead of relying on others to tell it. The communication strategy also had an internal focus that involved marketing the expansion of the department’s Recruiting Ambassadors Program (see Appendix G) to internal stakeholders while also forecasting how it would be broadened to include the community. Initially, this program was created to encourage department members to become involved in the recruiting process and it provided incentives for those recruiting efforts that culminated in recommended applicants completing the entire process. As part of the communications strategy, the program was presented to groups such as the Board of Police Commissioners, the Chaplain Corps, and Detroit Police Reserve Officers, as well as to the various unions that represent Detroit police officers. Further, the program was described in the monthly newsletter, Beyond the Badge, and has been the subject of local television broadcast in addition to radio announcements. Finally, recruiters attended precinct roll calls to disseminate recruitment literature and discuss the expansion of the program. Specifically, the Recruiting Ambassadors Program will now offer incentives to community members who recommend successful applicants. The scope of the expanded program has been discussed with community and faith-based groups who have been encouraged to seek out and recommend individuals with service-orientation characteristics and to help the Detroit Police Department incorporate the spirit of service into patrol behavior. In addition to expanding recruitment efforts, the department used the HSS project as an opportunity to upgrade its web site. Upgrades included recruitment streaming videos and online applications, information on the Recruiting Ambassadors Program and the introduction of You Have Been Observed cards. The latter are business cards that are presented to potential applicants telling them that they have been observed as having the people skills and ttitudes that are needed for a career in policing in the city of Detroit. Collateral to recruitment activities, the department launched a marketing campaign based on information from a separate series of focus groups. The camp ign was designed specifically as research to gather baseline data that would support marketing directed specifically to minority applicants for police officer jobs in Detroit (see Appendix H) The marketing campaign, however, was not introduced until much later in the project because of significant delays that were the result of the requirements for Institutional Review Board approval. While the marketing campaign focus groups were completed and provided rich information that the department found enlightening, these data did not emerge until the project neared completion. Adding the community component: The Detroit Police Department made expanding the scope of its Recruiting Ambassadors Program as an HSS initiative priority. Within this context, it sought to add community members to what was an internal effort to give officers the incentive to identify potential candidates and bring successful recruits into the department. To accomplish this objective, the department met weekly with a range of community groups to discuss what is involved in becoming a police officer in the city of Detroit. In these sessions, community organizations were encouraged to register as ambassadors for the department and were provided with recruiting information as well as referral cards that could be used to track the success of their efforts. At the end of each recruiting cycle, department members and the community organizations that provided the most successful applicants would be rewarded in a recognition ceremony. The Detroit Police Department also included the community in other components of the process, specifically the oral board interview. In Detroit, the interview takes place after the background investig ation is completed but before the psychological assessment is conducted. Although the department had added a community member to the interview panels before the introduction of HSS, the community did not have the same opportunity to rate the candidates as did sworn personnel. Consequently, their influence was marginalized. This procedure been changed and community representatives now provide a score for each applicant that is averaged with the three scores from sworn panel members. Moreover, spirit of service rating dimension has been added to the interview format. Finally, the police department has included community representatives in its CompStat meetings. CompStat is management tool that has gained in popularity since its introduction by the New York City Police Department in the 1990s. Essentially, it purports to control crime by making precinct commanders more accountable for crime in their districts and by providing them with real-time information that shows crime trends as they are occurring. This information provides opportunities to deploy officers and implement targeted strategies where they are most needed. These decisions are presented at regular meetings and fully discussed by high- level command of the department. In engaging the community in CompStat discussions, the Detroit Police Department has taken it to a very different level. Modifying selection strategies: Initially, the Detroit Police Department intended to focus its examination of selection strategies on three components of its existing hiring process: the background investigation, the final oral board, and the psychological ssessment. On the advice of its consultant, Dr. Terry Eisenberg, the department has provided more structure to the background investigation, has encouraged investigators to seek information relative to service when conducting reference checks, and has introduced 40-hour background investigator training program. For the most part, however, the changes made to the current format of the background investigation and to the psychological assessment are relatively minimal to avoid diluting those components and to allow them to continue what they do best. Dr. Eisenberg, expressed concern bout trying to add service orientation element to each component, arguing that this would present a piecemeal approach that in the end would prove to be less effective. In contrast, rather than do a little here and a little there, he recommended considering the oral interview as the component with the greatest potential to create a critical mass of information that is needed to evaluate the service orientation effectively. Using these recommendations, the modification of the oral interview process represents the most substantive change in determining service orientation. It now includes series of questions that relate specifically to service orientation, the addition of a citizen representative as a voting member of the board, and comprehensive training for all panel members. The police department also plans to develop guideline for the process. The current psychological assessment component of the selection process comprises three elements: completion of the Law Enforcement Assessment and Development Report, an instrument that measures both for normal personality characteristics and clinical pathology; a psychological/social history questionnaire; and a clinical interview. The Detroit Police Department added service-oriented questions to the psychological/ social history questionnaire. The questions elicit information about hobbies and service-related activities such as volunteer or charity work and involvement with community service or nonprofit institutions. To date, their impact has not been fully assessed. However, it was believed that the additional information would assist in “screening in” rather than “screening out” service oriented applicants. Finally, previously developed point system used to rank each candidate is being modified to include credit for earlier volunteer experiences, residency in the community, and previous employment in a service-oriented industry such as social work. These three elements have been added to a group of 24 screening variables previously developed by the police department that provide the core of information that is evalu ted for each candidate. Examples include, but are not limited to; entry-level Michigan Commission of Law Enforcement (MCOLE) test scores, education, job experience, and oral board criteria . With the addition of the three service- oriented elements, candidates are now rated on a 27–point police officer selection system with final scores rank ordered into the existing bands. Collateral to HSS, some of the hiring variables have been further modified to conform to the Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. Specifically, the clinical psychological assessment and physical agility components of the system needed to be evaluated as post-hire components. Institutionalization: The extensive internal marketing and the expansion of the Recruiting Ambassadors Program are good benchmarks for institutionalizing the spirit of service. Community inclusion in the Oral Interview Board and the goal of providing community policing training based on the knowledge skills and abilities defined by the focus group(s) represent another venue for institutionalizing change. The Detroit Police Department continues to evaluate a training proposal produced by the consultant engaged to develop new training. The department remains steadfast in its belief that the changes in recruit and in-service training, as well as for the Citizens’ Police Academy are necessary to institutionalize the philosophy of community mindedness as the driving force of the Detroit Police Department. The intent to conduct retroactive analyses of applicants who were hired and later found to be unsuccessful is another indicator of institutionalizing this philosophy, as is the effort to include citizens in the CompStat process. Unique Accomplishments The Detroit Police Department’s work in HSS resulted in the following unique accomplishements: • Expansion of the Recruiting Ambassadors Program • Communications Strategy—Media Summit • Involvement of Community in CompStat Recruiting Ambassadors Program: Intensifying an existing recruiting program by including the community as recruiting ambassadors demonstrates how department can build on internal capacity in contrast to developing totally new initiatives. Within this context, the Detroit Police Department charged the community and its own personnel with seeking out recruit candidates who embodied the spirit of service. Moreover, the department illustrated the seriousness of its intent by providing incentives for police personnel and community representatives who could bring in recruits who completed the process successfully. Communications strategy–media summit: Devising a comprehensive communications strategy that included convening a highly successful media summit to kick off HSS was an effective way to get ahead of issues concerning recruitment and hiring in Detroit. The summit drew attention to how the department was changing recruitment and hiring and provided the opportunity for the city to define the issues rather than allowing newspapers or magazines to do it. With the mayor as the focal point of the summit, it was clear that city hall was behind this initiative and that in itself drew further attention. Equally important was the effort to let the city know that the police department was engaged in a serious effort to hire police recruits who demonstrated that they were interested in the service part of policing in contrast to an experience in adventure. Involvement of the community in CompStat: Bringing community representatives into the CompStat process clearly signifies that the community role extends far beyond recruitment and hiring. In Detroit, the community now has a role in providing input that affects how policing will be conducted in Detroit. Who knows the community better than the citizens and who can give the commanders better advice about where crime is occurring and why? It was the knowledge of how this information could affect crime that drove the department to consider including citizens in the CompStat process. 6. Established in 1970, the Police Foundation, non profit organization, has conducted seminal research in police behavior, policy, and procedure, and works to transfer to local agencies the best new information about practices for dealing effectively with a range of important police operational and dministrative concerns. Through its research, technical assistance, technology, training, and information programs, the foundation helps police departments to acquire both the knowledge gained through research and the tools needed to integrate that knowledge into police practices. For more information visit: www. policefoundation.org 7. A consent decree is an agreement between the U.S. Department of Justice and law enforcement agency that stipulates various reforms that must be undertaken by the law enforcement agency. Typically, monitor is appointed to oversee the compliance of the department with the decree. Unique Challenges An overarching concern is that the components of the Detroit Police Department’s selection system remain somewhat compartmentalized and the information gathered from one component is not always passed on to the next. Even with the point system, it appears to be difficult to develop the whole person perspective on each candidate when the system develops applicant information in what appears to be screening component silos. This concern is compounded by the lack of tracking system to provide an accounting of applicants moving through the different stages of the process. With the help of the Police Foundation,6 tracking system will be developed that should address this concern. The Detroit Police Department also encountered multiple challenges in the roll-out of its marketing campaign, which was delayed because of Institutional Review Board issues. Those delays culminated in concerns about ongoing financial support between the department and its contractor and affected the scheduling of marketing focus groups. Detroit had hired Berg, Muirhead & Associates, who subcontracted with Moore Associates, to convene focus groups that would be observed through two-way mirror. Although the data developed through this process proved to be quite enlightening, they were developed relatively late in the process because of the consultant contractual issues. Consequently, the department was unable to meet its m arketing timelines. More important, it’s unable to use these valuable data to capitalize on the successful media summit. The police department also faced other challenges in refocusing its community policing efforts. Given that the department’s initial community policing efforts were directed at the precinct level and focused on community policing units, community policing came to be viewed as a specialization in contrast to an organization-wide change in operations. Consequently, many operational units had limited awareness of the HSS project and its goals. Further, maintaining interest in project of this nature in large department can be difficult at best, but particularly so as violent crime intensifies. Functioning under consent decree7 presents further challenges that were unique to this HSS site though not unfamiliar to other large cities. An unavoidable side effect of a consent decree is the climate of uncertainty that is created both for the resources needed to implement the decree and concerns about the impact on current personnel. HSS should be quite compatible with changes required by the federal government. Future of HSS in Detroit The Detroit Police Department is committed to letting citizens know that it is serious about change and about creating a department that is community-minded. Equally important are its efforts to communicate this same message to the men and women of the Detroit Police Department. No stranger to challenge, the Department remains steadfast in pressing forward to meet its goals and continue to focus on recruiting candidates who are able to interact with citizens because they understand their culture and are able to bridge communication gaps. At the 2004 Major City Chiefs (MCC)8 meeting, Chief Bully- Cummings reported that recent numbers of candidate applications reached 1,500, which represents an unprecedented growth in interest for the position of police officer in the city of Detroit. At the 2005 MCC meeting, however, the Chief announced restructuring of the department that was brought about by severe budget problems. This restructuring will result in the laying off of police officers, including new recruits, and will impact the ability to hire new officers. Thus, just as Detroit was achieving its mission to attract service oriented candidates—those who will give back and get more—budget realities limit the potential to reach that goal. Despite these serious challenges, Detroit remains committed to maintaining a level of diversity that reflects the community and to institutionalizing the spirit of service throughout the department. 8. Major City Chiefs (MCC) is an association that comprises more tha n 50 law enforcement organizations in the United States and Canada. MCC was formed to provide forum for police chiefs to discuss organizational issues only relevant to large police organizations. Current membership consists of law enforcement executives whose departments serve metropolitan area population of more than 1.5 million or employ more than 1,000 sworn officers. Some gencies that no longer meet this criteria have been grandfathered into the association. KING COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE: Accept the Challenge In the King County (Washington) Sheriff’s Office, Hiring in the Spirit of Service (HSS) was the sta rting point for building a 21st-century sheriff’s department and the impetus to fulfill a commitment to hire deputies, according to one official, “Who wear the uniform on the community’s behalf.” Rather than treat recruitment and hiring in isolation, the sheriff’s office set out to institutionalize a comprehensive performance management system that advanced community policing as the natural behavior for all deputies, not just new recruits. It also saw HSS as a way to further the development of the organization by endorsing an investment in the people who performed the deputy sheriff function. King County’s involvement in HSS was spearheaded by two events. The first was the sheriff’s office’s participation in former Attorney General Janet Reno’s Police Integrity Working Groups in 1999; and the second w s its involvement in the Race and Reconciliation Summit convened by the National Crime Prevention Council in 2001. Both initiatives were part of the U.S. Department of Justice’s efforts to enhance police integrity and improve relationships between the police and community, particularly communities with diverse populations. The initiatives addressed the differences in how the police and the community saw situations that resulted in problems that infringed on the civil liberties of citizens. More important, they illustrated long-standing difficulties in the capacity to communicate about these problems. Both events created a renewed sense of energy in the King County Sheriff’s Office as well as an awareness of the urgency to solve problems. This urgency was reinforced by the fact that in this 2,200-square-mile county, home to 1.7 million people, 44 percent of the sheriff’s office budget comes from other jurisdictions that contract with King County for law enforcement services. Hence, like many sheriff agencies, the livelihood of the King County Sheriff’s Office is dependent on satisfying a range of constituencies that expect professional and effective services that are delivered with integrity. Following participation in these keystone events, and under the leadership of then King County Sheriff Dave Reichert, the sheriff’s office sought to engage King County community and department personnel in how to best center its efforts. The overarching goal was the development of a system that could be linked to agency core values of leadership, integrity, service, and teamwork. Within this context, the sheriff’s office sought to implement a paradigm change that would incorporate quality differences in hiring, retention, and development of personnel— change that would be consistent with goals and objectives that the community values. Within this framework, the sheriff’s office envisioned HSS as its opportunity to engage in hiring practices that would reliably attract and select employees whose skills and abilities were compatible with effective community policing. History of the Project Before it became involved in HSS, the King County Sheriff’s Office was exploring ideas about performance management that were detailed in a department white paper on internal system development. The paper included recruitment and hiring in addition to other performance-related elements. The sheriff’s office believed that HSS would help it redefine its approach to hiring deputies who are service-oriented and to advance the intent to develop performance that reflected agency values. To achieve this objective, however, the sheriff’s office believed it was necessary to gain an understanding of the abilities, competencies, and behaviors that are consistent with the service orientation and to involve the community in broadening this understanding. Although a core group of staff was the mainstay of the project, they were supplemented by others who were perceived as thought leaders throughout the agency, but there w as less emphasis on involving the community in all facets of the project than in other sites. The core project staff and thought leaders comprised the steering committee and they were joined by the external consultants hired to manage and complete the project. Following limited competition, the sheriff’s office hired The Dunnette Group, Ltd., to help the committee members achieve their goals. Initially, the full steering committee was able to meet with some regularity but because of the extent of external consultant involvement and the distance of the consulting group’s location (Minneapolis, Minnesota), coupled with transfers out of the sheriff’s department, the committee was unable to continue to meet regularly. This arrangement did not interfere with substantive project activities but, because the project was largely consultant-driven, certain delays occurred that were caused by consultant schedules as well as coll teral contractual issues. Consequently, there was some interference with timely internal review and feedback on project deliverables. Project Goals The King County Sheriff’s Office goals involved introducing systemic change into the following components of the hiring processs continuum: • Recruitment strategies • Marketing strategies • Clinical psychological testing and occupational screening • Involvement of the community • Organizational change From the outset, it was clear that the King County Sheriff’s Office undertook a task that w as far more complex than simply identifying HSS traits. As a result, it is difficult to highlight each project goal independently because the sheriff’s office sought to build a system that would introduce substantive change across range of organizational variables. These variables included recruitment strategies to attract deputies, the systems used to select them, and the performance appraisal system that evaluates them. Subsequently, efforts of the sheriff’s office culminated in model for generating an eligibility list that methodologically combines all selection components into a unit-weighted composite score for each applicant. Changes to the components of the hiring continuum have been twofold and include (1) the systematic identification of job functions; and (2) defining the required core competencies for service-oriented deputies. Together, these two baseline activities laid the foundation for systemic change that would define the meaning of 21st century law enforcement for King County. Further, they facilitated the detailed examination of screening methods and the development of content-valid performance rating scales. Identified Job Functions for KCSO Sheriff’s Deputies Job functions were identified through a combination of focus group data, individual interviews, and review of the literature on community policing. These data informed task analysis that detailed the following King County Sheriff’s Office job functions: • Patrolling and detecting crime • Assessing, analyzing, and responding to situations • Collaborative problem-solving, networking, and brokering community services • Creating good public relations • Complying with laws and embracing department ethics philosophy, policies, and procedures • Working as a team • Establishing control in chaotic situations and arresting offenders • Controlling traffic and enforcing traffic laws • Investigating, gathering, and preserving evidence • Documenting, writing, and handling paperwork • Preparing for and testifying in court • Using technology and tools • Learning and keeping up-to-date Developing Core Competencies of Service Oriented Deputies The heart of the King County Sheriff’s Office strategy linked the deputy sheriff job functions, defined through the task analysis, with the core competencies for deputies at two different levels: level of mastery and level of developmental needs, distinction that is significant to subsequent performance appraisals. To achieve this goal, the sheriff’s office convened six focus groups, three of which comprised members of the community, and three additional groups including an incumbent deputy focus group, focus group of sergeants, and focus group from the criminal justice community. The latter included officials from district and superior courts, the county’s juvenile and adult detention departments, the prosecutor’s office and the Office of Civil Rights Enforcement. In each focus group the sheriff’s office ascertained the following information: how well the job activities ascribed to community policing are understood; what competencies are needed to effectively perform those duties; where does one find people with those characteristics; and how are they recruited. The inform tion derived from the community focus groups helped to define the core competencies. These competencies defined which of the current assessment instruments should be retained in the process and facilitated recommendations for adding new instruments to the process. The end result was revised recommended a battery of selection instruments. To achieve the competency model goal, King County consultants ensured that collectively the data from focus groups would be representative of the ideas of members of the general community, from the criminal justice community, and incumbent deputies. Specifically to encourage community participation, the identified community members received letters of invitation but flyers also were distributed at precincts and the deputies were asked to invite other community leaders who had an interest in law enforcement. Citizen academy participants were also invited. In all of the groups, participants were asked to respond to open-ended questions about their expect tions of service-oriented deputies, the traits that were required to fulfill this role, and the job functions they expected deputies to perform. The consultant used an iterative process wherein each successive focus group was informed by information developed in previous groups. This process was instrumental in defining the deputy sheriff job functions and the core competencies needed to perform these functions. The data were reviewed by the steering committee and management team with only minor revisions. The approach to developing the community focus groups presented challenges. Although the goal of the procedure was to create a heterogeneous information base, many members of the groups did not attend the meetings when contrasted with the level of participation in the deputy focus groups. Moreover, the community groups were largely unfamiliar with language used to describe policing, such as collaborative problem solving. Despite these impediments, and through the use of the iterative procedure, the consultants were able to gather sufficient data to perform qualitative analyses that defined the requisite core competencies. These competencies, or constructs, characterized the meaning of King County Sheriff’s Office law enforcement and provided the basis for evaluating the construct validity of other components of the selection process. These competencies also were key to creating content-valid job performance rating scales, unique contribution to HSS, as well as evidence of the extent of systemic change. The qualitative analysis identified the following service-oriented competencies: Problem solving and judgment Energy Stress reaction Writing skills Multitasking Reading skills Courage Memory Resourcefulness Spatial orientation Assertiveness Visual acuity and perception Integrity Physical fitness Self–control Driving skill Work motivation Basic computer skills Dependability Variety orientation Service orientation Teamwork Interpersonal skills Emotional health Oral communication skills Occupational and Clinical Screening In contrast to other sites, the decision was made early on that screening tools should be the purview of those individuals with professional expertise in the occupational screening areas. Hence, though the community identified competencies, there was no further community input on identifying occupational screening tools. The method of choice in this phase of the process involved a detailed audit by the consultants and review of existing meta-analyses. The audit reviewed technical information on reliability and validity of existing occupational screening methods to determine construct validity of select screening scale(s) that best predict each competency. Careful examination identified the competency constructs that are currently assessed as well as those constructs that would need to be added to the process to select in at the occupational screening phase of the screening system. The audit produced recommendations for assessing each competency and identified appropriate measures and assessment tools that were linked to the job functions. The Dunnette Group produced comprehensive and highly technical report th at leads the reader through each sequential step of the process and links specific tests to each competency. Further, it provides an extensive review of a range of commercially available instruments for assessing each competency. Supplementing this information is a separate examination of group differences based on race (including coefficient alpha reliabilities of test scales) that are particularly relevant to scales assessing cognitive ability and personality characteristics. The Dunnette Group performed a similar audit for the clinical screening phase and made specific recommendations for screening out candidates who are unlikely to do well. The results of that audit depicted links between competency constructs and a variety of existing psychological test scales that can be administered both before and after hiring. Of the clinical personality tests currently used by the King County Sheriff’s Office (MMPI-2 and the California Personality Inventory), the Dunnette Group recommended assessing three competency constructs using these instruments. They include stress reaction, self-control, and emotional health. Moreover, Dunnette recommended using compensatory selection system to assess these and other competencies instead of a pass-fail process or the development of holistic clinical impressions. 9 The completed King County Sheriff’s Office Website is located at: www. kingcountysheriffjobs. com. Compensatory Selection Model The recommendation to use compensatory model is in strong contrast to the multiple- hurdle approach that traditionally has been used in law enforcement selection. The multiple-hurdle approach assesses each candidate on one component at time and if candidates successfully meet the requirements of that component, they are passed on to the next component. In contrast, a compensatory system combines measures from a range of differential predictors including all competencies and cross all components. Using unit- weighted metric, this model produces composite of reliable and valid information specific to each candidate. Marketing and Recruiting In the King County Sheriff’s Office, marketing and recruiting activities were treated as initiatives separate from the screening emphasis. In this phase of the project, the sheriff’s office engaged a media contractor, Pop! Multimedia, to help develop a strategic marketing plan directed at redesigning and improving its web site with the intention of serving the community at large as well as attracting service-oriented recruits. The web site that eventually emerged is user friendly and emphasizes community activities as well as the traditional work of deputies in simple, friendly text. It includes testimonials from current deputies that give recruits personalized version of the job of deputy sheriff. In addition, the site contains information about crime prevention, announces upcoming dates for the Citizens’ Police Academy, and seeks information from citizens that could help solve current criminal cases. Since the site was introduced later in the project, and because of the previously cited issues related to the use of consultants, no data are available about its effectiveness in achieving recruiting goals. However, the King County Sheriff’s Office presents extensive information on how to create strategies to develop user-friendly web sites and on how to work with vendors to achieve that goal.9 Organizational Change The King County Sheriff’s Office adapted a three-phased approach to effect organizational change that involved changes in recruitment strategies, in the selection system, and in how it assessed deputy performance. Further, it linked information on job functions, required competencies, and the test scales used to assess them, to performance appraisal rating scales. Together, all of this information increased the content and construct validity of the sheriff’s office’s performance management system supported by HSS. As such, the work presents a solid model for consideration when institutionalizing organizational change. The performance management system facilitated by HSS represents change in emphasis when compared to traditional selection research. Further, it shows how well-conceived hiring project can introduce vital change into an organization. Central to this effort was the guiding principle that drove HSS in the King County Sheriff’s Office and which defined it as more than a hiring project. HSS was framed as the foundation of organizational systemic change that would affect critical human resource systems. The sheriff’s office was clear that instead of revising strategies aimed only at recruit deputies, HSS would affect the career life of all deputies. Clearly, the link to performance appraisal helps to accomplish that objective. Unique Accomplishments • Developed core competencies with links to existing assessment tools • Developed model eligibility list • Developed service-oriented performance appraisal Developed core competencies with links to existing assessment tools: The careful development of core competencies that reflect service-oriented law enforcement is considerable achievement. The work of the King County Sheriff’s Office provides a clear definition of the job functions of a deputy in a community policing department and links these functions to the core competencies required to perform these functions. Moreover, using a construct validity strategy to define the competency model clearly strengthens the credibility of this body of work. The linking of competencies to existing occupational and clinical assessment tools through the auditing process takes advantage of the scientific evidence that has supported commercially available tools in accordance with laws and published guidelines for the use of psychological screening in employee selection. These guidelines include The Uniform Guidelines on Employees Selection Procedures, the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association, and the 1999 National Council for Measurement in Education). Consequently, the information developed for the King County Sheriff’s Office provides substantive menu of existing assessment tools that can be transported and used to assess identified competencies. Many of these tools are valid predictors of performance in occupations with similarities to those of deputy sheriff, therefore, transporting them to the King County Sheriff’s Office selection process adds incremental validity and increases the predictive power of the pre–employment assessment. This feature of the project provides wealth of information that has not been available previously and makes significant contribution to the selection of service-oriented deputies. Developed a model eligibility list: The development of model for creating an eligibility list that combines all components of the selection process has the potential to create a measure reflecting the whole-person service orientation of candidates. Applying the compensatory model at the entry level of assessment would prove to be major change to traditional practices. Although acceptance of this model will require continued negotiations with county personnel, the fact that it is being considered represents the potential for a major change in the hiring processes used for public safety employment. It is a significant contribution that has emerged through the work of HSS. Developed a service-oriented performance appraisal: The development of content-valid performance rating scales advances the creation of a performance appraisal system that will facilitate institutionalizing the service orientation in the King County Sheriff’s Office. The latter was built on the tasks and activities identified in each job function and which are defined at two different performance levels: mastery level performance and needs improvement. The performance appraisal rating scales are the outcome of agreed-on dimensions of deputy sheriff performance on content-valid performance standards and incorporate the core competencies defined in the job analysis phase of the project. As such, they demonstrate how project phases were integrated to facilitate changing the selection system for King County deputy sheriffs and evaluating their subsequent job perform nce. Unique Challenges The King County Sheriff’s Office presents the most technical approach to assessing candidates. In so doing, they relied almost exclusively on consultants to complete the HSS project. Using the consultant-based model meant that work products were completed on consultant schedules and frequent delays were encountered because consultant products had to be approved by the department to satisfy department and county personnel criteria. Consequently, frequent back-and-forth exchanges occurred before final agreement could be achieved. As might be expected, these exchanges inevitably created communication glitches that resulted in further delays while they were being resolved. Resolution was generally forthcoming and the delivery of a final product was not affected. However, because of the delays it was not always possible for the King County Sheriff’s Office to maintain its activities within the time frame of the grant. The exclusive use of consultants in any project creates dependency on external sources. While this type of dependency can be favorable because of the expertise that consultants bring to the project, it also can create impediments if there are differences in how basic concepts are interpreted. For instance, consultants may have different perceptions of what community involvement means or may differ in their understanding of terms used in service-oriented law enforcement, such as problem solving, partnerships, or the crime-prevention emphasis. As a result, initial drafts of end products may reflect more the perception of consultants than those of the customer. Clearly, steering committees and facilitated focus groups are helpful in over-riding this difficulty but they need to be constructed carefully and facilitators need to have broad conceptual knowledge of the subject matter. Future of HSS in King County At the conclusion of the program, the King County Sheriff’s Office had produced significant body of work that increases the content and construct validity of its performance management system. By linking recruitment, hiring, and performance to the service orientation, the sheriff’s office has made great strides in creating process to institutionalize value-based performance for newly hired deputies. The proposed revision of its complete selection system to make it compatible with community policing, and the detailed explanation of how each component can be evaluated to produce service-oriented eligibility list, speaks volumes for facilitating requisite longitudinal validation and for creating institutional change. Commonalities Across HSS Sites Chapter Four Commonalities Across HSS Sites Support of the Law Enforcement Chief Executive All sites had the support of the law enforcement chief executive officer (CEO) and enjoyed strong level of commitment despite the fact that changing selection strategies can create risk for the CEO. Their commitment was reflected in decisions to devote in-kind resources to the project, including staff designated to manage the program, use of department facilities to house the project and related project activities, as well as agreement to participate in updating recruiting information through department web sites, and contributing advertising funds to the projects. In three of the sites, there was a change in CEO midway through the project; in another site the CEO decided to run for higher office; and in still another, the CEO announced his intention to retire. All sites experienced a threat to the leadership originally responsible for involvement in the project. This factor is not that unusual when considered within the framework of the average tenure of law enforcement CEO, which is approximately 3 years.10 Fortunately, the new CEOs continued the commitment to the HSS project and their endorsements sustained the momentum so that the project did not lose ground. Their commitment reflects well on the status of community policing and the adaptation of service orientation as the smart way to deliver policing services. 10. Kirchhoff, William E., Charlotte Lansinger and J mes Burack. Command Performance: Career Guide for Police Executives. Washington: Police Executive Research Forum, 1999. Steering Committees Steering or advisory committees were integral to project activities at each site and were instrumental in providing multidisciplinary feedback and guidance throughout the life of the project. Although the composition of the committees varied across sites, there is little question that they brought fresh ideas to age-old recruitment and selection issues. Some included representation only from intact community groups while others combined academics, research consultants, and the community. The latter model provided greater diversity in the expertise brought to the project but in some inst nces this diversity lso produced conflicting opinions. Despite differences in opinion, most of which were eventually resolved, such committees or advisory groups were important to enriching the project and helped stretch the imagination about what could be accomplished in federally funded project. Checks and Balances Despite strong commitment to HSS, all sites encountered requirements for ensuring that appropriate checks and balances were implemented throughout the project. They ranged from getting approval and review of marketing materials to vetting all recommendations through appropriate sources. Checks and balances sources typically involved executive commanders, local officials, human resource departments, and personnel responsible for civil service requirements. In some instances, engaging the latter strengthened the capacity to negotiate change in standard selection procedures. Union representatives also acted as safeguards in the checks and balances process and advocated for assurances that recommended changes would not compromise collective bargaining agreements even though recruit assessments generally are not the purview of collective bargaining. Finally, the checks and balance process served as a means to market the project internally and broadened the network of people who had a firm understanding of what the department was trying to achieve while also dispelling any misconceptions. These same people could then become advocates for growing HSS as significant change in the organizational culture. At all sites, the checks and balances review process continued throughout the course of the project and was ongoing even at the end of the project. Community Engagement Engaging the community is at the core of community policing and is what sets it apart from the professional model of policing. HSS raised community engagement to a new level that goes beyond sharing information and solving problems. By engaging the community to participate in fundamental and critical department process—recruiting and hiring recruits—citizens influenced strategies and outcomes of an important law enforcement process. As such, their involvement had significant policy implications. Each site developed ways to involve the community and promoted engagement activities that were fairly consistent. Citizens were engaged in designing web sites and in creating the messages that defined the particular agency. All sought the community’s help in identifying service-oriented characteristics that were linked to community policing activities. They also sought the communities’ help in developing an applicant pool of potential recruits who could meet these qualifications. In essence, community members were encouraged to become adjunct recruiters. They reached out to people who typically may not have considered a career in law enforcement, did not see themselves as police officers, and/or may not have seen their previous job experiences in service-oriented industries as having any links to police work. At some sites this level of engagement resulted in new partnerships such as Burlington’s alignment with the Community Economic Development Office and Detroit’s partnership with Empowerment Zones. Community engagement became a hallmark event at each site. This level of involvement clearly communicated the message that the law enforcement agency was interested in new way of doing business that included the community as its partner. Use of Focus Groups A collateral activity of community engagement involved the use of focus groups. These groups involved both citizens and law enforcement officers but differed across sites in how they were used and the depth of information that was gathered. Some used the focus group model as an open-ended discussion group while others used a research paradigm to effect structured data collection. Whatever the model, it became something of standard at each site with the exception of Burlington, Vermont. Despite initial trepidation about working with the police, the focus groups proved to be a valuable educational process for all participants. Both the community and officers learned from each other and soon realized that they were not that far apart on issues involving public safety. From the community perspective, they learned that it is not easy to become police officer and that candidates go through rigorous selection process. It was not a cavalier system where choices are based on favoritism, biased perceptions, or who you know. This message is important for citizens to understand, particularly in those communities where there have been acrimonious relationships with law enforcement. Conversely, officers learned that the community was more supportive than previously believed and that they brought value to the process. Despite widespread belief that the community would embrace the opportunity to participate, the sites found that they had to go the extra mile to ensure participation. Defining expectations, ensuring that their input would be taken seriously, and respecting their time were critical to success. Moreover, those sites that were able to pay a stipend for citizen participation had fewer no-shows. Marketing/Outreach All sites engaged in some form of image management through extensive media campaigns that defined the values of law enforcement, rather than letting the popular media define them. Image management was reflected through unique advertising campaigns that developed department brands and through new or revised web sites that broadcast key messages created to resonate with the groups that they were trying to reach. Beyond advertising, these efforts also produced new ways to spread factual information about the benefits, rewards, and challenges of a law enforcement career, as well as information about what the law enforcement agency was trying to accomplish. In dedicating resources to marketing, each site changed how and what it communicated to the public about its agencies. Their efforts went far beyond the traditional static brochures or standard trifolds with action photographs that are circulated at job fairs. Rather, they resulted in full-fledged advertising campaigns that allowed each agency to tell a compelling story. Institutionalizing Community Involvement This report showcases many examples of community involvement. With the exception of Hillsborough County, however, community inclusion in the oral interview board represents the selection component that was most consistently applied across sites. The sites using oral boards dedicated their efforts to ensure that citizen participation would be more than window dressing. They devoted the necessary time and attention to structuring the interview to incorporate it as a viable component of the public employment selection process. In some instances this involved creating a standardized set of questions that followed script as well as the development of scoring key to ensure the reliability of independent ratings of the interview data. Most agreed that community board members would need training but would not require an extensive indoctrination to the broad spectrum of law enforcement activities. Training, however, would need to go beyond interviewing skills and should include instruction on providing ratings of applicants, disregarding extraneous information presented by applicants, and voiding unlawful questions. Consequently, some of the sites are developing oral interview guides to use in this process. Further, most are taking the position that these guides should be used by law enforcement personnel as well as by the citizens who particip te in the interview. In some sites, community presence in oral board interviews has been extended to include citizen participation in promotional interviews as well as involvement in the training of new recruits. This level of inclusion drills down to institutionalizing HSS by affecting the internal and external belief systems of the organization and the community. It provides strong evidence of how HSS became a driving force for change and further institutionalized community policing in participating agencies and the communities they serve. Use of Consultants Most sites recognized that they did not have the expertise that was required to make substantive changes in recruitment and selection. Most used well–known consultants who had credibility with law enforcement to assist them in developing significant parts of the project, particularly those elements relative to the occupational and psychological assessment phases of the selection process. The downside was that they did not always agree with recommendations made by the consultants and were left with reports containing divergent opinions. Frequently, this divergence enriched the project. Conversely, resolving conflicting information can present challenges to any project because of the potential to create impediments to achieving final concurrence in the agency review process. Fortunately, in most sites the conflicts were reconciled primarily because of the predominant commitment to the over arching philosophy of community policing. Consequently, the momentum was sustained. Involvement of Unions All sites agreed that the endorsement of their respective labor unions would be critical to introducing change into the department. Consequently, most reached out to the union and some invited the union to participate on steering or advisory committees. Actual participation of unions was limited, however, perhaps because the HSS focus addressed potential candidates, not existing union membership. Most sites agreed that their unions were generally less interested in pre–employment issues. It was apparent, however, that the outreach was important to keeping the unions informed of progress and ensuring them that collective bargaining agreements would not be affected by HSS. This assurance was important to the successful conclusion of HSS. Although there was no direct union endorsement of HSS, collectively there were no instances of union resistance across sites. This was particularly important in Detroit, where unions were most influential, and where their lack of opposition was viewed as victory. Moreover, the good-faith effort to involve the unions at all sites became an effective internal marketing tool both for the success of HSS and for sustaining community policing. Psychological and Occupational Testing The sites found that modifying the actual processes used in psychological and occupational testing was more difficult than initially expected. Test standardization is critical for employment selection processes and involves professional pratices that preclude cavalier changes to test items. Moreover, factorial analyses of test dimensions evaluated in specific instruments and reported validity studies have been developed with scientific rigor. As such, it would be a complicated process to alter these dimensions and generally not recommended. Consequently, in lieu of developing new test— an extremely lengthy and rigorous process—a more realistic alternative involved examining commercially available current tests to determine their capacity to predict service-oriented performance. To implement this strategy, core activities of the selection infrastructure first need to be changed by creating job analysis linked to community policing, systematically defining service- oriented traits, and then developing the core competencies associated with the service orientation. Although each site did not engage in all these ctivities simultaneously, three of the sites introduced significant change to core elements of the selection infrastructure. Further, all learned from each other of the need to use appropriate methodology to make these changes and how to develop long-range plans for longitudinal validation of the processes developed through HSS. As such, their work will continue long after the conclusion of HSS. Lessons Learned Chapter Five Lessons Learned HSS Lessons Learned The experiences of the five sites provide a number of lessons learned that are reflected in a set of common themes. Prevalent underlying themes that cut across all sites included the realization that reaching out to other agencies and community groups provided form of transparency that was valued. Also, they recognized that a cookie-cutter approach was best avoided if true organizational change was to occur. Moreover, all concurred that participating in HSS helped them to develop a deeper and more intensive level of knowledge about their respective agencies. Aside from those themes, most sites encountered challenges as they attempted to introduce substantial change into fundamental processes of their agencies. Consequently, readers of this report may see how a coherency developed across sites as reflected in a set of core issues that influenced the project. As such, others planning to take on similar projects can benefit from the lessons learned through the HSS experience. Pre–employment Research Is Serious Business and Decidedly Complex Pre–employment research is complex and can be expected to take more time than originally anticipated. Because of the seriousness of the outcome, the potential to keep someone from gainful employment, or hiring someone in appropriate to carry out the policing role, the sites found that plans to develop new hiring models could not be accomplished within the time frame of grant. This was less of an issue in changing recruitment strategies than it was with developing model profiles that could be used to predict performance. In the latter situation, methodological issues—primarily small sample sizes, large numbers of selection variables, and differential validity strategies—affected the capacity for prediction and clearly speak to the need for longitudinal validation of processes developed at all sites. Collaterally, sharpening the research question(s) proved to be critical in determining if the end product would be primarily descriptive or predictive. Finally, the lack of traditional comprehensive job analysis that clearly defined the tasks associated with community policing, and the keystone of predictive validation, proved to be a limiting factor for most of the sites. Although job analysis/job function exercises facilitated the systematic identification of desirable characteristics of service-oriented police and were possible within the scope of the grant, comprehensive job analysis provided to each site would have enhanced the project. Notwithstanding the need to tailor the job analysis to the specific tasks unique to each site, common set of service-oriented tasks would have provided them with a unified perspective at the outset of the project. Despite this limitation, each site engaged in extensive work that produced successful definition of the traits, characteristics, and behaviors needed for community policing. Moreover, their work has laid the groundwork for developing a job analysis that includes the knowledge, skills, and abilities inherent to community policing. That, in itself, is a remarkable ccomplishment. Given the complexity of selection research, the methodological issues that emerged, and the implications for major change to existing selection systems, it is glaringly apparent that there is a need to build in a process for reconciling methodological differences at the outset of project. Rather than wait for these issues to emerge, it would be beneficial to anticipate that methodological considerations will surface that deserve debate and resolution. The debate can be fruitful and enrich the project but can also delay progress in achieving project goals; therefore, a front-end process that allows for the full exploration of the merits of diverging professional opinions and a method to resolve conflicting opinions needs to be considered. Involving the Community—Not As Easy As It Sounds Even though the Community Policing Consortium and the demonstration sites were conversant in engaging the community in a wide variety of contexts and thought they knew what the community wanted, they acknowledged that the engagement was decidedly more complex task than initially anticipated. Engaging the community in various grant activities, particularly focus groups, required more than simply issuing an invitation to come to meeting. Sites found that they needed to contact citizens early and often to ensure that they reserved adequate time in their schedules to allow for full participation. They also found it beneficial to develop a large list of potential volunteers so that they were not using the same people all the time. The latter practice not only enriched the quality of information, it voided impositions on citizens’ time. Within this context, some of the sites found that they had greater success when using retirees. Despite initial concerns that the retirees might provide a skewed perspective, they found that these individuals were more likely to own their own homes, had strong investment in improving the community, and also had the time to participate on a regular basis. Conversely, caution needs to be exercised that some groups, such as retirees or community advocates of policing, may be viewed as fans of law enforcement and may provide limited perspective about what is needed in service-oriented law enforcement officers. Further, addressing citizens who represent the age groups that policing agencies are trying to attract can provide valuable information even though it may not be presented as a favorable or positive endorsement of the department. The sites also found that despite initial outreach, some citizens were still hesitant to become involved and questioned if their input would be taken seriously. The sites, therefore, found it necessary to spend time preparing community members to participate and in framing expectations as well as anticipated outcomes to enhance the probability that they would attend scheduled sessions. Some found that paying a stipend helped to reduce no shows, while others that were unable to manage a stipend found other means of recognition. Showing interest in recognizing and rewarding participation conveys a message that citizen time is respected and that their participation is valued. This approach also lets the community know at the outset that this project is more than business as usual. Although the focus groups were enormously useful, they did not always materialize as pl nned. Even under the best of circumstances, once the groups were underway the sites discovered that there were language barriers between police and the community and that they ascribed different meanings to the same words. Frequently, there were distinct and substantive differences in their concepts of community policing and many community members had little understanding of what was involved in collaborative problem solving. Further, community members focused on how citizens were treated while officers emphasized public safety concerns as priority. As might be expected, citizens focused on global issues while officers were more task oriented. In this regard, citizens talked about relationships, information sharing, and appreciation of cultures, in addition to the messages conveyed through residency requirements and the physical appearance of officers. Police officers talked about community policing in terms of direct service, engaging in public relations, being responsive to situations in contrast to incidents, and viewed collaboration from the framework of citizens providing them with extra eyes and ears to report on crime in the community. Once initial concerns about participation were addressed and citizens became involved in the project, they showed interest in participating in widening level of activities, some of which exceeded the scope of the focus groups. As they became involved in other ctivities, such as oral board participation and scoring of interviews, the sites found that training component and specific guidelines were helpful to allay their concerns and to ensure that the information gathered was reliable and consistent. Creating the Internal-External Balance Given a long history of mutual distrust between citizens and the police in many communities, it is not unusual that officers and community members had initial misgivings about the project. Consequently, internal marketing became as essential to success as did the external outreach. Preparing tenured officers for how these changes would enrich the department was critical to managing their expectations and allaying fears that their job security would be jeopardized. Forecasting anticipated outcomes was also important to reducing uncertainty, which extended to command as well as line officers. Clearly, there is need to internalize change before it can be institutionalized it. That involves preparing the entire department to achieve internal buy-in. Preparation includes involving stakeholders across the agency at the outset of the project, following up with ongoing publicity and status reports about how the project is advancing, conducting roll-call presentations, and encouraging officers and deputies to participate in project activities. These activities first need to be supported by a commitment from the executive level of management that enables the creation of a change process. These same factors apply to steering and advisory committees and ongoing focus groups. To create the balance between internal and external acceptance, interest in participation needs to be reinforced continu lly nd participants need to be updated on the status of the project, as well as the glitches encountered, to keep them informed about how step-by-step progress is being made. Slogans and brochures will fall on deaf ears unless the internal and external constituencies are fully prepared for what change will entail and how it will affect them. Without this balance, ownership is diffused, people lose interest, and the goals of the project become sidetracked. Identifying a Common Core of Service-Oriented Traits Identifying service-oriented traits that were agreed on by all stakeholders in the process was more complicated than initially envisioned. It was made more difficult because of the extant lists of traits including those from state Police Officer Standards and Training Commissions (POST), human resource departments, and those identified in the HSS research. Winnowing down to number of traits that encapsulated what the department wanted to say to the community became a critical task that was made easier when sites used subject matter experts and job analysis and job function exercises. Further, sites that used a research strategy were more successful in identifying a common core of traits that satisfied relevant groups and fully identified what service-orientation means. Although all sites developed lists of traits and characteristics, they varied in length as well as data-collection methodologies. Some characteristics are commonly identified across sites and create common core of service- oriented traits. They include integrity, courage, teamwork, people-oriented interpersonal skills that reflect an interest in and an awareness of others, strong communication skills, and work ethic that demonstrates dedication and responsibility. They also include a measure of emotional health that was variably described as temperament, frustration tolerance, or ability to manage stress. Together, these traits appear to reflect strong component of emotional intelligence, dimension that is just now starting to emerge in the literature on the psychological screening of police applicants. Access to Personnel Data Created Common Issues The need to access personnel data was common feature across sites. These data create the baseline for measuring overall success of the initiatives because they provide relevant background or performance data about successful officers or deputies. However, ready access to personnel data is difficult, as it should be, given the confidential nature of the information. That was a particular concern of the Institutional Review Board because of the involvement of human subjects. Overcoming these issues requires commitment and support from parent jurisdictions and speaks to the need to create critical mass of supporters at the outset, including representatives from human resources, civil service, and state POSTs. Coordination with regulatory agencies is critical to ensure consistency in procedures and to avoid duplication. Further, this coordination is important to make sure that there is an agreed on use of definitions and to avoid the pitfalls of making changes that are inconsistent with guidance provided by regulatory agencies. Finally, keeping these groups in the loop facilitates communication and reduces misunderstandings that can have an impact on the project. Personnel Tracking Systems Collateral to the concerns related to accessing personnel data was the need for personnel tracking systems, the foundation of effective personnel management. As such, they may not be seen as directly related to the objectives of HSS; however, they are critical to any project that creates change in recruiting and hiring. They take on added significance because of their capacity to provide baseline data for gauging the success of changes brought about through the project. Moreover, they are critical for longitudinal validation of assessment processes that are changed as a result of the project. In the sites that did not systematically track the progress of recruits through the system, specifically where and why they dropped out, it was more difficult to account for success rates of the new initiatives. This issue is compounded when community members participate in the process because of the need to maintain confidentiality of hiring data and personal inform tion. The use of aggregate data is not precluded under these conditions, and implementing this practice needs to be considered to fully assess the effectiveness of change. Incompatible Information Systems A multitude of information exchange problems were encountered that are synonymous with the information age. There were problems with completeness of internal filing systems and in transmitting personnel information. In some instances, these problems resulted in labor-intensive process of manually redacting file information, such as personal identifiers, that need safeguarding because of EEO and confidentiality concerns. They also need to be considered for their relevance to collective bargaining agreements governing tenured employees, particularly if using incumbent employees in selection pilot studies. Also, there were multiple instances of data transfer problems, particularly between the systems of expert consultants and department systems, which have implications for integrating legacy systems into new systems. Much of this was caused by incompatible statistical software and a lack of interoperable systems, a common problem in law enforcement agencies. In many instances, it was apparent that the information exchange problems were not anticipated at the outset of the project and came about more as an afterthought. Sufficient planning at the beginning of project would have precluded the significant delays created by incompatible systems. Institutional Review Board (IRB) IRB processes are instrumental to ensuring the integrity of projects like HSS. Despite their necessity, they can delay implementation of the research components of project and create other problems such as disruption of proposed scheduling, delays in project activities, and loss of consultant time. There was general agreement across sites that there is a need to define IRB requirements early in the process and that review and approval should be granted before the project officially commences, a factor that is particularly important when engaging in test validation strategies. The primary issue involved in IRB approval for HSS sites related to minimizing exposure to human subjects, not unusual in projects using incumbent officers and supervisors as subject matter experts. Respectively, they included safeguarding data, providing informed consent, avoiding coercive methods for ensuring participation, protecting information in personnel files, and providing debriefing procedures for all participants. Although human subject protection is given in academic and applied research, in paramilitary organizations they may be viewed as less significant. Thus, providing awareness of these requirements early in the process would help to expedite the research in public safety settings. Further, the IRB requirements have implications for subsequent selection methods in such organizations, including, but not limited to, the sensitivity of handling candidate data, conforming to civil service rules, ensuring confidentiality of pre–employment personnel data, and clarifying rules and regulations of the hiring authority. The above issues will not disappear with the conclusion of the HSS project. They will need to be considered carefully in any extension of this project that involves assessing human subjects in hiring and selection procedures and in concurrent or longitudinal validation research. Since some of the sites intend to continue researching assessment instruments and their long-range predictive value, the issues identified in the IRB process will remain as significant concerns that will need continual attention. Web-Based Recruitment and Hiring Web sites are a common feature of contemporary life and are used as a recruiting tool for a number of occupations. When used within the context of enhancing public employment, however, there are unique concerns. Online applications in use at some of the sites create security and privacy concerns and the reliability of the job-related information that is presented is subject to question. Further, technology-based applications may not be user-friendly for candidates of who have recently mastered the English language, an issue in many diverse communities that are home to the very candidates law enforcement seeks to attract. Finally, because of civil service rules, the online procedures need to mirror the paper process, which often proved difficult to achieve because of formatting difficulties. Sites also encountered a number of purely technical issues, such as glitches in web site development. These issues present a decided contrast to what is involved in the minor tweaking of information systems and the delays that were created were far more extensive than originally anticipated. Most sites found that they needed more than specific expertise to develop and/or revise their web sites. Rather, separate management process and staff were required that could devote the time and attention that was needed to see it through to completion. One site recommended assigning two project leads to a web site project with one staff person tasked with the communication and recruitment side of the process, and nother ssigned to manage the extremely detailed task requirements inherent to technical applications. Other recommendations included starting with an internal strategic plan that combines an outline of what has to be accomplished as well as highly specific expectations for vendors as stated in the Request for Proposals (RFP) but goes beyond design and ranges from coding and editing to application development. The latter should be formulated in a precise requirements document that tells the vendor exactly what is needed. Last, but clearly not least, is the need to have community input. Since citizens are the customers who will be navigating the site, their input is essential and provides roadmap for what citizens will look for and what they will need to navigate site without difficulty. One site framed this issue as learning to think like the public versus thinking like the police. Other delays related to web site development involved acclimating management to the introduction of cutting- edge advertising companies into law enforcement organizations that are basically conservative. Since the sites had been using existing web sites for some time, the idea of creating dramatic and out-of-the-box change that typically deviated from standard procedures controlled by the city or county often raised eyebrows and created resistance that had to be managed through extensive vetting procedures. Web site issues do not subside once the new site has been developed and meets with success. There remains the business of developing content management tools that provide for clear and precise web site writing as well as procedures for ongoing maintenance which can be equally important to the initial development. The latter also involves timely updates to keep the site fresh, obtaining required photo releases from all subjects introduced on the web site, ensuring that all contact information remains accurate, and maintaining procedures for providing timely responses to web site inquiries. Despite the myriad of difficulties encountered, by the conclusion of HSS there was general concurrence that all sites had been vastly improved, fact supported by dramatic increases in hit rates. Overcoming Impediments to Enhance Diversity Enhancing diversity in the applicant pool—a goal of all sites—was met with variable success. The fact that the goal for a more diverse group of successful applicants was not fully realized led to disappointment but not necessarily discouragement. In general, the experience resulted in the agencies taking on new and proactive direction in minority recruitment. Moreover, new learning was created in some sites. In particular, two sites found it necessary to convene focus groups with minority employees (Sacramento) or minority citizens (Detroit). The goal of these groups was to better understand the motivation for seeking, or not seeking, law enforcement position and what it would take for minority candidates to envision themselves in the job. Generally, the sites found that the information gained from these groups was enlightening. However, since the groups were developed later in the project, they did not have the opportunity to use this information to inform their initial recruitment strategies. Clearly, the minority group responses would have had greater influence had the groups been convened in the initial stages. Some sites approached enhancing diversity from technical perspective. As a matter of professional practice relative to selection methodology, the King County Sheriff’s Office examined gender and ethnic group differences on pre-offer components of its selection assessments to examine potential for an adverse impact on protected classes. Within this context, they estimated mean score group differences on recommended composite scores that would be used for proposed eligibility lists. However, other sites took a more individualized approach as based on the realization that minority candidates would benefit from mentoring throughout the process. For example, Burlington initiated tutoring of minority candidates when it was discovered that those with English as a second language had difficulties with written examinations. Sacramento developed its Community Recruiter Program as a way to provide a more personalized method of recruiting in order to enhance diversity. Generally, the lessons learned from these sites call for implementing methods at the front end of project to create a diverse pool of successful applicants. Further, the midcourse corrections elected by some sites demonstrate that enhancing diversity is an evolving process that can clearly enrich recruitment. Mentoring—A Necessary Adjunct when Recruiting for Diversity Despite best efforts at selection, HSS demonstrated a need for mentoring recruits, particularly those from diverse communities. Mentoring will help these recruits adapt to the police culture and will foster an awareness of how to succeed in a new profession. Over and above supporting recruits through the initial stages of the process, mentoring is equally important in retaining recruits and capitalizing on an agency’s investment. Both Burlington and Sacramento recognized the extent of the adjustment process that is involved the early stages of career adaptation and viewed mentoring as significant to professional development. In contrast to viewing mentored candidates as those who need help, this approach conveys respect for their efforts and communicates that their candidacy adds value to the organization. Moreover, both sites learned that language and writing difficulties could be expected when English is second language and they went the extra mile to provide assistance that would contribute to professional development. Menu of Promising Practices Identifying, Recruiting, Retaining the Service-Oriented Recruit • Community Consultants Burlington Police Department • Recruiting Ambassadors Detroit Police Dep rtments • Mentoring Recruits Sacramento Police Department Burlington Police Department • Community Recruiter Program Sacramento Police Department What Should Recruits Look Like To Do Community Policing • Characteristic-Based Job Analysis Exercise Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office • Core Competencies Linked To Job Functions/Performance King County Sheriff’s Office • Service Orientation Linked to POST COP Dimensions Sacramento Police Department Marketing—How to Get the Message Out: Finding and Attracting Service- Oriented Recruits • Creating “Brand” Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office Sacramento Police Department • Media Campaign Detroit Police Dep rtment • OnLine Tests Burlington Police Department King County Sheriff’s Office Laying the Groundwork to Enhance Diversity • Minority Employee Focus Groups Sacramento Police Department • Minority Citizen Focus Groups Detroit Police Department • Minority Tutoring Program Burlington Police Department Service-Oriented Selection Procedures • Pilot Testing Instruments Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office • Oral Board Interviews Sacramento Police Department, Detroit Police Department Burlington Police Department King County Sheriff’s Office • Occupational Testing Audit King County Sheriff’s Office • Construct Valid Selection System King County Sheriff’s Office Engaging the Community in the HSS Process • Identification of Traits and Competencies King County Sheriff’s Office • Participation in Oral Boards Sacramento Police Department Burlington Police Department • Adjunct Recruiters Burlington Police Department • CompStat Meeting Participation Detroit Police Department Follow-Up to Institutionalize HSS • Longitudinal Validation Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office King County Sheriff’s Office • Citizen Feedback to FTOs Hillsborough County Sheriff’s • Citizen Participation in Promotion Interviews Burlington Police Department Detroit Police Department Sacramento Police Department • Citizen Participation in Recruit Training Burlington Police Department About the Author About the Author About the Author ELLEN SCRIVNER, Ph.D. Dr. Ellen Scrivner is the Deputy Superintendent of the Bureau of Administrative Services, Chicago Police Department. A twenty-seven year career has been highlighted by a reput tion for developing innovative solutions to complex police problems. Dr. Scrivner is an acknowledged expert on a broad range of policing issues, including recruitment, hiring and training, and enjoys wide-spread name recognition and credibility in the law enforcement community. Experience includes involvement in policing as a nationally recognized expert on community policing, licensed police psychologist,appointment to Command Staffs of two major urban police departments, an appointment as a National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Visiting Fellow to study police use of excessive force, and a range of publications and speaking engagements. Dr. Scrivner entered Federal government service to assist in establishing the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office), U.S. Department of Justice. As Assistant Director of Training and Technical Assistance (COPS), Dr. Scrivner launched a nationwide network of innovative community policing training institutes that have been described as a major legacy of the COPS Office. Appointed as Deputy Director of COPS, Dr. Scrivner oversaw an $8.8 Billion grant program in addition to all training and technical assistance, applied research, and the COPS Office Police Integrity initiative. Dr. Scrivner worked with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to assist the Office of Law Enforcement Coordination. This office was integral to the FBI Director’s priorities to prevent and deter terrorism by improving the collaboration with state and local law enforcement. This position required Top Secret security clearance. Also consulted to a range of local and Federal law enforcement agencies and to national police groups including the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), and the Police Foundation. Accepted the position with the Chicago Police Department in 2004 and is responsible for managing the administrative function of the second largest police department in the country. Administrative functions include managing a billion dollar budget as well as the Personnel, Information Services, Records Management, and Research and Development Divisions. Also responsible for overseeing the implementation of the ICLEAR information sharing enterprise system that will advance information sharing of critical police information throughout the state of Illinois. About the Community Policing Consortium About the Community Policing Consortium What is the Community Policing Consortium? The Community Policing Consortium (Consortium) is a partnership of five of the nation’s leading law enforcement organizations: the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), Dan Rosenblatt, Executive Director; the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE), Jesse Lee, Executive Director; the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA), Thomas N. Faust, Executive Director; the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), Chuck Wexler, Executive Director; and the Police Foundation, Hubert Williams, President. The executive director of the Consortium is William H. Matthews. How is the Consortium funded? The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) funds the Consortium. COPS is helping local communities develop long-term solutions to crime and violence. COPS has awarded grants to law enforcement agencies for hiring officers, procuring equipment and technology, and implementing innovative community policing practices. COPS has also funded other organizations and initiatives that offer training and conferences, conduct research, and promote strategies for implementing community policing. What is the mission of the Consortium? The Consortium’s primary mission is to advance community policing strategies that allow citizens and a wide range of community stakeholders to work as full and equal partners with law enforcement and other public and private organizations in the effort to enhance quality of life. What types of services does the Consortium offer? For more than ten years, the Consortium has provided training and technical assistance to thousands of law enforcement professionals and community members. The Consortium disseminates community policing strategies through: • Executive Blueprint Symposiums, our technical assistance program for law enforcement CEOs, which offer models and strategic approaches for managing personnel, technology, and resources for community policing • Community Engagements, our technical assistance program for citizens and law enforcement, which facilitate collaborative problem solving and foster understanding, mutual trust, and consensus • Community Links, the Consortium’s magazine, which features commentaries, reports, resource reviews, practical articles, and testimonies about community policing • a speakers bureau, through which the Consortium’s experts make presentations at conferences and give interviews for television, newspapers, and other media • resource guides and topical monographs • an interactive website (www.communitypolicing.org) with archived publications, an information database, and training and technical assistance information For more information, contact the Community Policing Consortium at (800) 833-3085 or visit our website at www. communitypolicing.org. About the COPS Office About the COPS Office The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) was created in 1994 and has the unique mission to directly serve the needs of state and local law enforcement. The COPS Office has been the driving force in advancing the concept of community policing, and is responsible for one of the greatest infusions of resources into state, local, and tribal law enforcement in our nation’s history. Since 1994, COPS has invested more than $11.9 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. COPS funding has furthered the advancement of community policing through community policing innovation conferences, the development of best practices, pilot community policing programs, and applied research and evaluation initiatives. COPS has also positioned itself to respond directly to emerging law enforcement needs. Examples include working in partnership with departments to enhance police integrity, promoting safe schools, combating the methamphetamine drug problem, and supporting homeland security efforts. Through its grant programs, COPS is assisting and encouraging state, local,and tribal law enforcement agencies to enhance their homeland security efforts using proven community policing strategies. COPS programs such as the Universal Hiring Program (UHP) has helped agencies address terrorism preparedness or response through community policing. The COPS in Schools (CIS) program has a mandatory training component that includes topics on terrorism prevention, emergency response, and the critical role schools can play in community response. COPS also developed the Homeland Security Overtime Program (HSOP) to increase the mount of overtime funding available to support community policing and homeland security efforts. Finally, COPS has implemented grant programs intended to develop interoperable voice and data communications networks among emergency response agencies that will assist in addressing local homeland security demands. The COPS Office has made substantial investments in law enforcement training. COPS created a national network of Regional Community Policing Institutes (RCPIs) that are available to state, local,and tribal law enforcement, elected officials and community leaders for training opportunities on a wide range of community policing topics. Recently the RCPIs have been focusing their efforts on developing and delivering homeland security training. COPS also supports the advancement of community policing strategies through the Community Policing Consortium. Additionally, COPS has made major investment in applied research which makes possible the growing body of substantive knowledge covering all spects of community policing. These substantial investments have produced significant community policing infrastructure across the country as evidenced by the fact that at the present time, approximately 86 percent of the nation’s population is served by law enforcement agencies practicing community policing. The COPS Office continues to respond proactively by providing critical resources, training, and technical assistance to help state, local, and tribal law enforcement implement innovative and effective community policing strategies. Appendices Appendix A California Commission on POST Patrol Officer Psychological Screening Dimensions DIMENSION 1: SOCIAL COMPETENCE This involves communicating with others in a tactful and respectful manner, and showing sensitivity and concern in one’s daily interactions. It includes several facets, including: • The ability to “read” people and be aware of the impact of their own words and behavior on others (Social Awareness) • Sensitivity and concern towards the feelings of others (Empathy) • Tact and impartiality in treating all members of society (Tolerance) Positive Behaviors: • Reads peoples’ motives and anticipates their reactions by picking up on verbal and behavioral cues • Recognizes needs and concerns of others • Resolves problems in ways that do not create unnecessary antagonism • Calms emotional/angry people and defuses conflicts through mediation, negotiation, and persuasion rather than force (when appropriate) • Recognizes the impact of one’s own verbal and nonverbal communications on others (and makes sure both are consistent and appropriate) • Refrains from making remarks that could be interpreted as rude or condescending • Interacts with others in courteous and respectful manner • Listens to others patiently and attentively (within reason) to gather needed information, gain cooperation, etc., while—at the same time—staying focused on the task • Is considerate when duties lead to physical or emotional pain/discomfort of others, including victims, witnesses, and suspects • Assists others when needed, even when some personal sacrifice is involved • Communicates tactfully and effectively with individuals across the gamut of society, even when giving constructive criticism • Provides service/renders aid or assistance in an unbiased fashion • Aware of and sensitive to social, economic and, cultural differences, including those associated with gender, sexual orientation, race, and religion • Sensitive and respectful when interacting with the elderly, disabled, and those with special needs • Willingly provides aid and assistance to all individuals • The ability to interact effectively with groups in a variety of settings (neighborhood watch meetings, community awareness meetings) • Interacts with community groups in a professional,articulate,and effective manner Counterproductive Behaviors: • Baits people; takes personal offense at comments, insults, criticism • Provokes suspects by officious bearing, gratuitous verbal challenge or through physical contact • Antagonizes community members and others • Uses profanity and other inappropriate language • Refuses to listen to explanations from members of the community • Performs job duties in a way so as to minimize interactions with others • Makes inappropriate comments to community members regarding their personal characteristics and among other officers concerning specific groups (racial, gender, sexual orientation, proficiency with the English language, immigrant status, HIV/AIDS infection, religion, transgender, social status) • Inability to recognize how one’s own emotions/behavior affect situations and others • Makes hasty, biased judgments based on physical appearance, race, gender, or other group membership characteristics • Exhibits “stage fright” when asked to speak in front of community groups DIMENSION 2: TEAMWORK This involves working effectively with others to accomplish goals, as well as subordinating personal interests for the good of the working group and agency. It involves establishing and maintaining effective, cooperative working relationships with fellow officers, supervisors, community partners, representatives of other gencies, and others tasked with serving and protecting the community. It consists of: • Sharing information and providing assistance and support to fellow officers and other working partners • Balancing personal ambitions with organizational/team goals • Performing one’s fair share in a group effort • Collaborating effectively with others to accomplish work goals, as necessary • Not allowing personal differences to affect working relationships Positive Behaviors: • Supports and recognizes the accomplishment of team members • Willingly offers, initiates, and provides assistance to fellow officers • Invites the community to provide input and assistance • Supports group efforts rather than competing for individual recognition • Solicits input and assistance from community partners and others outside the agency to accomplish work goals Counterproductive Behaviors: • Resents successes and accomplishments of team members • Does not assist fellow officers • Avoids asking others for assistance • Alienates colleagues by dominating interactions and activities • Gossips, criticizes, and backstabs colleagues and coworkers DIMENSION 3: ADAPTABILITY/ FLEXIBILITY This involves the ability to change gears and easily adjust to the many different, sudden, and sometimes competing demands inherent in law enforcement work. It consists of: • Appropriately shifting between the role of law enforcer and public servant • Adjusting to planned and unplanned work changes, including different types of incidents that must be handled one right after another • Prioritizing and working effectively on several very different tasks/projects at the same time • Appropriately applies laws and regulations; understands the difference between the letter and the spirit of the law • Performs duties without constant supervision or instructions • Works in unstructured situations with minimal supervision • Adjusts to differing supervisory styles • Can physically and mentally adjust to shift work • Makes sudden adjustments in use of force as appropriate Positive Behaviors: • Easily changes gears in response to unpredictable or unexpected events and circumstances • Willingly accepts and appropriately implements changes in policy, organizational practices and law (e.g., video cameras in car; racial profiling data collection, etc.) • Accepts and easily adapts to changes in work assignments • Accepts and easily adjusts to changes in operations, goals, actions, modes of conduct or priorities to deal with changing situations • Anticipates changes in work demands by locating and participating in assignments or training that will prepare self for these changes • Selects correct mode of operation for the situation: law enforcer, public servant, etc. Counterproductive Behaviors: • Needs directives to be in black and white • Fails to exercise appropriate discretion in carrying out duties (for example, is a “misdemeanor cop”— everybody gets a ticket) • Never takes action; spends too much time on minor infractions—unable to set priorities • Is paralyzed by uncertainty or ambiguity DIMENSION 4: CONSCIENTIOUSNESS/ DEPENDABILITY This involves diligent, reliable, conscientious work patterns, performing in timely, logical manner in accordance with rules and regulations and agency policies. It includes: • Carrying assigned tasks through to successful and timely completion • Maintaining punctual, reliable attendance record • Persevering in the face of obstacles, difficulties, long hours and other adverse working conditions • Staying organized • Carefully attending to details (e.g., typos, missing/incorrect information) • Staying current on new rules, procedures, etc. • Maintaining accountability for one’s work, and analyzing prior mistakes or problems to improve performance • Performing effectively under difficult and uncomfortable conditions • A promise made is a promise kept • Continually works to achieve or restore trust with peers, supervisors and citizens Positive Behaviors: • Strives to meet deadlines and otherwise complete work in timely manner • Stays current on relevant case law • Works overtime when necessary to meet organiz tional needs • Initiates proper action without needing to wait for instruction • Does more than just handle calls; productively uses unstructured time to identify and resolve problems on the beat, address community problems and otherwise meet agency goals • Follows through and completes tasks within the expected timeframe • Honors and follows through on commitments, even when it’s inconvenient or unpleasant to do so • Focuses on accomplishing the task rather than watching the clock • Safeguards the property entrusted to them • Makes sure the job is done correctly rather than just going through the motions • Attends to all aspects of projects and activities to be sure they are completed • Organizes and maintains knowledge of other agencies to provide referrals to community members as appropriate • Completes accurate and timely reports • Maintains skill and fitness levels • Arrives at ppointments on time (or ahead of time whenever possible) Counterproductive Behaviors: • Sneaks out before shift is over • Fails to comply with instructions or orders • Procrastinates • Loses case information or other valuable information • Causes unnecessary and inappropriate property damage while conducting searches or making arrests • Coasts toward the end of the shift • Poor attendance – takes time off from work unnecessarily • Deliberately fails to complete assignments in order to accrue unnecessary overtime • Takes excessive/extended breaks • Wastes time “shooting the breeze” • Misses scheduled court appearances or other important appointments • Fails to properly prepare for court appearances • Finds ways to avoid taking necessary training (e.g., range dates, CPT, physical training) • Fails to maintain department equipment • Fails to properly report damage to equipment • Conducts unauthorized personal business while on duty • Gives up or cuts corners when faced with obstacles • Performs job duties in a way that requires the minimum amount of effort (e.g., discounts citizen complaints to avoid writing separate reports, ignores signs which might be present of crimes/problems unrelated to the reason for the call, investigates at the bare minimum level, etc.) DIMENSION 5: IMPULSE CONTROL/ATTENTION TO SAFETY This involves taking proper precautions and voiding impulsive and/or unnecessarily risky behavior to ensure both public and officer safety. It includes the ability and inclination to think before acting – to keep one’s impetuous, knee-jerk reactions in check,and instead behave in conscious regard for the larger situation at hand. It includes: • Drives and otherwise behaves within one’s own limits – doesn’t excessively speed, take on too many individuals without backup, etc. • Taking proper precautions during and after vehicle pursuits, traffic stops,administering emergency assistance/first aid, etc. • Thinking things through before acting (including considering consequences), rather than doing the first thing that comes to mind, yet maintaining a training edge to respond optimally to deadly force situations • Careful use and maintenance of firearms, less lethal weapons, OC spray, edged weapons, vehicle, flashlight, b aton, tactical vest, radio, cell phone, etc.; consistently possesses all issued equipment • Safe driving practices during routine and high arousal activities • Attention to and awareness of hazards Positive Behaviors: • Thinks before acting • Complies with safety rules (wears seatbelt, uses helmet when biking, motorcyle riding, etc.) • Recognizes the impact of personal injury on performance • Drives in control Counterproductive Behaviors: • Brandishes and is otherwise careless with firearms • Disregards risk to self or others - exhibits “tombstone courage” • Fails to properly search suspects for weapons during apprehension • Drives recklessly and at excessive speeds • Gets in avoidable/excessive traffic accidents • Lives in the moment at the expense of accomplishing long-term objectives • Takes unnecessary, foolhardy risks • Reacts in a knee-jerk manner to emergency events (e.g., entering a “burglary-in-progress” alone rather than waiting for backup) • Acts without thinking • Overreacts when challenged or criticized • Involved in and/or arrested for off-duty incidents • Speeds and drives recklessly off duty • Gets in off-duty altercations DIMENSION 6: INTEGRITY/ ETHICS This involves m int ining high st nd rds of person l conduct. It consists of ttributes such s honesty, imp rti lity, trustworthiness, nd biding l ws, regul tions nd procedures. It includes: • Not abusing the system nor using the position of authority for personal gain • Not bending rules or otherwise trying to beat the system by tampering with evidence, slanting reports, providing inaccurate testimony, etc. • Not engaging in illegal or immoral activities – either on or off duty Positive Behaviors: • Gives honest testimony • Prepares truthful and accurate sworn affidavits • Does not yield to temptations of bribes, favors, gratuities, or payoffs • Refuses to share or release confidential information • Confronts coworkers who engage in unethical/illegal conduct • Takes action to prevent unethical/illegal conduct by others • Deals honestly (although tactfully) with community, coworkers, supervisors, etc. Counterproductive Behaviors: • Shades the truth, omits facts, makes false or misleading statements or otherwise engages in “creative writing” • Lies, misrepresents and commits perjury • Lies about his/her mistakes or oversights • Uses the badge to solicit gratuities or favors, either on or off-duty steals • Uses access to confidential information for self-serving purposes • Uses bullying, flattery, trickery and other devious methods when uncalled for by the situation • Breaks/bends rules, believing that the end justifies the means • Uses the position to receive sexual and/or monetary favors • Fraudulently reports sick and/or annual leave • Bends rules for personal gain or satisfaction • Abuses privileges and benefits of the job (e.g., take-home car, overtime, court time, etc.) • Resorts to “street justice” rather than adhering to laws, agency policies, etc. • Succumbs to peer pressure to adhere to “code of silence” • Involved in the sale or distribution of illegal drugs • Inappropriate professional boundary issues (e.g., relationships with victims, informants, etc.) • Engages in inappropriate sexual activity (e.g., prostitutes, sex with minors, etc.) • Transgresses professional boundaries by initiating inappropriate personal relationships with victims and others DIMENSION 7: EMOTIONAL REGULATION AND STRESS TOLERANCE This involves the ability to maintain composure and stay in control, particularly during life-threatening, time– critical events and other stressful situations. It includes taking the negative aspects of the job in stride and maintaining an even temperament, as well as accepting criticism rather than becoming overly defensive or allowing it to hamper job performance. It includes: • Acceptance/ownership of personal limitations and mistakes • Ability to perform under difficult, thre tening situations • Maintaining positive self image under adverse circumstances • Maintaining even-tempered composure and demeanor • Proper use of force Positive Behaviors: • Accepts responsibility for actions and mistakes; does not routinely make excuses or blame others for own shortcomings. • Even tempered • Uses constructive criticism to improve performance • Makes timely, responsible decisions and actions in dangerous/crisis situations • Can perform in the face of personal threat, where people are capable of life-threatening violence • Stays calm in the face of verbal abuse from others • Demonstrates emotional resilience by bouncing back from negative situations • Accepts that system injustices and inequities are beyond their control, rather than letting them impact their emotional state and job performance • Proper escalation and de-escalation of force; using force only when necessary, and then just the mount needed to apprehend suspect, search the property or residence, etc. • Handles the negative aspects of the job relatively well, without extreme negativity/cynicism • Fails to deescalate at conclusion of pursuit • Curbs personal versions (e.g., child molesters) from interfering with professional job performance Counterproductive Behaviors: • Never acknowledges or admits to shortcomings or mistakes • Experiences performance-impairing mood swings • Becomes excessively defensive or otherwise overreacts when challenged or criticized • Consistently blames others (or circumstances) for mistakes made • Worries excessively and enters into new situations with considerable apprehension • Overly suspicious and distrusting in dealing with others • Denies impact of stress-inducing incidents • Commonly behaves with hostility and anger • Suffers reactions to job stress, both near-term (anxiety, worry) and long-term (e.g., physical symptoms, burnout, substance abuse). • Overly self-critical of one’s job performance • Is “always right”—not open to others’ ideas, suggestions, etc. • Argues at the drop of a hat • Badmouths the agency and associated organizations • Unable to cope with stress; worries excessively or suffers other signs of anxiety • Unnecessarily confrontational and aggressive • Comes “unglued,” freezes, or otherwise performs ineffectively when feeling overloaded or stressed • Antagonistic toward fellow officers; e.g., uses abusive, condescending language; disrespectful • Disrupts/undermines authority (fails to successfully carry out directives; shows signs of contempt by eye rolling, excessive exhaling, etc.) • Excessive, unrestrained use of force • Allows personal problems and stressors to bleed into behavior on the job DIMENSION 8: DECISION-MAKING AND JUDGMENT This involves common sense, “street smarts,” and the ability to make sound decisions, demonstrated by the ability to size up situations quickly and take the appropriate action. It also involves the ability to sift through information to glean that which is important, and, once identified, to use that information effectively. It involves: • thinking on one’s feet, using practical judgment and efficient problem solving • prioritizing competing demands • developing creative and innovative solutions to problems • basing decisions on the collection and consideration of important information • applying deductive and inductive reasoning, as necessary Positive Behaviors: • Gathers and critically evaluates important information before deciding on course of action • Knows when to confront—and when to back away from—potentially explosive situations • Makes timely, sound decisions on the spot, if necessary, even in situations where information is incomplete and/or conflicting • Can step into a tense situation involving several people and figure out what probably led up to that point in time, as well as what is likely to happen as the situation unfolds • Expediently sizes up situations and identifies the underlying problem(s) • Generates new, creative/innovative ideas and solutions to situations and problems when necessary/advantageous • Applies lessons learned from past mistakes/experiences when faced with similar problems • Can identify similarities and differences between situations confronted on regular basis • Uses methodical, step-by-step approach to solve complex problems, as appropriate • Comprehends and retains good deal of factual information, and is able to recall information pertaining to community concerns, laws, codes, etc. • Selects an approach that is lawful as well as optimal for the situation Counterproductive Behaviors: • Succumbs to “analysis paralysis:” inability to make decisions when options are not clear-cut or obvious • Unable or unwilling to make “midcourse corrections” on initial course of action when presented with new information • Naive, overly trusting, easily duped. • Has tunnel vision; does not see the big picture when analyzing data • Fails to identify patterns and implications when analyzing data and information DIMENSION 9: ASSERTIVENESS/PERSUASIVENESS This involves unhesitatingly taking control of situations in calm and appropriately assertive manner, even under dangerous or adverse conditions. It includes the ability to: • Confront suspects • Act assertively and without hesitation • Not be easily intimidated • Use force, including deadly force, when necessary • Assert ideas and persuade others to adopt a desired course of action • Command respect • Emanate professional pride and demeanor Note: Extreme dominance and over aggression are not part of this dimension; rather, they are included as anger control in EMOTIONAL MATURITY REGULATION AND STRESS TOLERANCE (Dimension 7), and overbearing insensitivity in SOCIAL COMPETENCE (Dimension 1). Positive Behaviors: • Takes effective, expedient action in crisis situations • Unhesitatingly intervenes in situations when necessary or warranted • Confronts problems, even in potentially explosive situations; doesn’t back away unless tactically necessary • Able to persuade/mediate disputes and conflicts • Able to use voice commands to control conflict, speaking calmly, clearly and authoritatively • Can appropriately take control in group situations, coordinating resources, etc. • Judicious and discrete in the exercise of peace officer powers • Confronts fellow officers who abuse authority or engage in other inappropriate acts Counterproductive Behaviors: • Delays acting in crisis, time-critical situations due to absence of every fact and total picture of situation • Displays submissiveness and insecurity when confronting challenging or threatening situations • Is hesitant to exert influence in uncomfortable/stressful situations • Overbearingly takes over control of situations, thereby escalating tensions and risks • Avoids interpersonal conflict at all costs • Fails to take action when required or requested • Overly concerned with the negative reactions of others DIMENSION 10: AVOIDING SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND OTHER RISK-TAKING BEHAVIOR This involves avoiding participation in behavior that is inappropriate, self-damaging, and can adversely impact organizational functioning, such as alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence, sale of drugs and gambling. Counterproductive Behaviors: • Abuses alcohol and legally prescribed drugs (e.g., pain killers, steroids) • Uses illegal drugs • Misses work due to alcohol use • Drinks alcohol on duty • Arrives at work intoxicated/smelling of alcohol or hung-over • Involved in and/or arrested for off-duty incidents • History of DUI arrests • Gambles to the point of causing harm to oneself • Engages in self-destructive coping behaviors • Commits domestic violence DIMENSION 11: COMMITMENT TO SERVICE/SOCIAL CONCERN. This involves commitment to service to the community. A belief that effective policing is accomplished though a partnership between the Department and the community it serves. Having genuine concern for the community served. It includes: • An active involvement with the community to solve problems • A desire to serve Positive Behaviors: • Initiating and encouraging involvement from community members • Actively seeks input/feedback from community members • When possible, incorporates input/feedback into decision making • Recognizes,appreciates, and adapts to the diverse cultures, races, religions, etc., of the Sacramento Community • Aware of and sensitive to social, economic and cultural differences, including those associated with gender, sexual orientation, race and religion • Respectful when interacting with different cultures, races, religions etc. • Participates in activities demonstrating social concern (Toys for Tots, Safety programs, community awareness programs) Counterproductive Behaviors: • Having an “us versus them” mentality • Makes inappropriate or insensitive comments to community members or coworkers regarding personal, cultural, sexual, etc., characteristics • Specifically targets individuals based on cultural, racial, gender, sexual, and other characteristics • Actively disregards or avoids input/feedback from community members • An attitude that “I know what’s best” regardless of community input or feedback • Blind to the differences among differing cultures, races, religions etc., treats everyone the same Appendix B A Report on Findings from Focus Groups of Sacramento Female and Minority Police Officers Sacramento Police Department Purpose: Recruiting women and minorities has been identified as a common problem facing most law enforcement agencies. Traditional recruiting methods (placing ads in the newspaper,attending job fairs, etc.) have not been successful enough in attracting a diverse police officer candidate pool that reflects the demographics of Sacramento. The goal of these focus groups is to determine ways in which the Sacramento Police Department might improve its recruitment efforts of women and minorities. Methodology: Insight Research, Inc, conducted two focus groups for the Sacramento Police Department on June 21, 2004. The groups were as follows: • Minority Police Officers, mixed gender • Female Police Officers Please see discussion guide on page 98. Statment of Limitations: In opinion research, the focus group seeks to develop insight and direction rather than quantitatively precise or absolute measures. Because of the limited number of respondents and the restrictions of recruiting, this research must be considered in a qualitative frame of reference. The reader may find that some of the inform tion seems inconsistent in character upon first reading this report. These inconsistencies should be considered as valid data from the participant’s point of view. That is, the participant may be misinformed or simply wrong in his or her knowledge or judgement and we should interpret this as useful information about their level of understanding. This study cannot be considered reliable or valid in the statistical sense. This type of research is intended to provide knowledge, awareness, attitudes, and opinions about issues and concerns. The following biases are inherent in this type of study and are stated here to remind each reader that the data presented here cannot be projected to any universe of individuals. Bias 1. Participants who respond to the invitation of stranger to participate in this research show themselves to be risk takers and may be somewhat more assertive than non-participants. Bias 2. Some participants speak more often and more forcefully in focus group sessions than other participants, so their opinions tend to carry more weight in the findings. Bias 3. Participants “self-select” themselves, i.e., they are those people who are available on the night a particular group was scheduled. Bias 4. Participants were not selected randomly so that each person in the pool of possible participants did not have an equal chance to be selected. Bias 5. People in groups may respond differently to question than if asked that same question individually. They may follow the lead of a strong speaker or someone they perceive as “expert”. Further, this report cannot accurately detail the wealth of information in the non-verbal re ; e.g., “body language” (posture, sleepiness, wiggling in the chair, etc.) or the amount of time lapsed between questions from the moderator and actual responses from the group. It also cannot report on the subtle area of “peer pressure”—the willingness to void making a particular response because of fear of what others might think or to change response when others in the group appear to oppose their original position. Executive Summary: Key Findings: • Many police officers had a criminal justice role model in their family or were previously in the military. Some women were encouraged by others to join, and some minority men were influenced by television and movies. • Officers note the Sacramento Police Department provides job security, educated coworkers, and good benefits. They say they stay with it because they have invested their time and their selves to the department. • Women police officers say they think for many women there is physical barrier that discourages them from entering law enforcement. • Both minority and women police officers think the perceived public image of police officers is a barrier. • Women are frustrated by an image of law enforcement as a career for men only. • Minorities are frustrated by a negative image of law enforcement officials. • Officers agree that recruiting efforts need to be at a young age and at the college-level. They convey dedication to developing relationships with young children when on calls, or in the community. They also are adamant that recruiting needs to happen repeatedly at colleges—on the sports teams, in the gyms, and in the criminal justice classes. • Women police officers are frustrated with the lack of female representation in authority positions. They are also resolute that the administration must attempt to be flexible and innovative to women’s lives in order to attract more women to the field. • Minority and women police officers are positive in their image of the Sacramento Police Department and of the law enforcement field. They are challenged and excited by their careers and think that should be the core of a message to recruits. Executive Summary: Strategic Summary: • It is important to highlight the variety of opportunities the field offers, as well as underscore the benefits of the Sacramento Police Department in contrast to other agencies. • The negative image of police officers must be dispelled. • For women, the image of law enforcement as a “man’s job” needs to be overcome • For minorities, the image of the police being the “bad guys” need to be eliminated. • Recruiting should be done at two levels: at a young age and in colleges. • Elementary school children need to be introduced to the option of a career in law enforcement and planting this seed early is key to keeping kids on the right track. • Recruiting needs to be implemented in criminal justice classes at colleges and at gyms and on sports teams. • Recruiting needs to be repeated process. • Offer training programs to encourage women to practice physical skills before taking the entrance exams. • Make and effort to involve women and minority officers in recruiting events so that women and minorities can see their reflection in the department. • The administration needs to be supportive of officers participating in recruiting efforts. • The administration should provide funding or pay whenever possible. • Officers rely on the administration to circulate information about opportunities for them to recruit. • Advertising, especially advertising that features women or minority officers, is a key tool for attracting laterals. • A recruiting message should include the positive elements of variety, challenge, and honor that the career offers. It should also convey empowerment of the recruited— “you can do it” attitude. Becoming a Police Officer Many police officers had a criminal justice role model in their family or were previously in the military. Many also state that they were attracted by the structure offered. A minority officer said his influence was, “I think my father, he was in law enforcement too... the discipline of it, following rules.” Some women officers were encouraged to become police officer by others. One such woman said she was, “Playing soccer with two lieutenants, and played on co-ed league, and they said, “You should be cop.” Programs such as CHIPS and criminal justice classes were also mentioned as being influential for women. Female role models did not play a large part in the recruitment process for women officers, but have become important now that they are in the field. Male minority officers mention that images that television and movies such as Westerns portray of law enforcement officials was influential to their decision. One male minority officer says he had known he was going to be police officer, “since I was 5, watching Jackie Chan movies.” Another said, “I would say Westerns attracted me to law enforcement.” The career enticed many for its day-to-day variety, the challenges it presents, and the opportunity to have a good impact on community. A woman officer said, “Never the same thing,” while nother said, “the challenge and the opportunities.” Sacramento Police Department When discusing reasons for joining the Sacramento Police Department, many contrast it with the Sheriff’s office. They say the Sheriff’s office is less educated and they do not like the way it is run. A female police officer explained, “honestly, I was like well I’m an educated person, I have my degree, I can go to the Sheriff’s Department and work with people that are eighteen that have no formal education after high school, that sounds a little scary to me. Or I can work with people that have actuallly achieved something else already, here.” They feel they have job security with the Sacramento Police Department and know that it is ranked highly in California. They also note that the department has a paid police academy. Women stick with the Sacramento Police Department because they say it has been good to them. They appreciate the retirement and benefit plans. Both women and minority officers also feel they have invested their time in the Sacramento Police Department and do not want to start over somewhere else. Starting over would not be worth leaving the Sacramento Police Dep rtment because they recognize that any agency will have some downfalls. A male minority officer states that, “anywhere you go, there’s going to be drama.” Many also stay because they hold the Sacramento Police Department close to them, and consider it family. A female police officer explains, “One I don’t want to start over, I enjoy what I’m doing, good people in the department, just like any place else, if something were to happen to me or someone in my family I know the department’s behind me, it’s just good environment.” They also recognize that they are an elite group of people. A male minority police officer says, “I think it’s all the things you go through to be police officer here, it makes it pretty special, once you get through and you’re off probation and you’re past all these things it really does, you feel pretty good about being part of this team.” Since I was kid it was what I wanted to do, I never thought about doing anything else. – Minority Police Officer I saw how much fun my brother was having and I thought, “I can do that.” – Female Police Officer I think at the time when I joined, Sac PD was ranked within the top ten law enforcement gencies in the State of California, their standards were very high and their training of their officers was very high. – Female Police Officer I’m having fun, I like what I’m doing. And you know you go some place else you have to start with another whole mess of stuff to get through and know the system and everything. – Female Minority Police Officer For me personally it’s the people that I work with, I really feel comfortable with the people I work with, my partners, my team, my sergeant. These people are family. – Male Minority Police Officer Social, Physical, and Economical Barries Women police officers say there are both social and physical barriers to entering the police force. Firstly, they say the career is stereotyped as a man’s profession. They agree that it takes a special kind of woman to overcome this stigma, and many women simply do not want to take on that kind of stress. A female officer says, “I think one of biggest barriers is that it is a man’s profession and I mean even if you look at your department, you see out of 700-some officers, I mean there’s a very small number of women, and I would imagine that some women find that to be well I don’t want to take on that stress, or join into man’s world and I really think it takes a kind of special woman to be able to jump in and go, I want to be cop, it is dangerous, there are drawbacks to it and I want to partake in something that’s bigger than I am.” Secondly, a career as a police officer often is not agreeable for women who want to start a family due to the schedule and lack of flexibility. Regarding the physical barriers, women officers say they believe many women question whether they would be able to pass the physical tests required and whether they could handle physical confront tion on the job. Many women therefore are not interested in being police officers but rather detectives. Minority officers note that there just are not enought of them on the force for minorities to see role models. Minority officers also note that lack of fluency in English may be a barrier for some. Economic barriers do not seem to be factor for most. Only an Asian police officer notes that the career is considered blue-collar for his culture when compared to the medical or engineering fields: “I notice lot of people who I grew up with that are Japanese or Chinese who I thought were my friends growing up became doctors and executives because they’re very money-driven and a lot of them kind of view law enforcement as a blue-collar job.” Officers say they make enough money to get by and women police officers claim that men and women are paid equally. There’s lot of women because they can’t get over the wall or they can’t drag the dummy... I think just women thinking that they can’t overcome the physical part of it. – Female Police Officer A lot of [women] say, “Oh I’d like to be cop, but I don’t want to work the street, I want to be detective”... they don’t want the confrontation. – Male Police Officer I think in addition to perception is that when you’re looking for models, if you don’t see someone that looks like you, then you don’t see yourself doing it. The perception is that, yes, they might have minority officers, but those things that are constantly out there showing the other side of law enforcement such as some outreach programs that the department sponsors or actively participates in or actively supports, you traditionally don’t see minority officers as often as you see non-minority officers. – Male Minority Police Officer Either [officers on TV] are real attractive or extremely butch...But you have to put those things in perspective, that’s not reality. – Female Police Officer The Image Barrier Many police officers are disappointed by the way media portrays the l w enforcement officials. “Medi plays a big role, they portray a lot of the bad things that occur, they have lot of coverage on bad things that happen involving officers and not enough of the good stuff so when you go to calls or you talk to these kids, they think these officers are the bad guys,” says a male minority police officer. They also say the public is not aware of the many spect of police officer’s job: “They have no idea the technology that we use, the education that you have to have to get through to become an officer, they don’t see any of th t,” (female minority police officer). Women note that there are few television shows that feature a woman in her uniform, and associate shows that present plain-clothes woman officer with gun on her hip as using the sex appeal. Police officers struggle with the general perceived image the public has of them as well. For women officers, this includes the idea that a law enforcement career is more fitting to men than women. Hispanic minority officers mention that police officers are often not respected in their culture as a result of their corruption in countries such as Mexico. A minority officer explains, “For Hispanics, I think it’s cultural. The perception that you’re not going to do lot of good because of [image of corrupt police in Mexico].” Other minority officers say that police officers are viewed unfavorably in many minority neighborhoods and thus they are seen as sell-outs for becoming police officers themselves. Explains a male minority police officer, “As far as people I grew up with, me being police officer was the last thing anybody that I grew up around would have wanted to see because you know pretty much the people I grew up with were pretty much anti-law enforcement.” Perceptions of the job itself. Police are portrayed as the bad guys in some neighborhoods. – Male Minority Police Officer I think one thing is people’s perception of law enforcement, I mean from a racial standpoint, especially for minorities, it’s never been one of the more friendlier careers. – Male Minority Police Officer You get them in high school, you go to the athletic girls, you go to the ones that are thinking of being in the military. – Female Police Officer If we could at least get our name out there when they’re 9, 10, 11 years old. – Fem le Police Officer I think what the department has to realize is that the investment has to be long term, you can’t expect for it to pay off next year, you gotta expect it to pay off maybe 10-15 years from now and every year there after, but you can’t invest a minute of your time and expect a lifetime of reward, it’s just not going to happen. – Male Minority Police Officer Bottom line is, we need the backing of the management in order for us to go out and, you know, do things. – Male Minority Police Officer Breaking the Barriers: Recruiting Young All officers undersore the importance of planting the seed of recruitment at a young age. A male minority officer says, “You can’t create cop after they’re like 20 years old... I think what we really need to focus on are like kids at school and especially the young kids, because once you turn 13, 14, your mind is set to what you’re going to do and very few people go back to the right way instead of the wrong way.” They also say it is important for them to give kids the true image of a police officer being a good person and a person who is there to help them. Police officers are aware of their own responsibility to foster relationships with young people both on and off the job, but also suggest the department create relationship as well. Women officers suggest sponsoring girls’ sports team and minority officers suggest getting involved in church youth groups. Presence of officers in elementary schools is also important. Breaking the Barriers: Recruiting Right Women are particularly candid about the value of recruiting the right kind of women to a law enforcement career. They want women who are tough, assertive, and athletic. Both minority and women officers suggest looking to sports teams and gyms. They also suggest recruiting from criminal justice college classes, and from the military. It is important, however, to repeatedly recruit in these places, rather than only once or twice, as at a job fair. A female minority officer makes it clear: “When you’re looking for police officer, you’re looking for somebody with some leadership skills, somebody that can work well with others, somebody that’s not afraid to make a decision. You need to hit the gyms, you need to hit the sports teams, you need to hit the marketing and management classes because a lot of these kids that are going into business have to make decisions. And you gotta give people other options to look at, and if you don’t hit ’em they’re not gonna even consider it.” Recruitment in Action: The Administration Both women and minority officers consistently state that the role the administration plays in recruitment is critical on both financial level and as moral support. Regarding recruiting, female minority police officer states, “And again that goes back to something that needs to be supported by the administr tion, it really does need to be supported by the administration.” Many officers are ready and willing to go out into the community and recruit women and minority officers. Unfortunately, they say they simply do not have the time, or cannot afford to do so. Many say they would need to be paid for their time recruiting and need an administration that is supportive of that. Those who are motivated to volunteer their free time say they still need moral and organizational support from the administration. They need to feel sense of pride from the administration in order to exude that excitement about the department when they go out to recruit. They also need to know where there are opportunities to get involved. They say the administration should also encourage more of the younger officers to get out into the community. Women police officers also note that importance of women in high authority positions. They are unhappy with the current representation of women and say that women who may want to join may be discouraged by the lack of women ranked above Lieutenant. Minority officers are also concerned that they are not represented in recruiting efforts. Lastly, women police officers are concerned with the administration’s ability to be flexible. They want an administration that can be creative and can fit their needs, both in recruitment as well as once they are on the force. A female officer says, “our department just started to do some innovative and creative things that are appealing to women where as the sheriff’s department just started to do some innovative and creative things that are appealing to women where as the sheriff’s department already has those types of things in existence. They say that an administration that can convey such compliance and responsiveness to woman police officer’s needs can go a long way in recruiting more women. Recruitment in Action: Advertising Advertising was not a hook for most of the participating officers, however they feel that is an important piece of the recruitment effort. Women suggest an ad with a woman police officer alone in her squad car to show that women police officers are able to perform their job alone. Minority officers suggest commercials on culture-specific channels such as BET and Spanish channels. Women mention that the Sacramento Police Department does not adverties with PORAC as many other agencies do. Recruitment in Action: The Message Women and minority police officers have positives ideas about the Sacramento Police Department and are optimistic with the language they would use to recruit officers. They stress that a message should include the variety of work the field offers. A female minority officer says, “they need to know that there’s more to the police department than the patrol car and putting on the uniform daily. They need to know that there are several different venues and spects, directions that you can take your career in once you get inside the department.” Another minority officer concurs, “I think give them the opportunities that we have, I mean you can branch out to all these different things, you don’t have to just stay on patrol, you can go up the management, you go into SWAT. If you want to sit at a desk, you can sit at a desk. If you want to chase soemone, you can chase someone. I think they need to have all the options.” Maybe just giving an officer a day a year or something, nd just saying hey go do something with kids. – Male Minority Police Officer If the dep rtment was accommodating, sure I would do it [recruiting]. – Female Police Officer Let’s be unique and have some sort of training for people that want to go through the training, especially the intimidated women. – Female Police Officer PORAC is huge thing, especi lly for laterals... When you flip through there, other agencies have huge color ads. – Female Police Officer For me it’s fun, it’s challenging, and it’s not as hard as you think it is. – Female Police Officer Challenging and diverse... every call is different, how much more diverse can you get than that? – Female Police Officer Discussion Guide • What attracted you to a career in law enforcement, in general, and the Sacramento Police Department, in particular? Follow-up question: •If you changed from an earlier career path or direction, what influenced this change? • Why did you continue your employment with the Department? What makes you want to stay? • What kinds of barriers (social, political, economic, personal, etc.) real or perceived, prevent females/ minority members from applying for a job in law enforcement? • What are ways that the Sacramento Police Dep rtment can help candidates overcome these barriers? • What types of marketing/recruiting informations would appeal best to females/minority members? For example, what inform tion would attract these candidates and how should it be presented? • How and where can the Department find qualified law enforcement applicants that represent the City’s diverse demographics? • What other ideas do you have for improving female/minority recruiting for the Department? • In what ways might you, as employees, be able to assist in those recruiting efforts? Appendix C Sacramento Police Department Community Focus Groups Discussion Guidelines I. Standard Introduction – (10 minutes) A. Explain focus group methodology B. Ground rules – A/V, no side conversation C. Participant self-introduction II. Warm-up – (10 Minutes) A. Give me a word or phrase that fills in the blank for you in this sentence: “I’m feeling “blank” bout the way things are going in Sacramento these days.” 1. What makes you feel that way? 2. What issues concern you the most? (Probe: safety, crime, drugs...) 3. What can we do about these problems? 4. Whose responsibility is it to fix it? (Probe: parents, community leaders, politicians, and particular organizations...) III. Contact (20 Minutes) (Pass Handouts) A. WRITE. On the first page of your handout, I am going to ask that you please write down the first thing that comes to mind when you think about the Police Department in Sacramento and why do you feel that way? (Moderator: Let respondents write their response, then discuss their answers) If necessary to sk: 1. Why do you feel that way? 2. What happened to make you feel that way? 3. What could have made a difference? B. Who has had contact with an officer? (Hand count out loud for tape recording purposes.) 1. In what context did you have this contact? 2. How long ago was this contact? 3. What was the contact like? 4. Would you have changed anything about that contact? a. If yes, what would you have changed and why? b. If no, why not? Sacramento Police Department/Insight Research, Inc. IV. Your City’s Police Force (20 minutes) A. WRITE. In your handouts, please write down what the words “Community Policing” mean to you? (Moderator, wait for respondents to write their answers down and then discuss.) Moderator: After discussion read ONLY IF NECESSARY: Community Policing is a four-tiered approach. Community oriented policing is proactive, solution-based, and community driven. It occurs when a law enforcement agency and law-abiding citizens work together to do four things: 1. arrest offenders 2. prevent crime 3. solve on-going problems 4. improve the overall quality of life B. Now, based on what we’ve discussed and the definition you just heard, what do you like about your city’s police force? C. Would you change anything about your city’s police force? a. If yes, wh t would th t be? b. If no, why not? D. What values do you think that your police force should hold? E. Do you think that your city’s police force currently holds these values? a. If yes, which ones nd how? b. If no, which ones nd why not? F. Who should be responsible for instituting and maintaining these values? G. How do you think your city’s police force could best incorporate those values? V. Characteristics (30 minutes) A. What are the most important tasks of police officer? B. WRITE. In your handouts, please write down the traits or qualities that you feel good community-oriented police officer should have. (Moderator, wait for respondents to write their answers down and then discuss.) Moderator: After discussion hand-out and discuss the POST Peace Officer Traits Handout: Now, based on what we’ve discussed and the traits you have just seen, what traits are most important for police officers? C. What kind of person is most likely to embody those characteristics or qualities? D. How might we determine if that person possesses the necessary qualities? E. Do you think that these qualities or characteristics can be taught to individuals? F. Why do you think that officers go into the job? (After complete discussion, probe: Is it because of their spirit of adventure, or their spirit of service?) 1. Which one do you think is more important? Why? (Make sure to discuss “spirit of service” in more detail. This is what we’re looking for in police.) G. Wh t characteristics or qualities might not be appropriate for police officers? H. How might we determine if they possess these qualities? I. Thinking about all of the traits we’d like to see in our new and existing police officers, where do you think we can go to find these types of candidates? Sources? VI. Citizen’s Role (15 minutes) A. Do community leaders have any responsibilities in assisting police departments? Why/Why not? B. Wh t do you think is the best w y to do effective outre ch campaigns, and how to partner with your organization? C. Would you be willing to assist in any way as a community leader/citizen and participate in policy making, outreach recruitment efforts and hiring? Why/Why not? D. Would you want to be a part of a Steering Committee Group and provide your input? MODERATOR, READ: The Hiring in the Spirit of Service Steering Committee Group consists of Law Enforcement, City, and Community members. They meet quarterly to provide insight and guidance on the Hiring in the Spirit of Service grant project currently underway at the Sacramento Police Department. This project will review the Department’s hiring practices for police officers in the areas of: Recruiting, Community Outreach, Occupational Testing, and Psychological Screening, to identify best practices in hiring community- or service-oriented police officer candidates. E. Would you be interested in participating in an oral interview panels? Why/Why not? • Do you feel that it is feasible to have this type of panels? Why/Why not? Benefits? VII. Recruitment Ads (15 minutes) Show one :30–second video and 5 print ads. A. What is your first impression of this ad? B. What is the message of this ad? C. What do you like/dislike about this ad? D. Is this appealing to citizen looking for job as police officer? What do you think makes it appealing? E. Is this consistent with the traits we are looking for in a police officer? F. How would you make this ad more effective? Is there anything missing that would make it better and more likely to motivate potential candidates to call? G. Will this ad appeal to our diverse community? H. How would you rate this ad on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is that the ad is not convincing at all and 10 is very convincing. VIII. Wrap-Up (5 minutes) A. WRITE. When you think about all of the issues we have discussed, and about the ones that are really important to you, who is on your side? 1. Who is working for the kind of changes we have talked about? 2. Who is working against them? 3. What do you see the next police force changing? MODERATOR: Pass Sign-up sheets for steering committee and interview panel at end of focus groups. Appendix D Performance Appraisal of Police Officers Sacramento Police Department Prepared by: William Donnoe, Ed.D. Evan Sundby, Ph.D. July 2004 Summary ............................................................................. 105 Background .......................................................................... 105 Review of the Literature .......................................................... 105 Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights .................................. 106 Personnel Records ................................................................. 106 Sacramento Police Department Policy ............................................... 107 Responsibilities of Sergeants/Supervisors ......................................... 107 Citizen Complaints ................................................................ 107 Employee Appraisal Files .......................................................... 108 Performance Appraisal Dimensions .................................................... 109 Operationally Defined Performance Appraisal Dimensions ............................ 111 A Model for Police Officer Performance Appraisal .................................... 115 Input from Police Department Personnel ............................................ 115 Data from Personnel Files ......................................................... 115 Unit Performance .................................................................. 115 Self Appraisal .................................................................... 115 References .......................................................................... 116 Attachment 1. Appraisal Forms and Instructions ...................................... 117 Summary This manual provides a model and mechanism for performance appraisal of Police Officers for the City of Sacramento Police Department. This Police Officer appraisal process was developed under a grant: “Hiring in the Spirit of Service,” from the United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing (COPS). This grant allowed the Sacramento Police Department to systematically study the traits that Police Officers require for success on the job. These traits were coupled with behavioral dimensions identified in job analysis work completed by POST. Together, these traits and behavioral dimensions form the framework for this Police Officer performance appraisal process. The current policies of the Department were applied to the new performance appraisal process. Using a 360o evaluation model, the appraisal process gathers performance data from a number of different sources, such as direct supervisor observations, peer/team input, existing personnel files, and overall team/unit performance. This performance appraisal system is designed to be utilized for Police Officers who have completed their field training phase and initial probationary period. The process culmin ates in a formative appraisal of an Officer’s job performance, and provides a mechanism for the supervisor to construct specific job-related feedback that is designed to acknowledge good performance, improve deficiencies, and increase officer/team/unit safety. Further, the data collected as a result of applying this performance appraisal process could be a foundation for further research related to Hiring in the Spirit of Service, leadership potential, and overall organizational assessment. Background Review of the Literature Systematic performance appraisal is regarded by some as the key to employee development and as the centerpiece of an effective police personnel system (Travis and Brann, 1997). Kramer (1998) stated that “Performance evaluation remains essential to keeping a cadre of dedicated, hardworking, employees. Because every organization is unique, law enforcement agencies should create individualized, effective performance evaluation systems.” Purposes of police personnel appraisal include an objective assessment of performance as it relates to specific job tasks as well as to overall organizational goals. It promotes common understanding between the officer and his or her supervisor. Often times, performance appraisal has been perceived as primarily a mechanism for negative feedback. However, it must be recognized that the appraisal assesses both job-related strengths and weaknesses. Based on the results of the appraisal, an officer is provided feedback about his or her performance and developing courses of action to improve performance where needed. Appraisal systems can also be used for making decisions about assignments and promotions, as well as to determine department-wide training needs (Bennett and Hess, 2001). Some authors have identified the following as the most important elements of performance appraisal system: they are job-centered and focus on the specific task or tasks to be performed; they are clear and simply stated; they are observable as well as objective; they target actual on-the-job performance; and they are measurable in terms of predetermined performance standards (More, Wegener, and Miller, 1999) Traditionally, police officer performance appraisal has been unidimensional. That is, the officer’s supervisor rates the officer based on the supervisor’s observations during the rating period. More recently, however, 360o evaluation model has been developed. This system has also been referred to as multi-rater systems or full-circle appraisal (Lepsinger and Licia, 1997). The core of 360o performance appraisal system involves collecting job performance data from a number of different sources, such as direct supervisor observations, peer/team input, existing personnel files, and overall team/unit performance. The current project involves the development of a performance apprisal system for the position of Police Officer for the Sacramento City Police Department under a grant: “Hiring in the Spirit of Service,” from the United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing. The foundation of the performance appraisal system is the 360o model described bove. This performance appraisal system was specifically tailored for the Sacramento Police Department. The grant allowed the Sacramento Police Department to systematically study the traits that Police Officers require for success on the job. These traits were coupled with behavioral dimensions identified in job analysis work completed by the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST). Together, these traits and behavioral dimensions form the framework for the 360o performance appraisal system. In addition to this, the development of the performance appraisal system was guided by California State Law, specifically the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (Marr and Marchant, 2001), as well as by the policies of the Sacramento Police Department and the current employment contract between the City of Sacramento and the Sacramento Peace Officers Association. Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights The Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (here after referred to as the Act) specifies procedural rights that must be provided to Police Officers when they are subject to investigation or discipline (the Act appears in Government Code Sections 3300-3311). Performance appraisal is not an investigative process, nor a foundation for discipline. Yet, some of the aspects of the Act are relevant when considering an appraisal process for Police Officers. These are discussed below. Personnel Records The term “personnel record” is defined in Penal Code Sec. 832.8 s: “any file maintained under that individual’s name by his or her employing agency and containing any records relating to” issues of employee appraisal (among other related areas). Police Officers have the right to receive notice of adverse comments entered into their personnel files,and have 30 days to make response to such comments (Govt. Code Secs. 3305and 3306). This right does not extend to comments that are made in connection with a promotional examination. However, this has direct implications for the disposition of any report of Police Officer’s performance, such as may be provided in a performance appraisal report. A 2000 amendment to the Act gives a Police Officer the right to inspect personnel files that are used or have been used to make any personnel decisions (Sec. 3306.5). This new section also permits an Officer to request correction or deletion of material that he/she believes was mistakenly or unlawfully placed in the file. Therefore, the Police Officer performance appraisal process should include a mechanism for the affected Officer to receive, review and comment on all appraisal reports that are to become part of any personnel file, within the requirements of the Act. Sacramento Police Department Policy Responsibilities of Sergeants/Supervisors. The General Orders of the Sacramento Police Department (120.03) specify responsibilities of Sergeants, to include: Sergeants/supervisory personnel shall generally be members appointed in charge of one or more employees. In ddition to general and individual responsibilities of all employees, each is specifically responsible for the following: 1. Closely monitoring the activities of subordinates, making corrections whenever necessary and commanding where appropriate. 2. Supervising with firmness, deliberation, and impartiality. The supervisor shall take immediate action when: any subordinate violates any departmental general, office, divisional or special order; a complaint is lodged against an employee; or an employee performs above and beyond the call of duty. 3. Providing le dership to include le ding others to the fulfillment of common go ls and objectives, on-thejob tr ining s needed for efficient oper tion, and coordin tion of effort when more th n one employee is involved. 4. Exercising direct command in m nner that ssures the good order, conduct, discipline and efficiency of subordin tes. Exercise of command m y extend to subordin tes outside of the usu l sphere of supervision if the objective or integrity of the Department so requires; or if no other provision is m de for tempor rily unsupervised personnel. 5. Enforcing Department rules to ensure compliance with Department policies and procedures. 6. Inspecting activities, personnel, and equipment under their supervision and initiate suitable action in the event of failure, error, violation, misconduct or neglect of duty by subordinate. 7. Having working knowledge of the duties and responsibilities of subordinates. They shall observe contacts made with the public, outside agencies, and other employees and be available for assistance or instruction. Field supervisors shall respond to calls of serious emergencies, felonies in progress, and others unless actively engaged in a police incident. They should observe the conduct of the assigned personnel and take charge when necessary. Citizen Complaints Penal Code Sec. 832.5 requires every law enforcement agency in California to establish a procedure to investigate complaints against peace officers made by members of the public. Sacramento Police Department General Order 220.01, and the Department’s Complaint Manual address this Penal Code Section, and provide specific policy regarding citizen complaints. Citizen complaints against Police Officer constitute “adverse comments” with reg rd to the Act. This requires review by the Officer before such comments can be placed into a personnel file. Since citizen input may be part of the complete performance appraisal system, care must be taken with regard to how the citizen input is solicited, what form it will constitute, and how the inform tion is handled. Employee Appraisal Files The General Orders (257.01 “Employee Appraisal File”) go on to provide specific policy and procedure for performance appraisals as follows: PURPOSE To establish criteria and procedures for the content and maintenance of employee appraisal files. POLICY To maintain n employee appraisal files on the divisional level. PROCEDURE A. MAINTENANCE 1. An employee appraisal file shall be maintained on every employee on the divisional level. 2. The material in the file shall serve as supervisory aid to identify weak areas as well as special accomplishments of an employee while working in particular division. 3. Official Chiefs shall ensure an employee appraisal file is kept on all employees under their command. 4. The file shall be maintained by each division commander and shall include each employee and supervisor assigned to the division. 5. Office Chiefs shall maintain a file on each division commander within the office. 6. The Chief of Police shall maintain an employee appraisal file on each Office Chief and the Captain, Office of the Chief, and maintain appraisal files on all employees assigned to the Office of the Chief. 7. The file shall be examined each year at the time of the employee’s yearly performance appraisal. 8. Documented disciplinary actions, or other related dverse documented comments entered in the employee’s appraisal file, shall be removed from the file after one year from the date of documentation. B. CONTENT 1. The material to be included in the employee appraisal file shall consist of any information that could be utilized by supervisor during the evaluation of an employee. Such information shall include, but not be limited to: a. Documentation of oral reprimands, counseling sessions, or verbal warnings b. Copies of letters or reprimands c. Copies of letters of suspensions d. Letters of commendation, awards, and certificates e. Copies of quarterly inspection sheets, performance evaluations, etc. f. General order verification sheets g. Copies of injury reports h. Copies of transfer requests i. Calendar pages 2. Nothing adverse to the employee’s interest shall be entered into the employee appraisal file without the employee having first read and signed the document. a. If an employee refuses to sign the document, the refusal shall be indicated on the paper with the date, time and supervisor’s initials. b. An employee may add written comments to any document placed in the file. 3. Employees shall be allowed to inspect the folder when convenient and in the presence of supervisor. 4. When employees transfer to another Division, their appraisal file shall be forwarded to the employee’s new assignment. This is also consistent with the current labor contract, Section 23.14 (Agreement Between the Sacramento Peace Officers Association and the City of Sacramento, 2001 - 2005). Performance Appraisal Dimensions Under a grant from the United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing, the Sacramento Police Department systematically studied the traits that Police Officers require for success on the job. Of particular interest in this review was the concept of “Hiring in the Spirit of Service,” and how the traits needed for success could include those skill sets necessary for community policing. Within this context, the following traits were identified as core v alues for Sacramento Police Department Officers by community and internal focus groups: Adaptability, Commitment to Service, Communication Skills, Compassion, Empathy, Flexibility, Honesty, Integrity, Objectivity, Patience, Personal Interest, Respect, Social Concern, Strong Work Ethic, Tolerance, Wisdom. The Sacramento Police Department’s recruiting campaign for new Entry Level Police Cadets specifies the following core values: Courage, Involvement, Compassion, Dedication, Commitment, Integrity, Communication. The California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) has systematically studied the traits required for the Police Officer job. These are stated in 1) POST’s behavioral dimensions, 2) POSTS’s psychological screening dimensions, and 3) POST’s oral interview guidelines. The POST behavioral dimensions include: Communication Skills, Problem Solving Ability, Learning Ability, Judgment under Pressure, Observational Skills, Willingness to Confront Problems, Interest in People, Interpersonal Sensitivity, Desire for Self-improvement, Appearance, Dependability, Physical Ability, Integrity, Operation of a Motor Vehicle, Credibility as a Witness in Court. The POST psychological screening dimensions include: Social Competence, Teamwork, Adaptability/ Flexibility, Conscientiousness/ Dependability, Impulse Control/Attention to Safety, Integrity/Ethics, Emotional Regulation and Stress Tolerance, Decision Making and Judgment, Assertiveness/Persuasiveness, Avoiding Substance Abuse and Other Risk Taking Behavior. The POST or l interview tr its include: Experience, Problem Solving, Communication Skills, Interest/Motivation, Interpersonal Skills, Community Involvement/Awareness. From these various sets of dimensions or Police Officer traits, common elements were identified and new composite groupings of traits were generated, and identified as the Performance Appraisal Dimensions for the City of Sacramento Police Department, Police Officer position. Figure 1 shows these dimensions, and how they are related to the other job analysis sources. Following Figure 1, these Performance Appraisal Dimensions are operationally defined, to include examples of positive behaviors and counterproductive behaviors. Figure 1. Overview of Police Officer Dimensions SPD Community Policing Focus Group Communication Skills Compassion, Empathy, Tolerance, Respect Honesty and Integrity Personal Interest Commitment to Service and Social Concern Strong Work Ethic Objectivity, Wisdom Adaptability/Flexibility Patience SPD Recruiting Campaign Communication Compassion Integrity Commitment and Involvement Dedication Courage POST Peace Officer Job Dimensions (Behavioral Dimensions) Communication Skills, Credibility as a Witness in Court Interpersonal Sensitivity, Interest in People Integrity Dependability, Desire for Self-improvement Observational Skill, Problem Solving Ability, Judgment Under Pressure, Willingness to Confront Problems Appearance Physical Ability Operation of a Motor Vehicle Learning Ability POST Psychological Screening Dimensions Social Competence, Teamwork Integrity/Ethics Conscientiousness/Dependability Decision Making and Judgment, Assertiveness/Persu siveness Adaptability/Flexibility Impulse Control/Attention to Safety Emotional Regulation and Stress Tolerance Avoiding Substance Abuse and Other Risk Taking Behavior POST Oral Interview Dimensions Communication Skills Interpersonal Skills Interest / Motivation Community Involvement / Awareness Experience Problem Solving SPD Performance Appraisal Dimensions Communication Skills Interpersonal Skills Integrity Commitment to Service Work Ethic Problem Solving Safety Demeanor Operation of a Motor Vehicle Operationally Defined Performance Appraisal Dimensions COMMUNICATION SKILLS This includes an Officer’s written Communication and police reports; and oral communication with individuals and groups both inside and outside of the Police Department. Positive Behaviors: • Reports are technically correct and free of errors • Writing is concise • Legal and technical issues are appropriately addressed in written work. • Comfortable speaking before groups, both inside and outside of the Police Department • Uses radio appropriately • Provides appropriate verbal commands in field situations • Communicates tactfully and effectively Counterproductive Behaviors: • Reports often contain errors that must be edited • Uses profanity and other inappropriate language • Exhibits “stage fright” when asked to speak in front of groups INTERPERSONAL SKILLS This includes an Officer’s attitude, compassion, empathy, tolerance and respect with regard to interactions with individuals and groups both inside and outside of the Police Department; his/her acceptance by others; and his/her ability to function as a member of a team. Positive Behaviors: • Recognizes needs and concerns of others • Calms emotional/angry people and defuses conflicts through mediation, negotiation and persuasion rather than force • Refrains from making remarks that could be interpreted as rude or condescending • Interacts with others in a courteous and respectful manner • Provides service/renders aid or assistance in an unbiased fashion • Aware of and sensitive to social, economic and cultural differences, including those associated with gender, sexual orientation, race, and religion • Supports and recognizes the accomplishment of team members • Supports group efforts rather than competing for individual recognition Counterproductive Behaviors: • Does not assist fellow officers • Avoids asking others for assistance • Alienates colleagues by dominating interactions and activities • Gossips, criticizes and backstabs colleagues and coworkers • Makes in appropriate or insensitive comments to community members or coworkers regarding personal, cultural, sexual, etc., characteristics • Specifically targets individuals based on cultural, racial, gender, sexual, and other characteristics INTEGRITY This includes an Officer’s attitude, performance and commitment with regard to following and enforcing rules, regulations and laws; maintains high standards of personal conduct; demonstrates honesty, impartiality, and trustworthiness. Positive Behaviors: • Confronts coworkers who engage in unethical/illegal conduct • Takes ction to prevent unethical/illegal conduct by others • Gives honest testimony • Prepares truthful and accurate sworn affidavits • Does not share or release confidential information Counterproductive Behaviors: • Shades the truth, omits facts, makes false or misleading statements or otherwise engages in “creative writing” • Breaks/bends rules, believing that the end justifies the means • Abuses privileges and benefits of the job • Has inappropriate professional boundary issues (e.g., relationships with victims, informants, etc.) COMMITMENT TO SERVICE This includes an Officer’s commitment to provide excellent service to individuals and groups both inside and outside of the Police Department. Positive Behaviors: • Recognizes, appreciates, and adapts to the diverse cultures, races, religions, etc., of those with whom he/she works • Aware of and sensitive to social, economic and cultural differences of the community • Respectful when interacting with different cultures, races, religions etc. • Strives to provide excellent services to those directly impacted by his/her assignment Counterproductive Behaviors: • Does not care • Does not use customer service approach • Avoids going the extra mile that would make people feel good about the services provided • Alienates those served • Makes inappropriate or insensitive comments regarding those served WORK ETHIC This includes an Officer’s work patterns, personal responsibility for accomplishment of assignments, perseverance, lack of procrastination, loyalty to the organiz tion, and personal goal setting actions. Positive Behaviors: • Strives to meet deadlines and otherwise complete work in timely manner • Does more than just handle calls; productively uses unstructured time to identify and resolve problems on the beat, address community problems and otherwise meet organizational goals • Honors and follows through on commitments, even when it’s inconvenient or unpleasant to do so • Completes accurate and timely reports • Works hard Counterproductive Behaviors: • Procrastinates • Coasts toward the end of the shift • Poor attendance • Gives up or cuts corners when faced with obstacles PROBLEM SOLVING This includes an Officer’s observational skills, common sense, ability to address problems in systematic and safe manner, and ability to make appropriate and timely decisions under pressure, and his/her willingness to confront problems. Positive Behaviors: • Gathers and critically evaluates important information before deciding on course of action • Knows when to confront, and when to back away from, potentially explosive situations • Makes timely, sound decisions on the spot, if necessary, even in situations where information is incomplete and/or conflicting • Can step into a tense situation involving several people and figure out what probably led up to that point in time, as well as what is likely to happen as the situation unfolds • Expediently sizes up situations and identifies the underlying problem(s) • Applies lessons learned from past mistakes/experiences when faced with similar problems Counterproductive Behaviors: • Cannot make a decision in a crisis situation • Unable or unwilling to make mid-course corrections on initial course of action when presented with new information • Has tunnel vision; does not see the big picture when analyzing data • Fails to identify patterns and implications when analyzing data and information SAFETY This includes an Officer’s attitudes and actions with regard to personal safety, safety of other officers, and safety for the public. Positive Behaviors: • Takes effective, expedient action in crisis situations • Resolves problems in ways that does not rouse unnecessary antagonism • Thinks things through before acting • Carefully uses and maintains equipment, weapons, etc. • Consistently possesses all issued equipment • Follows Department policy in all actions that have safety implications (e.g., contact with suspects, use of force, etc.) Counterproductive Behaviors: • Provokes suspects • Careless • Underestimates risk • Reacts in a knee-jerk manner to emergency events • Acts without thinking • Overreacts when challenged or criticized • Fails to take action when required or requested DEMEANOR This includes an Officer’s physical demeanor and field presence; ability to present to the public positive and confident image in the face of adverse situations; and his/her uniform and grooming. Positive Behaviors: • Recognizes the impact of one’s own verbal and nonverbal communications on others (and makes sure both are consistent and appropriate) • Shows sensitivity and concern towards the feelings of others • Displays tact and impartiality in treating all members of society • Confronts problems, even in potentially explosive situations; doesn’t back away unless tactica lly necessary • Able to persuade/mediate disputes and conflicts • Able to use voice commands to control conflict, speaking calmly, clearly and authoritatively • Can appropriately take control in group situations, coordinating resources, etc. • Maintains skill and fitness level • Maintains uniform and equipment • Proudly wears uniform Counterproductive Behaviors: • Displays submissiveness and insecurity in challenging or threatening situations • Is hesitant to exert influence in uncomfortable/stressful situations • Overbearingly takes over control of situations, thereby escalating tensions and risks • Fails to maintain skill and fitness levels • Uniform is shoddy and grooming is disheveled OPERATION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE This includes an Officer’s ability to operate a motor vehicle in a safe manner; and his/her adherence to Department policies related to vehicular operation and safety. Positive Behaviors: • Drives within limits of the situation • Takes proper precautions during and after vehicle pursuits, traffic stops, etc. • Driving practices are safe during routine and high arousal activities • Shows attention to and awareness of traffic hazards • Complies with safety rules Counterproductive Behaviors: • Drives recklessly and at excessive speeds • Gets in avoidable/excessive traffic ccidents • Fails to follow Department policy (e.g. pursuit driving, use of emergency equipment) • Fails to leave vehicle in appropriate condition at end of shift A Model for Police Officer Performance Appraisal The term “360o evaluation” has come to mean the consideration of input from a variety of sources, beyond the traditional supervisory perspective. In the case of Police Officer performance appraisals, 360o appraisal process will include the supervisor’s direct observations, as well as consideration of information from such sources as 1) input from others in the Police Department who have observed this Officer’s performance (e.g., peers and support personnel), 2) data from the official personnel file (i.e., the employee appraisal file on the divisional level), 3) consideration of unit achievements that are a direct reflection of team effort, and have been impacted and/or influenced by the Officer being evaluated, and 4) self- appraisal by the Officer. A traditional 360o appraisal model will formalize various sources of input, and go so far as to collect performance ratings from people other than the supervisor, either by questionnaires or one-on-one interviews. This is not what is intended for this performance appraisal process. Instead, this “360o” process should include multiple sources of data, already available to the supervisor, that are considered in the overall appraisal. For example, it is not intended that an Officer’s performance be evaluated by either community members or other Officers; this would not be fair to any of the involved parties. Instead, it is intended that the supervisor seek out sources of information regarding an Officer, beyond his/her immediate observations. This can be accomplished throughout the appraisal term (e.g., over the course of year), from input that is provided or requested by the supervisor. For example, it is expected that a supervisor will hear both positive and negative feedback about an Officer’s performance; this can come from peer Officers, other supervisors, or support personnel. Such multiple sources of input will ensure fair and reliable overall appraisal by the Officer’s immediate supervisor. Each of these sources of information are discussed below. Input from Police Department Personnel It is recommended that the Supervisor go directly to the Officer’s peers and others in the Police Department who will know the Officer’s work, and ask for verbal, informal input regarding performance. Data from Personnel Files Data from the official personnel file (i.e., the employee appraisal file on the divisional level) may include commendations and/or sustained complaints which will assist in rating the Officer on one or more of the performance Appraisal Dimensions. Unit Performance The City of Sacramento, and the Sacramento Police Department have adopted an Organizational Assessment model that can be applied to any program of the Department, or any unit, section, division or office of the Department. Although these evaluations may not be formally in place in every organizational unit/section/program, the supervisor will have some good ideas about overall performance. In consideration of this, the supervisor should consider the Officer’s impact or contribution to the overall achievement of unit/section/program goals. Self Appraisal It is recommended that the Officer complete a self-appraisal prior to meeting with the supervisor to discuss the results of the appraisal process. This self-appraisal can assist both the Officer and supervisor in determining any needed changes, training, or development. References Bennett, Wayne W. and Hess, Karen M. (2001). Management and Supervision in Law Enforcement, Third Edition. Wadsworth/Thompson Learning, Belmont, CA. California Government Code Sections 3300-3311. Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act. California Penal Code Sec. 832.8. Kramer, Michael. (1998). Designing an Individualized Performance Evaluation System: A Values Based Process. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Vol. 67, No. 3, pp. 20-26. Lepsinger, Richard and Licia, Anntoinette D. (1997). The Art and Science of 360o Feedback. Pfeiffer, An Imprint of Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers. San Francisco, CA. Marr, Cecil and Marchant, Diane. (2001). Pocket Guide to the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act. California Public Employee Relations, University of California, Berkeley, CA. More, Harry W., Wegener, W. Fred, and Miller, Larry S. (1999). Effective Police Supervision, Third Edition. Anderson Publishing Company, Cincinnati, OH. Sacramento Police Department General Orders. Travis, J. and Brann, J. (1997). Measuring What Matters: Developing Measures of What the Police Do. National Institute of Justice Research in Action. Washington, D.C. Department of Justice. Sacramento Police Department Police Officer Performance Appraisal Form Instructions to supervisors: In addition to your direct observations of this Officer’s performance, consider information from such sources as 1) input from others in the Police Department who have observed this Officer’s performance (e.g., peers and support personnel), 2) data from the official personnel file (i.e., the employee appraisal file on the divisional level), 3) consideration of unit achievements that are a direct reflection of team effort, and have been impacted and/or influenced by the Officer being evaluated, and 4) self-appraisal by the Officer. At the conclusion of the appraisal process, conduct formal “Performance Appraisal Meeting” with the Officer. At least two weeks prior to this meeting, inform the Officer that the appraisal process in underway, and agree on a meeting time and date. Provide the Officer with his/her blank copy of this appraisal package, and request that he/ she complete self-appraisal that will be addressed during the meeting. During the meeting, the Officer should be asked to discuss his/her self appraisal. As the supervisor, you will discuss your appraisal. The purpose of the meeting is to conclude the appraisal period, recognize the Officer’s achievements and strengths, and develop goals for any needed improvement. General Order 257.01 “Employee Appraisal File” specifies that an employee appraisal file shall be maintained on every employee on the divisional level, and material in the file shall serve as a supervisory aid to identify weak areas as well as special accomplishments of an employee while working in particular division. The appraisal report completed by the supervisor will become part of the “Employee Appraisal File.” Nothing adverse to the Officer’s interest can be entered into the this report without the Officer having first read and signed it. If the Officer refuses to sign the appraisal report, the refusal shall be indicated on the report with the date, time and supervisor’s initials. The Officer may add written comments to any document placed in the file. Refer to the Performance Appraisal Manual for complete definitions of each Appraisal Dimension. These will include specific examples of positive behaviors, and counterproductive behaviors. Use specific examples of the Officer’s performance based on his/her assignment when providing comments on the appraisal forms. Officer Instructions. You should review this appraisal package and be prepared to provide your supervisor with self appraisal, by dimension. You may wish to recall specific examples of achievements and positive actions that you have had, by dimension, during this rating period. Supervisor’s Name: Division: For each Performance Appraisal Dimension provide 1) a rating of the Officer’s performance, and 2) comments that provide the basis for the rating. After the dimensions, provide an Overall rating with comments. Allow the Officer to enter his/her comments at the end of the form. Make sure that the Officer’s name, a date of appraisal are entered on every page. Police Officer’s Name: ___________________________ Date of Appraisal: ___________ Rating Scale: E = Exceeds Expectations M = Meets Expectations D = Does Not Meet Expectations COMMUNICATION SKILLS. This includes an Officer’s written communication and police reports; and oral communication with individuals and groups both inside and outside of the Police Department. Comments: Rating: INTERPERSONAL SKILLS. This includes an Officer’s attitude, compassion, empathy, tolerance and respect with regard to interactions with individuals and groups both inside and outside of the Police Department; his/her acceptance by others; and his/her ability to function as a member of a team. Comments: Rating: INTEGRITY. This includes an Officer’s attitude, performance and commitment with regard to following and enforcing rules, regulations and laws; maintains high standards of personal conduct; demonstrates honesty, impartiality, and trustworthiness. Comments: Rating: COMMITMENT TO SERVICE. This includes an Officer’s commitment to provide excellent service to individuals and groups both inside and outside of the Police Department. Comments: Rating: WORK ETHIC. This includes an Officer’s work patterns, personal responsibility for accomplishment of assignments, perseverance, lack of procrastination, loyalty to the organization, and personal goal setting actions. Comments: Rating: PROBLEM SOLVING. This includes an Officer’s observational skills, common sense, ability to address problems in a systematic and safe manner, and ability to make appropriate and timely decisions under pressure, and his/her willingness to confront problems. Comments: Rating: SAFETY. This includes an Officer’s attitudes and actions with regard to personal safety, safety of other officers, and safety for the public. Comments: Rating: DEMEANOR. This includes an Officer’s physical demeanor and field presence; ability to present to the public a positive and confident image in the face of adverse situations; and his/her uniform and grooming. Comments: Rating: OPERATION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE. This includes an Officer’s ability to operate a motor vehicle in a safe manner; and his/her adherence to Department policies related to vehicular operation and safety. Comments: Rating: OVERALL PERFORMANCE. Comments: Rating: Officer’s Comments: Signature of Officer: Date: Sign ture of Supervisor: Date: Appendix E Use of the Hilson Job Analysis Questionnaire (HJAQ) for Identifying Desired Characteristics of Community Oriented Police Officers Robin Inwald, Ph.D. Hilson Research, Inc. As part of government-sponsored research project, the Hilson Job Analysis Questionnaire (HJAQ) was administered to 291 individuals, including two groups of currently employed police officers (n = 90), their supervisors (n = 30), and a group of civilians from the local community (n = 171). The police officers were part of a special squad of community-oriented police officers and were divided according to those who were currently assigned to special community-oriented positions (n = 56) and those who were once assigned to this group but were no longer working in this unit (n = 34). Participants in these four groups endorsed items on the HJAQ indicating which characteristics they believed to be “essential,” “important” or “not important” for success as a community-oriented police officer. Since it is difficult to carefully screen for more than a few key characteristics during the pre-employment or selection phase in a police agency (without screening out the majority of candidates), the top three areas that were rated as most important by the respondents were identified first. It was found that the top three areas endorsed by the community members (see Table 1) were “Admission of Shortcomings,” “Communication Skills” and “Frustration Toler nce.” This suggests that the civilians were most concerned about selecting community relations officers who would be honest and insightful about their own boundaries, able to communicate with the public, and would not be prone to temper outbursts or to other impulsive behaviors. These results match the top three areas identified by the police supervisors (see Table 2). This finding suggests that the community and the police administration in this agency agree on the most important characteristics to assess for community-oriented police officer positions. A review of the responses from the community relations officers themselves shows a match with the other two groups on the first two characteristics rated as most important, “Admission of Shortcomings” and “Communication Skills” (see Tables 3 and 4). The third are rated as most important by both the current and past community relations officers was “Lack of Procrastination.” This difference may reflect the organization’s internal requirements for finishing projects/tasks in a timely manner. Perhaps the failure of fellow community-oriented police officers to complete work on time puts pressure on the other officers, creating friction among the staff. In any case, the fourth area of importance rated by both current and past community relations officers was “Frustration Tolerance,” suggesting that all four groups had similar results. By attending to the top four areas in the selection process, a screening program will be able to meet the standards requested by both employees and civilians (see Table 5). If the next three most important areas identified by the HJAQ are evaluated (rankings 4, 5, and 6 in each group), it can be seen that both the current and past community relations officers agreed with their community members’ concerns for selecting officers with good “Frustration Tolerance (ranking 4).” “Work Patterns” (indicating a lack of absence, lateness, and other job-adjustment problems) and “Lack of Asocial Behaviors” were also added by both groups of community relations officers (rankings 5 and 6). The next three most important areas for supervisors included “Work Patterns,” “Lack of Procrastination,” and “Lack of Asocial Behaviors,” all areas endorsed by the two community relations officer groups as well. The community members group added “Lack of Procrastination,” “Work Patterns,” and “Attention to Safety Issues” as their next most important characteristics. It should be noted that “Lack of Asocial Behaviors” followed as the seventh most important area rated by the community members, suggesting that there were no major differences in the ratings of community members when compared with those of police personnel in this study. Since the areas identified above as most important for screening successful community-oriented police officers are included in a comprehensive test battery used by the agency for this purpose, these results lend support for the use of such testing in the law enforcement field. However, it is important not to overestimate the value of survey of this kind. Regardless of which characteristics police personnel and civilians identify as most important, it is longitudinal research and cross-validation of such research that will identify which characteristics actually predict successful performance. The results of this survey verify that both civilians and the law enforcement community are in greement as to the general direction such pre-employment screening should take. Finally, it should be noted that the supervisors in this study had lower adjusted scores on the HJAQ when compared with participants in the three other groups. The supervisors did not seem to value these characteristics as much as did the officers and civilians. A study of the performance of these supervisors would indicate whether or not they are adhering to the standards of their officers and their community. Table 1 Weighted Percentages of Overall HJAQ Scores OCCUPATION ANALYZED: COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICE OFFICER ANALYZED BY: COMMUNITY MEMBERS (HJAQ = 171) HJAQ Scales Adjusted Scores Rankings Learning Ability – I&E 59.53 Work Ethic: Work Patterns – I&E 77.24 5 Perseverance – I&E 65.53 Lack of Procrastination – I&E 78.25 4 Loyalty to Organization – I&E 73.44 Goal Setting Behavior – I&E 69.74 Social Skills: Social Acceptance by Others – I&E 63.16 Communication Skills – I&E *81.77 2 Extroverted Behavior Patterns –I&E 53.97 Enterprising Spirit: Willingness to Compete – I&E 56.81 Self-Confidence – I&E 71.35 Social Judgment: Admission of Shortcomings – I&E *84.21 1 Social Awareness – I&E 70.15 Lack of Social Wariness – I&E 61.81 Frustration Tolerance – I&E *78.65 3 Conscientiousness: Lack of Asocial Attitudes –I&E 59.21 Lack of Asocial Behaviors – I&E 73.98 Safety Beh viors: Attention to Safety Issues – I&E 77.05 6 Managerial Ability – I&E 66.37 Persuasiveness/Sales Ability – I&E 49.06 Caregiving Interest – I&E 60.82 Appendix E Table 2 Weighted Percentages of Overall HJAQ Scores OCCUPATION ANALYZED: COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICE OFFICER ANALYZED BY: SUPERVISORS, GROUP 2 (HJAQ = 30) All HJAQ Scales Adjusted Scores Rankings Le rning Ability – I&E 49.67 Work Ethic: Work Patterns – I&E 73.33 4 Perseverance – I&E 53.13 Lack of Procrastination – I&E 72.67 5 Loyalty to Organization – I&E 68.89 Goal Setting Behavior – I&E 65.83 Social Skills: Social Acceptance by Others – I&E 53.61 Communication Skills – I&E *76.11 2 Extroverted Behavior Patterns –I&E 50.71 Enterprising Spirit: Willingness to Compete – I&E 50.24 Self-Confidence – I&E 64.00 Social Judgment: Admission of Shortcomings – I&E *76.67 1 Social Awareness – I&E 62.17 Lack of Social Wariness – I&E 52.33 Frustration Tolerance – I&E *75.00 3 Conscientiousness: Lack of Asocial Attitudes –I&E 55.83 Lack of Asocial Behaviors – I&E 72.33 6 Safety Behaviors: Attention to Safety Issues – I&E 67.92 Managerial Ability – I&E 59.33 Persuasiveness/Sales Ability – I&E 46.67 Caregiving Interest – I&E 48.06 Table 3 Weighted Percentages of Overall HJAQ Scores OCCUPATION ANALYZED: COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICE OFFICER ANALYZED BY: CURRENT COMMUNITY RELATIONS OFFICERS, GROUP 1 (HJAQ = 56) All HJAQ Scales Adjusted Scores Rankings Learning Ability – I&E 55.89 Work Ethic: Work Patterns – I&E 79.91 5 Perseverance – I&E 67.86 Lack of Procrastination – I&E *81.07 3 Loyalty to Organization – I&E 76.04 Goal Setting Behavior – I&E 77.90 Social Skills: Social Acceptance by Others – I&E 60.71 Communication Skills – I&E *87.20 1 Extroverted Behavior Patterns –I&E 67.22 Enterprising Spirit: Willingness to Compete – I&E 59.57 Self-Confidence – I&E 76.07 Social Judgment: Admission of Shortcomings – I&E *83.93 2 Social Awareness – I&E 72.05 Lack of Social Wariness – I&E 54.82 Frustration Tolerance – I&E 80.06 4 Conscientiousness: Lack of Asocial Attitudes –I&E 62.05 Lack of Asocial Behaviors – I&E 79.46 6 Safety Behaviors: Attention to Safety Issues – I&E 74.55 Managerial Ability – I&E 71.43 Persu siveness/Sales Ability – I&E 50.89 Caregiving Interest – I&E 59.23 Table 4 Weighted Percentages of Overall HJAQ Scores OCCUPATION ANALYZED: COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICE OFFICER ANALYZED BY: PAST COMMUNITY RELATIONS OFFICERS, GROUP 3 (HJAQ = 34) All HJAQ Scales Adjusted Scores Rankings Learning Ability – I&E 50.29 Work Ethic: Work Patterns – I&E 79.66 5 Perseverance – I&E 61.95 Lack of Procrastination – I&E *81.18 3 Loyalty to Organization – I&E 73.28 Goal Setting Behavior – I&E 71.69 Social Skills: Social Acceptance by Others – I&E 61.27 Communication Skills – I&E *86.76 1 Extroverted Behavior Patterns –I&E 62.18 Enterprising Spirit: Willingness to Compete – I&E 56.09 Self-Confidence – I&E 68.24 Social Judgment: Admission of Shortcomings – I&E *84.71 2 Social Awareness – I&E 68.38 Lack of Social Wariness – I&E 61.47 Frustr tion Tolerance – I&E 81.13 4 Conscientiousness: Lack of Asocial Attitudes –I&E 56.99 Lack of Asocial Behaviors – I&E 78.53 6 Safety Behaviors: Attention to Safety Issues – I&E 75.37 Managerial Ability – I&E 68.04 Persuasiveness/Sales Ability – I&E 52.94 Caregiving Interest – I&E 57.11 Table 5 Weighted Percentages of Overall HJAQ Scores OCCUPATION ANALYZED: COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICE OFFICER ANALYZED BY: COMMUNITY MEMBERS & POLICE PERSONNEL (HJAQ = 291) All HJAQ Scales Adjusted Scores Rankings Learning Ability – I&E 56.74 Work Ethic: Work Patterns – I&E 77.63 5 Perseverance – I&E 64.28 Lack of Procrastination – I&E 78.56 4 Loyalty to Organization – I&E 73.45 Goal Setting Behavior – I&E 71.13 Social Skills: Social Acceptance by Others – I&E 61.48 Communication Skills – I&E 82.82 2 Extroverted Behavior Patterns –I&E 57.14 Enterprising Spirit: Willingness to Compete – I&E 56.58 Self-Confidence – I&E 71.13 Social Judgment: Admission of Shortcomings – I&E 83.44 1 Social Awareness – I&E 69.48 Lack of Social Wariness – I&E 59.45 Frustration Tolerance – I&E 78.84 3 Conscientiousness: Lack of Asocial Attitudes –I&E 59.15 Lack of Asocial Behaviors – I&E 75.40 Safety Behaviors: Attention to Safety Issues – I&E 75.43 6 Managerial Ability – I&E 66.82 Persuasiveness/Sales Ability – I&E 49.62 Caregiving Interest – I&E 58.76 Appendix F Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office: Officer Recruitment and Selection A Plan for Community Inclusion (Part II of II). Prepared by Innovation Group, March 2004 Introduction This is the second and final deliverable under the Hiring in the Spirit of Service project, regarding community inclusion in the officer selection process in the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office. The goal of Hiring in the Spirit of Service is to allow HCSO to help “select in” applicants with traits that predispose them to success as community oriented law enforcement deputies. This document describes ten ways that the citizens of Hillsborough County could appropriately participate in the recruitment and selection processes, in support of that goal. These ten approaches to inclusion range from nominal to substantial, allowing for HCSO to choose one or more approaches that fit the agency’s unique culture and business needs. Reasons for Including the Community in Officer Selection Processes The basis for community policing is that law enforcement and community members work together to promote public safety. Both parties have valuable and different perspectives on the jurisdiction and its issues. Both parties also have different legal authorities, resources, and motivations to address community issues. Separately, citizens or officers can address problems, but together, the impact of their separate efforts is augmented by their mutual and coordinated focus. For example, a homeowners’ association can take steps to prevent loitering in a drug trafficking area, or the Sheriff’s office can initiate enforcement efforts, but if the two can agree upon a strategy in advance, the end product is likely to be more satisfactory to both the association and the Sheriff. According to the department’s “Community Oriented Policing Summary, June 2003,” these kinds of partnerships have been encouraged in Hillsborough County since at least the 1980s, and are pervasive today, countywide. In many law enforcement agencies, this has become the way business is done, rather than simply a program or grant initiative. In fact, many agencies have abandoned the “community-based” and “community-oriented” titles that used to be prominent in community oriented initiatives, and just call it “policing” gain. HCSO is one of these agencies. As laud ble as this level of progress is, even great successes do not eliminate the need to continue evolving. HCSO is considering the best way to evolve to an even better partnership with the community, by including the community in key administrative process. Inviting the community to participate in the officer selection process, even in a small way, yields several benefits for HCSO and the citizens it serves. Among them: 1. As described above, it extends the police/community partnership to another level. It allows citizens to not only partner with the officers chosen for them, but to weigh in on which officers appear to be a good fit for that partnership in the first place. 2. This extension of the partnership increases the community’s ownership of the agency. This is healthy for the community, which must expect accountability and responsiveness from the Sheriff’s Office. It is also positive for the Sheriff’s Office, which avoids an unnecessary level of insularity from the people it serves. 3. Moving away from insularity means moving towards transparency —today’s corporate culture must accommodate a substantial shift in this direction. While there are many law enforcement matters that must be kept out of the public eye, there should be a perception that the Sheriff’s methods and criteria for choosing one person over another for employment are not secret. This is also good for the applicants, who are not always aware of how they were selected or not selected. 4. It promotes more informed investment choices by the Sheriff. If department is investing a large sum of money in something as valuable as an officer, the Sheriff wants investment advice from as many credible sources as possible. Currently, the main advice comes from within the department, via the Recruitment Section. Community inclusion means at least one other “investment advisor,” and directly from the agency’s customer base. Once community inclusion efforts are successfully integrated into the officer selection process, it would become simply the way business is done, rather than a special initiative that is perceived to require extra effort and time. That would be the true measure of success for community inclusion efforts. How the Community Has Been Included in Other Jurisdictions Many sources were consulted to determine what has been done already to include the community in officer selection processes (see Appendix A). There are no known books or book chapters published in this area, and no known scholarly or magazine articles on the subject. A survey of several experts in the field yielded similar results. What little was found, pertained to: 1. Community participation in advertising committees or periodic focus groups 2. Community participation in Chief selection panels 3. Selecting designated “community officers” from among already-hired officers 4. Using civilian command staff as a way to enhance community relations. These four examples represent interesting ways of managing agency policies and processes, but are tangential to this particular project. This project is about direct participation of citizens in determining who will be hired as officers. A forthcoming Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) publication reports that about 20% of all community policing agencies1 report using citizens in their officer selection processes. However, it is not clear how, exactly, citizens are used in those instances. The lack of printed literature about citizen inclusion in officer selection processes could suggest that including citizens is so common (one of five gencies would still mean about 3,000 gencies, nationwide) that no one would think to write up any case studies. It is more likely that other forms of citizen inclusion are considered more interesting and relevant to a broad udience. In comparison, over 90% of PERF study respondents reported that citizens regularly participate in community (1. As defined in that study) meetings with police and participate in neighborhood watch programs. In 2002, almost 80% of respondents reported sponsoring citizen police academies, and similar numbers reported using citizens as civilian volunteers within the department. All of these topics have received more attention in the research literature, perhaps in part due to their pervasiveness. Although no printed literature was found that describes this particular kind of citizen involvement, contacts identified several examples of agencies that systematically use community members in the officer selection process. What was learned from them informed some of the recommendations made in this document. Summaries of their practices are summarized in Figure 1. Examples of agencies that use volunteer groups to generally advise the chief law enforcement officer on variety of matters, including recruitment, are not included here. The Sheriff of Clark County, NV, for example, has Women’s, Hispanic and African American Advisory Panels that meet regularly. Because Hillsborough also sponsors several advisory boards already, additional examples of this form of citizen participation were noted, but not deeply explored. This study focuses on applied examples of citizens participating in recruitment and selection. Figure 1. Community Inclusion Practices of Six Law Enforcement Agencies Durham (New Hampshire) Police. Chief Dave Kurz is responsible for hiring new officers for his department of about 20. He also invites two prominent business leaders, school board members, or other well-regarded civilians to participate in the applicant’s oral board. These citizens can ask questions, just as the other board members do. Afterwards, the board members share overall impressions. Chief Kurz reports that citizens and officers both benefit from the interaction with each other, and the citizens are usually impressed with the quality of the candidates. Gallatin (Tennessee) Police. Former Chief Walter Tangel used three to four clergy, members of the Chamber of Commerce, NAACP officials, or other community leaders on applicant oral boards. His former department has complement of about 50. Citizens and officers like sked the applicant standardized questions, then completed comment sheet afterwards that informed the chief’s hiring decision after all applicants had been interviewed. Ocean City (Maryland) Police. This department has 100 officers, but each summer it swells to accommodate 100 more for the seasonal increase in beachgoers. This translates to a lot of hiring – about 30 new and 70 returning seasonal officers each year. One officer, one supervisor, and one graduate of the Citizen Police Academy interview applicants, and provide a score for each applicant. The averaged interview score counts as half the applicant’s overall score, with the written exam score comprising the rest. Because this department had the most formal community inclusion of those detailed here, a more complete summary of the department’s citizen inclusion practices is in Appendix B. Sacramento (California) Police. Sacramento has added civilians to the oral board that interviews prospective officers. The board is responsible for rating candidates in each of six dimensions via a structured interview, and must individually provide scores within a certain range, relative to the other scorers. Citizen participants are selected from focus groups, the chief’s Advisory Committee, and other sources, using “snowball” sampling. Participants go through mock interviews as part of a training process. There is second interview, occurring later in the process, that is not scored, and that does not include civilian. Citizens also serve on promotions panels for Captains and higher–ranked supervisors, and will soon sit on SPD’s panels for sergeant and lieutenant. This agency has about 700 officers. Figure 1. Community Inclusion Practices (cont’d) Sacramento County (Califormia) Sheriff. Citizen volunteers who have some training on the department’s policies, and who have some knowledge of the law enforcement function, attend recruitment events with the department’s recruitment deputies. Most likely to participate are Cadets (younger volunteers who may pursue law enforcement careers) and Volunteers in Partnership with the Sheriff (VIPS), who have completed a 40-hour, department-provided training program, in one of three areas of specialization. This agency employs about 1,700 officers. Orange County (California) Sheriff. This 1,700-deputy agency uses a citizen on its three-person oral board for all applicants; the other spots are filled by a deputy and Sergeant. The interview is highly structured, and an average of the three scores is taken. There is no requirement for the three scores to resemble each other. The average score determines whether the applicant is eligible to continue in the selection process. Citizen interviewers are briefly trained before conducting their first interview; they are selected by Human Resources from the sheriff’s advisory council, or from list of former grand jurors. Sgt. Tom Slayton reports that while some citizen interviewers are better than others, everyone has been invited back to interview again. Citizens seem to appreciate the responsibility, and officers value the different perspective they provide. He also reports no applicant complaints, and the intent to continue this practice, which is at least 17 years old for this department. Discussion of the Current Officer Selection Process In order to propose ways for citizens to become stronger participants in some future officer selection process, it was first necessary to map out the current process. This was accomplished by examining some existing HR flowcharts, and conducting interviews with key Recruiting officers. The current process map is depicted in Figure 2. The current process is consistent in appearance with many U.S. law enforcement selection processes. For qualified candidates, the entire process takes from 3½ months to 6 months, which is not unusual in the government sector, especially for law enforcement. Each applicant who makes it to Step 6 is paired with single background investigator for the remainder of the process, which provides continuity that benefits both the applicant (who is likely to want contact with the same HCSO representative for the duration) and the recruiting staff (who can then put forth a more confident recommendation during the final steps of the process). The steps depicted on top relate to the applicant’s commitments during the process, while those on the bottom describe what efforts HCSO makes to move the applicant through those steps. An in-depth discussion of the process is deferred, in favor of focusing on possible community inclusion spects. One of the notable things about this hiring process flow is its lack of any “select in” data. The flowchart accurately shows that at each step, an applicant is either eliminated, or not eliminated. There is no scoring, ranking, or categorizing that occurs on a formal basis to differentiate among those who find themselves in the stack of applications presented to the Sheriff at Step 10. This means that the Sheriff is simply brought for consideration every single applicant who does not get eliminated. This lack of quantitative or qualitative information was, in fact, one of the main reasons HCSO asked to participate in the Hiring in the Spirit of Service initiative. There is a desire to have more reliable information presented that differentiates between candidates that are promising, and those that simply pass all the tests put before them.2 This is challenge that most law enforcement agencies in the country face — what is rare is finding an gency that is willing to consider alternative ways of measuring applicants to address not only eligibility, but validated job competencies.3 2. This does not obviate the need for the Sheriff to have the ultimate decision in who gets hired; he alone is legally responsible for the quality of the hiring choices. This document was developed with the intent to have community inclusion promote better hiring decisions made by the Sheriff, as opposed to somehow diluting the Sheriff’s decision- making authority. 3. This part of the study focuses less on what the competencies are, and more on how to involve the community in applying them. Dr. Robin Inwald is completing the majority of work on HCSO’s law enforcement deputy competencies. Current Community Inclusion in the HCSO Officer Selection Process Members of the community currently help to decide which applicants are selected or not selected for deputy Sheriff positions, albeit in very limited ways. 1. Background investigators contact the applicant’s neighbors and personal references to help assess the applicant’s basic eligibility. Assuming that these contacts live in unincorporated Hillsborough County, one could make the argument that “the community is consulted.” However, many applicants and their references live outside of the county, so that technically the HCSO “community” is not always consulted. Even when the contacts are within the community, the community recommendations are not always merit- based, because the applicant provides the references himself. Finally, the purpose of these community consultations is only slightly related to who to “select in,” and much more intended to weed out candidates who lie on their pplications or fail to disclose personal information during other parts of the recruitment process. For these reasons, the community contacts made during the background investigations are too little, too late to really meet the standard of “community inclusion.” 2. Another way that the community is currently involved in selection processes is the employer check. This is where the applicant lists recent employment, why she left, who her boss was, and so forth. that employer is then contacted to verify the information. This method of community inclusion features the same drawbacks listed for the personal references and residence check listed in the previous item. Most importantly, this is weed-out step, more than it is rating or ranking measure. 3. HCSO is developing a program that would allow citizens to nominate applicants for pre-academy acceptance for an officer job, through specific community groups. Successful nominees would receive scholarships to attend the academy, and stipends to support themselves during that time. Because this is a prospective measure, it is listed here only for reference purposes. 4. Citizens frequently volunteer recommendations for existing applicants, through phone calls and letters to the Sheriff. From current practice, this is the best example of community participation in the selection process. The citizen usually advocates for the candidate, so these letters rarely serve to eliminate candidates as the first two examples do. However, the drawbacks to this kind of citizen input are: • the citizens who offer advice do not know the other candidates, so the recommendation is offered with no context for how well that person would fare relative to others • the citizens may or may not know what kinds of skills are required to be solid officer in that jurisdiction • it is likely that not all applicants know that spontaneously-volunteered letters of recommendation are beneficial to applicants (if, in fact, they are) presenting an issue of fairness in using them in selection These current community inclusion activities, while common among law enforcement agencies, do not accurately reflect the Sheriff’s expressed commitment to community partnerships. This document will describe additional ways to include the community in meaningful aspects of the officer selection process. Ten Ways that HCSO Could Include the Community More in the Officer Recruitment and Selection Processes So far, this document has described what the current HCSO recruitment and selection processes are, and how other departments have used the community to assist in their own selection processes. After extensive consideration of the existing examples, and liberal consultation with HCSO recruiting and command staff, the following ten ideas are set forth for consideration. They are listed in no particular order. Some of these are more appealing than others, and for different reasons. One may involve major organiz tional change, for example, but yield the greatest long-term benefit to the agency. Another may be less dynamic, but less expensive or less difficult to implement. Ultimately, these are possibilities that were devised with HCSO’s unique culture and business needs in mind. 1. Citizens serve on one-time or recurring focus groups to determine what kinds of qualities are important in officers. Pros: This concept is well-documented in many contexts, and involves a very small time commitment from both citizens and HCSO, relative to the other possibilities that follow. It provides for citizen involvement in a facilitated setting, with specific questions and report to the Sheriff and/or the recruitment staff following each session. It can be repeated as frequently as desired, and it provides extremely current, community–specific data to the Sheriff and/or recruitment staff. Cons: This is a relatively low-imp ct step to add to the existing process. While citizens can offer ideas, and the Sheriff makes selections, the connection between the two is somewhat undetermined. The greatest weakness of this kind of input is that even if the Sheriff were to agree 100% with what the citizens identified as the qualifications they were seeking, the testing instruments to measure those qualities are not always fully established in the field. To implement: HCSO would need to establish citizen selection criteria , meeting schedule, facilitator, meeting space, and an established set of questions to be discussed. There would also need to be time allotted for report to be completed each time, and a way to transmit that report to relevant parties prior to recruitment and/or selection. 2. Citizens hand-deliver the Sheriff’s offers of employment to the selectees, either alone or in conjunction with CSOs/command staff. Pros: This is great for community relations and press exposure and adds unique, personal touch to very significant and long- waited event. It establishes an awareness on the part of the new officer, at a very early stage, that he or she has been offered the job by the department and the community. It also provides sense of empowerment to the citizen participants, who are symbolically empowered to act on behalf of the county’s chief law enforcement officer. It is low cost, with no need to change other, existing processes. Cons: This could be an unwanted gesture from the applicant’s perspective, especially if he or she intends to turn down the offer, or if the candidate eventually fails the polygraph or psychological test, which are administered following the offer. It requires time commitment from HCSO and citizen, as well as some coordination, and does not involve the citizens directly in deciding whom to select, even though it does involve the citizen in the process in an important way. To implement: The Sheriff would need to decide how citizens could be selected for this duty. Someone in HCSO would be responsible for appointing specific citizens to deliver offers to specific candidates, bringing the letter to the citizen, and offering script and guidelines for that citizen. Someone (citizen or HCSO contact) would need to coordinate the delivery time and place, and ensure delivery in timely fashion. 3. Have citizens and applicants interview each other, informally, outside of a formal setting. Pros: Citizens could speak with applicants about expectations for effective law enforcement in the county, in very personal way. The same citizens could learn about what kind of applicants HCSO attracts. Applicants could meet several citizens, and citizens could meet multiple applicants. Could be formal, like series of timed interactions, or informal, like reception. Something like this has been tested, but at the post-hire stage, in at least one HCSO District, as a result of this study. The Chamber of Commerce meets with recruits during the FTO period, and the District commander reports very positive feedback from recruits, their FTOs and the Chamber members. Cons: If used during the already long application process, this would be yet nother step. It would likely involve a substantial amount of an applicant’s weekend or evening time, which would be devoted to meeting and greeting a series of strangers. It could adversely impact more introverted applicants. It is unclear which citizens would volunteer to participate, and how much training (if any) and supervision would need to be provided to ensure appropriate interaction. If this is considered part of selection, interactions would need to adhere to standard interviewing protocols for legal reasons, which minimizes any “informal” status to this step. If this is not considered part of selection, it will not be perceived as important by most HCSO staff and applicants, and thus be poorly attended, even though the humanizing benefits described above would, theoretically, still be gained by both parties. Logistics for coordinating dozens of applicants and many more citizens would be challenging. To implement: HCSO would need to establish whether this would be formal/required or informal/ voluntary. It would need to find series of times that all applicants would be able to choose from to attend. It would need to find pool of citizens from which to draw participants, and schedule them for all sessions. Citizens would need to be trained if this would be part of selection. A place (or several places) would need to be reserved, and refreshments purchased and provided. Some kind of citizen and applicant reflection assignment could be used, or not (“What did you learn about the citizens of Hillsborough?” “What did you learn about the applicants you met tonight?”); it could become part of the applicant’s package if it were part of selection. 4. Have applicants attend a session of the Citizen Police Academy program, to meet with citizens. Pros: Like the previous suggestion, this allows applicants and citizens to interact. As part of the CPA experience, citizens would learn yet another aspect of the department; as part of the applic tion process, the applicants have sole opportunity to interact with potential “customers.” The CPA dates are fixed some time in advance, so it is easier for HCSO and applicants to plan ahead to attend. Applicants and students could simply introduce themselves to each other, avoiding any EEO complications but still allowing there to be some exchange of information, followed by separate debriefings. Applicants could subsequently meet with a recruiter or other officer to learn about how community expectations fit into the day-to-day work; students could meet with the instructor to talk about the challenges of recruiting, and how the process is very long and very stringent, etc. Other than check-off in the process, this would require no preparation on the part of the applicants or the students. Cons: This would require adding another CPA session to the existing curriculum, or modifying an existing session to accommodate the meeting. The potential benefits would rest with the applicants and citizens, but no additional information would be provided to the Sheriff for decision making. This is an additional time commitment from applicants who already participate in a very lengthy and involved process. The quantity of applicants and students, in one place at the same time, is challenging logistically, in addition to the prospect of holding up someone’s application for many months just because he or she was unable to attend specific CPA session. To implement: HCSO would need to append its existing recruitment literature and regulations to reflect an additional requirement, and the recruitment officers would need to coordinate attendance and documentation of it. Facilitators for both the citizens and applicants would need to be arranged. 5. Citizens volunteer to help recruit at police academies, whenever recruitment officers do so. Pros: This is very early stage at which citizens can participate in who gets to be an HCSO deputy, but it falls outside of the actual selection process. The benefits are to HCSO, applicants and the citizens: HCSO can supplement scarce recruiting staff with volunteers in an innovative way; applicants see the department as a true partnership between officers and citizens; citizens can advocate informally for the kinds of applicants they want serving their communities, and can talk with applicants about things like housing, cost of living, and schools, so that recruitment officers can focus on personnel-related questions like salary, benefits, and work schedules. Involves no additional time commitment for applicants, and may save time for HCSO staff. Citizens would be expected to speak strictly from the vantage point of citizens, so no additional training would be required. The Sacramento County (California) Sheriff’s Office uses citizens in fashion similar to this. Cons: This may involve additional expense for travel, and full day time commitments (or more) from citizens. Recruitment officers may feel threatened, at least at first. Does not involve any actual participation in selection —all applicants recruited by citizens could be summarily eliminated without any additional citizen input. Without clear guidance, both citizens and officers could become frustrated with expectations and duties. To implement: Explore issues of liability on travel, and explore citizen interest in participating. Establish criteria for participating, if any. Explore costs for sponsoring citizens during recruitment days. Develop feedback methods to determine return on investment (Does this save officers time? Do citizens enjoy it? How many of your new hires remember meeting with citizen at the academy? Did it make a difference?) 6. Applicant is assigned to call a Citizen Police Academy graduate at home or work, to complete a brief interview, in order to continue in the selection process. Pros: Small time commitment from both applicants and citizens. Additional HCSO time commitment is negligible. Very personal, one-on-one interaction between the parties. Similar benefits to #3 and #4 above, without logistical challenges and public speaking requirements. Cons: Benefits applicants, but does not inform the Sheriff in his selection decisions. Citizens do not have input into selection — one-person interview panel is too tiny to provide reasonably fair feedback to the Sheriff on the qualifications of the applicant. To implement: HCSO would need to append its existing recruitment literature and regulations to reflect an additional requirement, and the recruitment officers would need to coordinate completion of the interview. Citizens would need to be identified, one per applicant, and the applicant and citizen would need to somehow be introduced in order to set up phone interview. 7. Citizens (who have been served by a recruit) provide feedback to FTOs, post-hire, during the FTO period. Pros: Substantive feedback to HCSO, during a time when feedback is already being sought and considered from other sources. The Sheriff still makes selections based on the existing information, but the citizens impact the agency’s retention decisions. Additional administrative burdens are avoided for the recruitment staff. Feedback is provided by real customers of the recruit, based on experiences in purely professional context. Citizens feel valued for their opinions and feel there is true accountability for recruit performance and conduct. Recruits learn that they are accountable to superiors and citizens. Supervisor/FTO m kes more informed decision. Cons: Shifts additional administrative burdens to the FTO and/or supervisor. Some additional paperwork. Relatively unorthodox compared to other departments’ known practices, but very consistent with agency culture. To implement: Some administrative forms for collecting citizen feedback, and some training for FTOs or supervisors on how to select citizens for interviewing, and how to incorporate their feedback into the retention decision. HCSO has already used this method of citizen input, as a result of this study, with very positive results. The initial feedback form developed is included here as Appendix C. 8. Add an Oral Board step to the selection process, and encourage citizen participation on the Board. Pros: The oral board is the most common, documented, place for agencies to include citizens in the selection process (see summary of research in an earlier section). HCSO does not currently use an oral board, though it has in the past. The oral board would provide an appropriate forum for citizens to participate in selecting candidates who met all eligibility criteria . There is some, limited precedent for successfully including citizens at this stage. Cons: HCSO eliminated this step because it was not consistent with agency culture and/or business needs. Also, among organizational psychologists, interviews are consistently viewed as very unreliable predictors of success on the job, regardless of who conducts them. Serious consideration must be accorded to any decision to re-implement, to ensure that it is cost-effective, worth the additional delay in hiring, and valuable in informing the Sheriff’s selection decision in some way. This would involve a large time commitment from HCSO and applicants, and also involve cost and time to develop valid interview instruments, training for citizens and officers, and appropriate locations and times for these events. Time commitments for HCSO, applicants, and citizens could be significant. To implement: Revise selection protocols to include an interview step. Train officers and command staff on appropriate interview questions. Devise and approve questions. Develop feedback forms and rating/ranking criteria . Decide candidate minimum cutoff score, if any. 9. Citizens nominate applicants, pre-academy, for consideration. Pros: Under current procedures, HCSO only ccepts applications from those who are already certified law enforcement officers, which limits the pool of potential applicants substantially. Although many Florida departments share in this practice, it does little to ensure the selection of the best possible candidates — it simply allows for selection from among existing officers from the academy or other gencies. An investment banker or dishwasher who wanted to apply would not be eligible, no matter how well-suited to the job, and no matter how devoted to the community. A pre–academy nomination for the job would address this; HCSO would accept someone for employment, sponsor them through an academy — including living expenses — and have hand–picked employee upon graduation. It allows for citizens to play an important role in nominating potential officers, applicants to pay for the academy and living expenses, and the department to assert more control over whom it chooses to hire. Less wealthy applicants would find this option more attractive, because they invest less time and money up front to achieve the same objective. Cons: Widespread use of this practice, in addition to the existing practice of strictly post-academy hire, would add an administrative burden to the recruiting staff, which would have to track more candidates, and then through two separate but parallel processes. Although relative bargain for the value added (the estimates run about $7,000 per candidate chosen), cumulatively the costs would comprise quite a large amount. For twenty new hires the cost would be $140,000 more than for the same number hired post-academy. This cost would have to be weighed against the anticipated benefits.4 There could be perceptions of nepotism or unfair treatment, depending on how the new process was handled and who was accepted or passed over. The Sheriff may feel undue pressure to choose nominee over self-sponsored academy graduate, all other qualifications being equal. To implement: This is an option that the department has already implemented, in connection with nother grant program. An expansion of that program would be required. 4. An extended discussion of the relative benefits of the less expensive, passive recruiting approach, versus the more expensive and proactive approach, and their relative dollar costs, is a whole different study. 10. Retool the existing process to be score-oriented, using rating, ranking, or both, to assist in “selecting in” candidates. Pros: This option is about repositioning the Sheriff to make more informed decision. In order to involve the community, it would have to be effected in conjunction with another of the other nine suggestions above. The reasoning is as follows: at all stages of the selection process, all candidates (on paper) maintain one of two statuses: eligible or ineligible. With the assumption that citizen input should not directly accept a candidate for employment, nor disqualify candidate outright, such input must place candidate high or low relative to other candidates, in order to be meaningful. Under current practices, it cannot, because there are no mechanisms to quantitatively or qualitatively indicate that an applicant is of either high or low caliber, in shorthand form. While the recruitment staff can make verbal recommendations upon request, they are only based on how well candidates performed on the eligibility screens, and much less on how well candidates interact with the community, complete technical writing tasks, or exercise professional judgement. While completely numbers-based system is unnecessarily bureaucratic, the completely numberless system it now uses has its own shortcomings. Using rating, ranking, or both for at least some steps of the selection process would allow for more meaningful community input, as well as more relevant presentation of application files to the Sheriff at selection time. Cons: This is a major organizational change. Not only would it change the way that candidates are viewed at selection time, it puts an additional burden on the Sheriff if the decision is made to select someone with lower scores or rank than another who is not selected. This does not mean it is ill-advised, just additional effort to document the reasons for the decision. Current personnel systems that use scores and ranks almost exclusively are considered vastly inferior to the one HCSO currently uses, so heading too far in that direction is not prudent. The idea would be to add some elements of formal rating and ranking to the existing process. To implement: HCSO is exploring the possibility of implementing rating/ranking of sorts, through nother part of this grant, using the Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI). Pre– employment test scores would be used to predict success as a CRD. Because it is already underway, this is the most likely way to begin using rating/ranking as part of the selection process. A Word About Selection of “Citizens” and “Community Members” After much consideration, we recommend graduates of the Citizen Police Academy (CPA) as the default pool of citizens for use in any of these new aspects of selection. Although HCSO does maintain close ties with several ethnic and racial groups through appointed advisory boards, as well as with the business and worship communities, the CPA is the one program for which all members of those groups are eligible, and citizens from all parts of the county, and all ages, can participate. It includes people who worship and those who do not, business owners and non-business owners. It also ensures that participants share a common eligibility criterion, and understand some of the basics of law enforcement in Hillsborough County. The CPA graduates people who are very supportive of law enforcement, and some who are not, providing balanced community input. Finally, the program is so popular that there is a steady stream of new faces that can replace past volunteers on a regular basis. Resources Consulted During This Endeavor Before proposing ways that HCSO could improve its hiring process by including members of the community, it was important to seek out agencies that have already tried to do so. In this way, HCSO can learn from others’ successes and challenges, avoiding foresee able mistakes and adopting best practices. Little, if anything, has been written about including the community in the officer selection process. Finding actual people who could talk about this kind of community inclusion was challenging, as well. Nevertheless, the lack of information available was a clear message that community inclusion of this kind is not widely used, conveying all the benefits and challenges of proposing entirely “new” ideas. Library Resources Consulted University of MD Library Catalog Criminal Justice Abstracts Criminal Justice Periodicals National Criminal Justice Reference Service Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe Sociological Abstracts EBSCO Academic Search Premier Social Science Abstracts Social Sciences Citation Index Behavior Sciences and the Law Crime and Delinquency Criminal Justice and Behavior The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice International Social Science Journal Journal of Criminal Justice Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency Policing: An International Journal Social Science & Medicine The Social Science Journal Social Science Research Theoretical Criminology Professional Resources Consulted Gary Cordner, Ph.D. Kentucky Regional Community Policing Institute Philip Lyons, J.D., Ph.D. Texas Regional Community Policing Institute Ed Brodt Kentucky Regional Community Policing Institute Rob Chapman Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Steve Edwards, Ph.D. National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Rana Sampson, President Community Policing Associates Karen Amendol , Ph.D. Police Foundation Ed Barajas Police Foundation Jessie Lee Nat. Org. of Black L w Enforcement Executives (NOBLE) Lt. Greg Guiton and Pfc. Doug Collier Ocean City (MD) Police Chief Dave Kurz Durham (NH) Police Chief Walter Tangel (ret.) Gallatin (TN) Police Kim Kohlhepp Intern tion l Assoc. of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Lorie Fridell, Ph.D. Police Executive Research Forum Samantha Brinkley, HR Director Sacramento (CA) Police Peter Cuthbert Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police Det. Steve Brock San Bernadino County (CA) Sheriff Officer Martin Wright Las Vegas (NV) Metropolitan Police Sgt. Adam Ferrari Jefferson Parrish (LA) Sheriff Dep. Stacie Hill Sacramento County (CA) Sheriff Mr. George W lton, Analyst/Recruiter Bexar County (TX) Sheriff Deputy Tiffany Kuehn Harris County (TX) Sheriff Sgt. Tom Slayton Orange County (CA) Sheriff Case Study of the Ocean City (MD) Police Hiring Process Focusing on Community Inclusion Practices Management consultants David Bachrach and Tara Carpenter conducted site a visit to the Ocean City Police department on December 10, 2002. The purpose was to document the nature and extent of community participation in selecting new police officers. Lt. Greg Guiton and Pfc. Doug Collier hosted the half-day visit. Here are the major aspects of the agency’s hiring practice, and how citizens are involved. • Citizens participate most directly in the applicant interview. Citizens very much enjoy participating. They are given equal voice on a panel of three: one non-sworn citizen, one supervisory officer, and one road officer. Interview is scored, and it is integral to the process that the same questions are asked of every applicant. An interview sheet with the same questions is distributed to all interview participants. After each interviewer issues rating, the average of the three scores is taken. • Have to attend Citizens Police Academy. In order to participate in officer selection, citizens need knowledge about law enforcement, and its context within the community. Therefore, they are required to graduate from the city’s Citizens’ Police Academy, which meets one night week, for 10 weeks. The CPA is offered twice a year, at 25 students per class. It meets February through April, and September through November. Citizens are provided with background information about special units, traffic enforcement, firearms, arrest procedures, and other topics considered to be interesting for non-officers. Participants are volunteers. During the lesson on recruiting and selection, participants are told that there is an opportunity for them to volunteer as citizen interviewers after graduating from the academy. • No serious legal hurdles faced before, during, following implementation. This aspect of the hiring process was accepted as a matter of course, normal business process adjustment. No known appeals of decisions, based on interview panel composition. • Officers apprehensive of process at first, but no longer. Citizens very satisfied. This innovation allows for additional police-citizen interaction, during an important administrative process. It provides transparency for citizens, new perspective for officers, and a message to applicants that they are ultimately accountable to both superior officers and city residents. • Since 1996 the process has been in place. For the better part of a decade, citizen participation has worked and has become a natural part of doing business. • Get the department behind you first. OCPD did not work on buy-in, and had some troubles getting credibility for this aspect of the process at first. • Get both groups (officers and citizens) together for ½ day before the interviews are conducted. OCPD didn’t do that, and it made the interviews less enjoyable, less professional. • Citizen and officer training needs taper off. After several years, no additional training is required – the process kind of perpetuates itself. EEO/diversity training is less important because the interview questions are standardized. No follow-up questions. • OCPD counsels citizens if they do not seem to fit in with the process. Do not hesitate to move them to other volunteer opportunities if interviewing is not their “thing.” OCPD has had to ask people not to return, on occasion. • OCPD tries to overstaff, choosing 8-10 citizens per day. OCPD sends out the four possible interview dates to the CPA graduates. Each day has six panels, and citizens can serve all day, or part of a day. One citizen per panel. Overstaffing allows for substitutions and no-shows. • OCPD sponsors a barbecue for volunteers who participate in the interviewing. This sets a positive tone, and encourages repeat participation. Coffee and orange juice in the morning, and that’s when logistics are worked out for the day. • CPA has a broad range of participants, chiefly from local businesses and retirement population. • 450 eligible interviewers 18 citizen academies have been run (x25 people) • Range of scoring – Although individual members of the panel can give different scores within a range (a range is low, medium or high), everyone on panel needs to score within the same range. CHARACTERISTICS OF OCPD’S RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION PROCESS, IN GENERAL • Selection criteria are not complex. The interview comprises half the applicant’s score, and the written test makes up the other 50%. All other procedures are pass/fail, such as the background check and physical agility exercise. • Applicant participation in testing is mostly compressed into two days. On Saturday (day 1), everyone who shows up for the testing brings a completed application and driver’s license.5 The test is scored right away, and participants who do not pass are informed right away. The next step is physical agility: an obstacle course. Again, those who do not pass are excused on the spot. Agility test is usually completed by 13:00. Those who pass both tests are scheduled for the next day’s activities. This is considered the easier of the two days for police personnel to administer. Non-sworn citizens do not participate in day one selection activities. On Sunday (day 2)6, applicants p rticip te in video test that involves memory, n lytic l thinking, and ttention to det il, using three self-cre ted scen rios. Videos re viewed twice, and applicants re encour ged to t ke notes. This video test is linked to the subsequent interview, where the applicant is quizzed on what he or she remembers about the scenarios, and is asked situationally- based questions about the scenarios. Applicant’s notes are not used. The interview involves other, more typical job-related items as well. Interviews are scheduled earliest for those that have the greatest driving distances following the testing. This is considered the h arder of the two days for police personnel to administer. Two-day compression is generally convenient for applicants, and generally arduous for police department personnel. It is believed to be the best possible option for meeting this department’s hiring needs. 5. The old method was for the person to submit an application, then be informed of the assigned testing date. Under that method, less than half of the applicants showed for testing, and no initial screening was performed on the applications, anyway. Rescheduling was not practical. The process was reengineered to be more efficient and effective. Now applicants just show up on the weekend of their choosing, with their driver’s license and application. 6. Tax forms are completed on day 2. • Practice is uniform. OCPD hires both seasonal and full-time (year-round) officers. Same testing process is used for seasonal and full-time staff. When someone comes to test, they specify that they want consideration as season l, full-time, or both. Need to retest each year to be an eligible applicant. Written test is off the shelf. Civilian applicants have a separate process. • Selection occurs in two stages. (1) About ten days after the testing weekend, the participants who qualify receive initial (contingent) offers of employment. (2) The final (binding) offers are extended after background checks are completed on those who accept the initial offers. In general, department does not wait for all testing to be completed before extending initial offers. • 99% of full-time hires are from an experienced seasonal officer pool. Some civilian cadets are hired as well. It is rare to hire people outside of the seasonal program, unless it is lateral from another PD. Some laterals were seasonal in OC at some point. Use of seasonal officers cuts down on training costs. • Scores are entered in a spreadsheet continuously, with testing cut-off. A high enough scorer is conditionally hired for maximum of ten days until background checks are completed. Recruits are hired to fill slots, and when they are filled, there are no more hires. Therefore, earlier testers get an advantage. If the first picks decline, additional testing may be done. A high-scoring seasonal may be evaluated for full-time. Time to complete background checks varies based on workload. OC expects large turnover in the next few years and may have to look to other options for background checks. Checks for seasonal and full-time are similar – copy of driving record along with a questionnaire including arrests and traffic citations. Full-time hires also have background investigators sent to where they live. • Recruit is done at universities, in and out of classrooms. Focus is currently on parts of Pennsylvania and Ohio. There has not been much success in Delaware, Maryland, or New Jersey. We have not explored Virginia. OC started fall recruiting to allow for greater lead time in preparing for applicant’s big job decision. OC proctors exams to accommodate training schedule, if needed. There is little success at job fairs, even those focused on law enforcement. • Example of 2003’s four testing dates: o February 8th and 9th, 2003 o March 1st and 2nd, 2003 o March 22nd and 23rd, 2003 o April 5th and 6th, 2003 o Training is conducted April-June • OCPD CID (5 detectives and Sergeant) conducts all background checks on applicants. They consist of a 20-page questionnaire, certified copy of driving record, and phone-based background interviews. • 30-35 seasonal officers return each year – more when the economy is bad. 70-75 are new – including many college students. 900 applications for seasonal, 300 test. Variable testing dates will likely get more people to test. Job fairs haven’t been very fruitful for seasonals. OC has started coming to universities and speaking to criminal justice classes. We offer internships and final exam proctoring to get students early, and have also started seasonal recruiting in the fall to give people from far away the lead time to take job. Western, North, and Central Pennsylvania may have 300 applications more this year. OC gets more people from Pennsylvania then Maryland and Delaware and doesn’t recruit in New Jersey. • 80-90 applicants interviewed each year, one hour each max. OCPD APPLICATION AND SELECTION PROCESS FLOW Applies to Both Seasonal and Full–Time Police Officer Applicants Flow Chart Day 1 Application and Written Test Physical Agility Test Day 2 Video Test and Oral Board Conditional Offer Background Check Final Offer Academy Training (If Not Certified) FTO Period / Road Patrol Sample Citizen Feedback Form This form could be used by citizens who were served by a recruit during the FTO period. An FTO or supervisor could provide upon the conclusion of a call, or could return some time fter the call. It is short enough to allow for on-the-spot completion. The FTO/supervisor could use this feedback as part of the decision-making process: does the recruit continue in field training, proceed to full deputy status, or end his/her employment as deputy? In this way the community has input, while HCSO still maintains complete decision-making authority in the matter. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE CITIZEN FEEDBACK ON RECRUIT PERFORMANCE RECRUIT NAME: _____________________________ PHASE: I II III IV FTO NAME: __________________________________ DATE: ___________ The Sheriff depends on the citizens of Hillsborough County to provide feedback on how well patrol deputies respond to community needs. You have been served recently by a field training officer and a recruit – a fully-certified law enforcement officer who is still learning about the specific expectations of Hillsborough County residents and business owners. This is your opportunity to convey your own feelings on behalf of the community. Please consider taking a moment to think about why you called for assistance, and how well your needs were met, under the circumstances. Your responses will be used for purposes of helping the recruit improve the way he or she conducts business or renders services in the future. OVERALL, DID THE RECRUIT UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM OR SITUATION? (Circle One) YES NO OVERALL, DID THE RECRUIT RESPOND IN AN EFFECTIVE FASHION? (Circle One) YES NO OVERALL, HOW FAIR WAS THE RECRUIT IN DEALING WITH THE SITUATION? (Circle One) Very F ir Somewh t F ir Not F ir DID THE RECRUIT APPEAR TO BE KNOWLEDGEABLE? (Circle One) YES NO IF YOU NEEDED TO CALL THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE ABOUT ANOTHER MATTER, WOULD YOU WANT THIS DEPUTY TO RESPOND TO HANDLE THE SITUATION? (Circle One) YES NO PLEASE TURN THE SHEET OVER TO COMPLETE THIS EVALUATION Please include any other feedback you would like to share about the way your situation was handled. This can include praise for work performed well, or aspects of your interaction that you didn’t like. This is only used to help the recruit. Citizen Name (optional) : Event #: Survey Conducted By: Appendix G Proposed Recruiting Ambassadors Program Detroit Police Department E. Lynise Bryant-Weekes, Director of Personnel Detroit Police Department Inspector Morris Wells, Commanding Officer, Personnel/Recruiting Section OVERVIEW: The Detroit Police Department’s “Recruiting Ambassador” program was initially instituted to reward internal recruitment efforts. The concept was to reward Department members for their efforts in assisting in recruiting by recommending individuals who possess the qualities necessary to become Detroit Police Officer. A member recommending an applicant who successfully completes the hiring process is thereafter rewarded for his/her efforts. Under the Hiring in the Spirit of Service initiative, the Department has expanded the scope of the Ambassadors Program to include participation from the community. This expanded program reflects community involvement in the initial stages of the selection process of the Detroit Police Department. The expanded initiative involves community groups and faith-based organizations that will recommend individuals for service as a Detroit Police Officer. Implementation It is the desire of the Detroit Police Department to engage the Community in our hiring and recruiting efforts. Recognizing the need for and value of citizen input in the hiring process, the Department currently utilizes citizens in the applicant oral board process. To further utilize and involve citizens in selection of police officers, the Department is soliciting the assistance of the community in its recruiting efforts by expanding the internal Recruiting Ambassador Program, which encourages department members to assist in recruitment efforts. To introduce the Recruiting Ambassador Concept, the Detroit Police Department will host meeting in October 2003, with Community Groups and Faith Based Organizations, to roll out the Recruiting Ambassador program. These groups will be provided the Department’s basic criteria for hiring and selection and given an overview of the hiring process. The Detroit Police Department will encourage the organizations to play major role in assisting with the Department’s recruiting efforts by challenging their members to recommend individuals who they believe fit the criteria necessary to serve as Police Officers. Members of the Detroit Police Department, including executives, will address Faith Based and Community Groups, on a weekly basis, to discuss the benefits and opportunities of being a Detroit Police Officer and to encourage participation in our Recruiting Ambassaador Program. In addition to the bove, the Recruiting Unit will again roll out the internal Recruiting Ambassador program encouraging Department members of all ranks to participate and recommend individuals for police service. Organizations will register with the Department by completing Recruiting Ambassador application form indicating their interest in assisting the Department with its recruiting efforts. The organization will then be provided with referral cards to be given to potential applicants that identify the particular organization as the referring entity. This referral card will be maintained with the application and upon the applicant’s entry into the Academy will be placed in the entities Recruiting Ambassador file. At the end of the Recruiting cycle, the Department will recognize and reward department members, organizations, and community groups that provide the most applicants, who successfully enter the Detroit Metropolitan Police Academy, in specified time period. At the conclusion of each specified time period the Department will host recognition ceremony to reward the group and Department member whose efforts have brought the greatest number of Student Police Officers to the Academy. Time-line October 2003 – Program Roll-out November 2003 – March 2004 Community Presentations by DPD Executives. April 2004 – Completion of first cycle and recognition ceremony Appendix H Hiring in the Spirit of Service Focus Group Report Detroit Police Department Executive Summary Moore & Associates, Inc. was contracted by Berg Muirhead & Associates, Inc. to conduct focus group study on behalf of the Detroit Police Department (DPD). The purpose of the research was the gather baseline information in support of marketing and outreach effort to increase the number of minority applicants for police officer jobs in Detroit. Participant Demographics Four focus groups were conducted; two among African-American males, one among African-American females, and one among Hispanic males. Three fourths (75%) of the focus group participants live in Detroit and one-fourth live in the surrounding community. Participants ranged from 21-26 years old and had personal incomes of $30,000 or less. The groups were held on May 11th and 12th, 2004. A total of forty-five (45) individuals participated. Groups lasted approximately one and one-half hours and participants were paid a cash incentive of $75 each. Education and Current Occupation The educational background of participants range from high school diplomas to college degrees. The African- American female participants were by far the most educated group, with five college graduates, and six participants with some college. The Hispanic male group was comprised predominately of men who had some college education, although none of the recruited Hispanic males were degreed. Among the African-American males participating, some had high school diplomas, some had attended college, and others were college graduates. Group participants represented a wide range of occupations, including labor, retail, sales, education, management, and medical technician. Many individuals went into careers they were familiar with because a relative or friend was in the profession. Other Job Considerations When asked what other jobs they had considered, participants seemed to fall into one of the three segments: the first one that hired me, the job that was familiar, and the job I always wanted to do. Other jobs which had been considered included police officer, lawyer, military, nursing, teaching, engineering, and medicine. As part of a pencil and paper exercise, the occupations characteristics which were rated as “most important” included “opportunity for advancement”, “job security”, “health benefits,” and “starting pay.” Career Options Focus group participants were asked if they had considered other careers. Most participants had considered other career choices after high school. When the career of police officer was discussed, the conversations became more diverse. Many indicated they had not considered it. The job was considered by most to be dangerous, low paid, and socially unrewarding. Several participants said although they had considered it; they did not like the “nature of the job”. Others indicated they “wouldn’t be eligible.” Most of the women said they would not consider job as police officer under any circumstances. Image of Suburban Police Suburban police departments were preceived to be better staffed, have better equipment and better service, particularly in terms of response time. Police officers in suburban communities were thought to be paid more and have better education. Suburban police were also perceived to be racist at worst and bored or scared at best. Image of Detroit Police Department While it was commonly held belief corruption is problem in the Detroit Police Department, participants were able to discern there were some good, hard–working police who were trying to improve the city by reducing crime. In general, participants felt the size of Detroit, the nature of the crimes, and the lack of resources were the basis for the negative image of the Detroit police force, rather than the officers themselves. Although most of the participants had stories about lack of response or encounters that ranged from insensitivity to incompetence, they seemed to be sympathetic to the Department as a whole. Policing as a Career Participants in each group were asked to describe the type of person who becomes police officer and what type of person should become police officer. The ideal personality for an applicant for the position of Detroit Police Officer would have respect for the law, as well as for power, but would not be petty or a power seeker. Desired qualities included the following: • Disciplined • Responsible • Sterner than the current police • Serious • Committed • No silliness • Fair • Good with people When asked if they would apply for job as a Detroit police officer in the future, most of the participants indicated they would not. This was due to the perception of low pay, poor benefits, and danger. Most participants were reasonably accurate in their estimates of the starting pay for a Detroit police officer ($26,000 – $28,000). Overall, they were uninformed as to the pay progression, the opportunities for advancement, and the level of pay a sergeant or lieutenant could attain after 3 to 8 years. Marketing Messages and Spokespersons When asked “What would it take for the job to be more appealing to you?” respondents indicated in addition to increasing the pay, they would have to have more inform tion. They also suggest the hiring standards be raised and require college for recruits. With the exception of those who had or were applying for jobs in law enforcement, there was virtually no information as to the various careers that are open to Detroit police officers. There was also little information about benefits offered to police. Respondents were asked how the Detroit Police Department should to about attracting more young applicants. Beyond raising salaries and improving both benefits and image, they said young people needed to know more about the opportunities available through the Detroit Police Department, and that they needed to learn about it in middle school or before. Participants in all of the men’s focus groups suggested campaigns patterned after those being used by the Army, Air Force, and Marines because they show not only the diversity of job opportunities, but also the diversity of people doing those jobs. A discussion of preferred spokesperson indicated that police officer with experience would be effective. Each group had slightly different idea of what that officer should look like; mature but not old, authoritative, but not intimidating. “Someone I can relate to,” was the prevailing suggestion. Respondents were asked if the Detroit Chief of Police was present, “What would they like to ask her about a career as a Detroit Police Officer?” Some of the responses included: • “Why is the pay so low?” • “Where does she see the reputation of the City going?” • “What are the life insurance benefits?” • “What are you doing to change the image?” • “How she made it through...What did she have to go through?” • “Was this a career choice?” • “Tell about the trial and tribulations?” • “Why won’t you hire me?” Appendix I Site Contact Information Sacramento Police Department 5770 Freeport Blvd., Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95822 Samantha Brinkley, Director of Personnel William Donnoe, Ed.D., Consultant Burlington Police Department 1 North Avenue Burlington, VT 05401 Deputy Chief Stephen Wark, Project Manager James Borrow, Project Coordinator William Nash, Ph.D, Consulting Psychologist Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office 2008 E. 8th Avenue T mp , FL 33605 Colonel Carl Hawkins, HSS Project Manager Lorelei Bowden, HSS Project Coordinator Lt. Julie Edwars, HSS Project Implementation Consultants: Robin Inwald, Ph.D., Hilson Research Bill Blount, Ph.D., Research Coordinator Michael Brannick, Ph.D. David Bachrach, Innovations Group Detroit Police Department 14655 Dexter Detroit, MI 48238 Lynise Bryrant, Personnel Director Elsie Scott, Ph.D. Project Manager Consultant: Terry Eisenberg, Ph.D. King County Sheriff’s Office 516 Third Street Seattle, WA 98104 Ralph Cady, Personnel Director Rebecca Connolly, Web Site Manager Consultants: Dunnette Group Ltd. Leatta Hough, Ph.D. Deniz S.Ones, Ph.D. For More Information: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 1100 Vermont Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 To obtain details on COPS programs, call the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770 Visit COPS Online at the address listed below. www.cops.usdoj.gov