U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services JUNE 2003 Community Policing IN ACTION! A Practitioner’s Eye View of Organizational Change JUNE 2003 by Andrea Schneider, Project Director and Visiting Fellow Contributing Authors Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer, Seattle Police Department Chief Scott Seaman, Los Gatos-Monte Sereno Police Department Joan Sweeney, Ph.D., Boston Police Department (Consultant) This project was supported by grant number 2000–CK–WX–K112 awarded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view or opinions contained in this document are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Expert Panel Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer, Seattle Police Department Chief Scott Seaman, Los Gatos-Monte Sereno Police Department Joan Sweeney, Ph.D., Boston Police Department (Consultant) Commander Catherine McNeilly, Pittsburgh Police Department Collaborators Special thanks to these departments for the countless hours spent writing, on the phone, and during site visits over the course of this project. Their candor, remarkable insights into community policing, and generous sharing of time are greatly appreciated. Boston Police Department Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department Longmont Police Department Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Portland Police Department Rock Hill Police Department San Jose Police Department Savannah Police Department Windsor Police Department Authors’ Acknowledgements We would like to thank the following police and sheriff’s departments for their time and special effort. Although not all of these agencies appear specifically in this report, their expertise in law enforcement and commitment to community policing added immeasurably to the success of this project. Albuquerque Police Department Oakland Police Department Bay St. Louis Police Department Pine Bluff Police Department Boulder Police Department Riverside Police Department Bowling Green Police Department Sacramento Police Department East Hartford Police Department Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department Howard County Police Department Salinas Police Department Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office Tempe Police Department Lowell Police Department Tucson Police Department Manchester Police Department University of California, Los Angeles Metropolitan Police Department Police Department New Haven Police Department Ventura Police Department Westminster Police Nassau Police Department This fellowship project was made possible by a grant from COPS. We are grateful for that support. We are especially grateful to project manager Robert Chapman, who contributed in innumerable ways to the writing of this report and tirelessly supported the project through its development. Special thanks also goes to the COPS team: Veh Bezdikian, Pam Cammarata, Margaret D’Elia, Tom Frazier, Sheryl Thomas, Theresa Mercer, and Ellen Scrivner, who provided countless suggestions, participated vigorously in the expert panel sessions, and provided their own expert advice along the way. Special thanks to Katherine McQuay for her editing assistance. Our appreciation is also extended to the COPS Communications Team: Maria Carolina Rozas, Kelly Tapp, and Noah Teates, who organized and edited this publication. This report represents the hard work and commitment to community policing of many people all over the country. We remain in your debt. TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION The Advancing Community Policing Grant Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Synopsis of Results From Nine Law Enforcement Agencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Common Organizational Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Recommendations for Future Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 About This Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 CHAPTER 2. BOSTON: SAME COPS/SAME NEIGHBORHOOD The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 CHAPTER 3. CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG: A LIVING LAB FOR PROBLEM-SOLVING POLICING The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 CHAPTER 4. LONGMONT: COMMUNITY POLICING STARTS WITH COMMUNICATION The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 CHAPTER 5. LOS ANGELES COUNTY: A SHERIFF’S VISION FOR COMMUNITY POLICING The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 CHAPTER 6. PORTLAND: EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 CHAPTER 7. ROCK HILL: EMBEDDING COMMUNITY POLICING IN NEIGHBORHOODS AND OFFICERS’ CAREERS The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 Department Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 CHAPTER 8. SAN JOSE: CREATING A SHARED VISION THROUGH LEADERSHIP TRAINING The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 CHAPTER 9. SAVANNAH: TRANSFERRING OFFSITE LEARNING INTO NEIGHBORHOOD BEATS The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74 CHAPTER 10. WINDSOR: A NEW PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CITIZENS The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78 CHAPTER 11. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79 APPENDIX A: THE FELLOWSHIP AND EXPERT PANEL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81 APPENDIX C: ACP GRANTEES AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE COMPONENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87 APPENDIX D: ABOUT THE AUTHORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91 APPENDIX B: PROJECT TYPES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83 FOREWORD Law enforcement agencies are traditionally reluctant to reexamine processes that have proven effective, but what if there’s a better way? Have you ever wondered what it would take to reorient your agency around the principles of community policing? This report charts the progress of a group of law enforcement agencies determined to do precisely that. Some got farther than others, some started farther ahead, but they all learned valuable lessons about the process. The COPS Office has collected these lessons in this report, and they truly provide a practitioner’s eye view of the challenges and obstacles to implementing organizational changes in a 21st century law enforcement agency. Community policing is that better way, and the COPS Office helped these agencies embrace it. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION To The Advancing Community Policing Grant Program The Advancing Community Policing Grant Program . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Synopsis of Results From Nine Law Enforcement Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Common Organizational Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Recommendations for Future Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 About This Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION To The Advancing Community Policing Grant Program Community policing is based on the premise that partnerships between police and citizens will help increase public safety and reduce crime. A seemingly simple concept, community policing actually requires a complex and challenging mix of changes to a police department’s organizational culture and structure. These changes are usually combined with innovative approaches to fighting or preventing crime that may call for extensive community cooperation, planning, and outreach. Change is complicated, and never more so than in a hierarchical, traditional organization such as a police department or sheriff’s office. Aligning a law enforcement agency’s resources, processes, and systems with the community policing philosophy can be a taxing undertaking. For a community policing change to last within a law enforcement organization, the nature of the organization itself must change. Thus, how effectively change is implemented will determine whether that organization sustains community policing as a new policing model or retrenches to a more traditional style of policing. The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (the COPS Office) was created in 1994 by the U.S. Department of Justice to help local law enforcement agencies develop or improve community policing in their jurisdictions. Since its creation, the COPS Office has awarded more than nine billion dollars in grants across the Nation to hire more officers, purchase new technology, and support local problem-solving approaches to fighting crime and disorder. This report examines the results of the Advancing Community Policing (ACP) Grant Program established by COPS in 1997 to help law enforcement agencies overcome obstacles and build the necessary infrastructure to strengthen and institutionalize their community policing programs. The Advancing Community Policing Grant Program To help agencies garner the necessary resources and the flexibility to use them effectively, the COPS Office organized ACP grants according to Organizational Change and Demonstration Center components. In November 1997, COPS awarded $18 million under the Organizational Change component of ACP.1 Ninety-six law enforcement agencies were funded, each agency receiving up to $250,000 under a one-year grant. The ACP program’s main goal was to help law enforcement agencies develop an infrastructure to support the community policing philosophy and corresponding program initiatives. This report collects the lessons learned by many of those 96 agencies and focuses specifically on nine programs that were examined in depth by COPS. ACP had five funding categories that encompass the wide range of organizational changes COPS believed most needed support: Leadership and Management, Modifying Organizational Structures, Organizational Culture, Re-engineering Other Components, and Research and Planning. Thus, through the ACP grant process the COPS Office could: - Foster progressive and creative leadership and management approaches - Help agencies modify organizational structures to support decentralized decision-making and responsibility, most often with geographic accountability - Help change the predominant organizational culture from a traditional, response-oriented ethos to one that uses partnerships and an analytical approach to identifying problems in order to develop tailored interventions - Help police administrators re-engineer other components of the organization to support community policing, such as training, crime analysis, 911 call management, department policies, procedures, performance measurement systems, officer evaluation tools, and documents that articulate strategy and vision - Support the advancement of internal research and planning, because public agencies often under-emphasize investments in such efforts -Improve systems and processes to facilitate communication and flow of information COPS relied on individual police agencies to set their program objectives and strategies. Those agencies were expected to seek out the necessary training, experts, and guidance to meet their goals. COPS attempted to generate ideas during the application process by suggesting allowable project costs that would cover the necessary tools to support the change efforts. Such costs included technology and equipment, hiring new employees, overtime for current employees to devote to the program, travel to other jurisdictions, and external sources of expertise (such as consultants, trainers, and conferences).2 Innovation Through Process Change What made the ACP program innovative was its focus on the process of organizational change. The program’s goal was to achieve long-term systemic change that would lead, in turn, to concrete results. Although emphasis on organizational issues might not generate dramatic or immediate program out comes, changing organizational processes and related activities such as training can result in long- term operational changes that support community policing. Although COPS sought definite long-term outcomes, the ultimate objective was to create the organizational capacity to support, advance, and sustain a philosophy and set of program activities that could run counter to traditional methods. COPS also encouraged applicants to articulate their organizational change strategy outside the scope of these grant efforts, then link their proposed strategies to further long-term change. The exercise of applying for funding may have allowed many agencies to reflect on both short-term needs and desired long-term changes. The goals were to become better police officers, run more effective organizations, and prevent and solve more crimes. Emphasizing process improvements supported the system changes needed to sustain community policing practices and integrate them into the daily work of the agency. Synopsis of Results From Nine Law Enforcement Agencies The ACP grants served as catalysts for a wide range of organizational change initiatives across the Nation. After the program was well under way, the COPS Office sponsored a research study to examine how representative grantees were imple- menting their ACP-supported initiatives and to cull findings and lessons learned from the grantees’ experiences. Nine sites were selected for indepth examination by a visiting fellow and an expert panel.3 After reviewing numerous sites around the country, the expert panel recognized that each agency used its funding differently, custom- izing its effort to the local community’s unique Exhibit 1. The Nine ACP Programs Evaluated AGENCY PROJECT TYPE GRANT FOCUS Boston Police Department, MA Modifying Organizational Structures Changed organizational processes to support a new patrol strategy and creation of Neighborhood Beat Teams as part of a larger organizational change management process, based on a citywide strategic planning effort Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, NC Organizational Culture Used outside expertise to combine greater use of technology with problem-solving methods to address community problems Longmont Police Department, CO Re-engineering Other Components Used a community strategic plan to improve communication with the community; utilized outside expertise to assist in organizational change practices; significantly reorganized the department to support community policing Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office, CA Organizational Culture Funded training in community policing leadership for 300 sergeants and 100 lieutenants as part of a plan to develop a community policing bureau Portland Police Bureau, OR Re-engineering Other Components Created an emergency information system that integrates with the existing technology infrastructure to address neighborhood communication Rock Hill Police Department, SC Organizational Culture Developed a multitiered career ladder program for officers below the rank of sergeant to enhance recruitment and retention; used funds to address an organizational crisis San Jose Police Department, CA Leadership and Management Developed strong community policing leadership simulation models for community members and police; involved community members in significant portions of grant activity Savannah Police Department, GA Leadership and Management Sent teams of sergeants and lieutenants to community policing agencies around the country to bring ideas back to Savannah and successfully adapted such models as Crime Free Housing for Savannah Windsor Police Department, CT Organizational Culture Catalyst for community policing in the department and the community; worked closely with union officials and community members to create an effective foundation for community policing programs organizational needs and goals. Exhibit 1 summarizes how the nine sites used their grants, by project type.4 Law enforcement executives and their staffs brought energy, passion, creativity, and commitment to the ACP grant program. The participating agencies desired both to learn from their mistakes and to share their successes with others. Although change is inherently difficult, these agencies were happy to be involved in the process and proud to be identified with community policing strategies and activities. Even better, the departments saw tangible results: they became more efficient, solved community crime problems more effectively, and got more involved in their neighborhoods. The experiences that proved most difficult occurred when leadership was insufficient, e.g., the grant was assigned to just one or two people without support from management. These difficulties demonstrated that widespread support throughout the department or agency is essential. Misunderstandings during collaboration also detracted from success. In some cases, when multiple agencies worked as partners, issues of power and control arose. The study found that in most cases, agencies need to know more about developing and maintaining collaborative relationships and how to anticipate problems, especially when sharing money or influence. The grantees were energetic about their ACP grant efforts and used their grants to explore better methods and processes. They took risks, as their projects often represented changes that ran counter to the prevailing organizational culture. Successful projects incorporated input and activity from many levels of the organization, including line officers, first-line supervisors, and managers. ACP grantees worked on changes with which law enforcement nationally has little practical experience. Therefore, they had few examples to follow. Nonetheless, the nine agencies featured in this report are excited about their accomplishments and committed to community policing as the next phase of law enforcement in the United States. They are looking for national leadership and ways to build on their successes. As people become more invested in and experienced with the problem- solving process, the desire for continuing progress will grow. Common Organizational Issues Although each grantee’s experience was different, some shared characteristics of organizational change emerged during the study. New community policing responsibilities created new expectations from both the agencies and the public. Agencies needed to align their vision and goals for the organization with the day-to-day realities of policing. The following issues were identified by the expert panel study as critical elements of each grantee’s ACP project: - Accountability - Performance evaluations - Increased organizational capacity - Communication - Community oriented government - Customized services to fit the location - Engaging and investing in mid-level management - Leadership - Networking, connecting, and learning - Resources - Time for change - Unions - Vendor selection The broad range of problems and successes grantees experienced in each of these areas goes to the heart of why the ACP program was so important. Implementing a new community policing initiative is not enough; steps must be taken to institutionalize the initiative within the department. There are many facets, twists, and turns to be managed along the way so that community policing becomes rooted in the department’s culture and practices.5 Accountability Accountability was one of the first themes to emerge among the grantees. Changing organizational expectations led to changes in police responsibilities and increased police accountability to the community. At the same time an agency was changing its performance, it also had to change public expectations of that performance. Tensions often developed between traditional public expectations (reactive—police come in and solve the community’s crime problems) and emerging community policing strategies (proactive—the community works with police as a partner to enhance public safety as well as to prevent and solve crimes). The newly implemented community policing strategies under ACP sought to share accountability with neighborhoods for increased public safety. In addition to responding to every community request, law enforcement professionals were expected to be actively involved in the daily life of the community. Officers and deputies could not give up what they had been doing, but they now had much more to do. Teaching members of the community to work with law enforcement as active partners and become accountable for the results was a shift for most officers. Crossing the barrier between law enforcement and the community often led to reductions in certain crimes. When residents and officers identified a drug trafficking hot spot in a Charlotte, North Carolina neighborhood, police pursued a partnership with the affected community. Although the process was not always easy or smooth, by working together, police and residents moved the drug traffic pattern out of the affected area. After the success of the community collaboration, a paradox emerged that found the police facing enhanced expectations about the level of service in the affected area, and the community’s fear about the loss of police presence. As law enforcement leaders initiated change, the support of mayors, city managers, city councils, and county boards helped legitimize the effort in the public’s eyes. Over the course of these changes, the public’s involvement and participation in the law enforcement process increased significantly. Many agencies found that once communities became aware that law enforcement professionals in their areas were beginning to implement community policing, they wanted it implemented in their own neighborhoods, regardless of the local government’s ability to fund it. That demand created pressure on law enforcement leaders, who had to remain accountable both to the community and, fiscally, to the city. When asked how he believed the public would react if his agency abandoned its new community policing strategies, the Lowell, Massachusetts’ superintendent of police responded by predicting that citizens would bring complaints not only to him as the chief law enforcement executive, but to the city council as well. The ACP grant program was designed to provide law enforcement agencies a unique opportunity to change in ways that might otherwise have been very difficult. Law enforcement agencies are like any other established organizations: reluctant to abandon traditional methodologies and organizational structures. The support of the COPS Office combined with the support of law enforcement and government executives gave credibility to efforts to change these organizations, which, in turn, increased support for the projects among both line officers and community members. This widespread support helped participants move more quickly and hold themselves more accountable for meeting their goals. Many agencies were willing to take risks and experiment with ideas for which they might not have been able to raise support without the ACP program. Performance Evaluations As law enforcement agencies incorporated community policing ideas into their organizational values, performance evaluations were often revised to reflect the new practices and requirements. This helped institutionalize the change, by literally integrating it into personnel practices. In Longmont, Colorado police developed Partners in Performance, an evaluation system that reflected such basic tenets of community policing as partnership, ownership, personalization, relationships, permanence, and community oriented activity. New job descriptions were created to reflect these ideals. Administrators also developed action plans that incorporated community policing goals. Monthly performance evaluations were conducted in which supervisors had 51-percent input and the employees being evaluated had 49-percent input. Employees could contest the outcome and request further review if they felt it was necessary. These monthly assessments over the course of a year meant that annual assessments did not come as a surprise. In Rock Hill, South Carolina the police department built community policing practices and skills into its career ladder. An evaluation was part of each step up the ladder, and utilization of community policing strategies is now integral to a successful move upward. When active community policing involvement became part of the promotion process, it became more difficult for officers who opposed it to just "grin and bear it." Most began to truly consider community policing as a serious element of their jobs. This helped institutionalize and perpetuate community policing philosophies within the department. For many officers and deputies, this change was difficult. Some left their agencies rather than change. More frequently, however, law enforcement professionals who might have initially tolerated the change as an unpleasant passing phase changed their attitudes as they began to feel more effective at their jobs and watched support for community policing grow within the neighborhoods they were sworn to protect and serve. Increased Organizational Capacity Building an organization’s capacity for change means exposing its leaders and personnel to new methods of training, technical assistance, and investing resources—including time, talent, and money—in the institutionalization of new practices. Achieving this requires a willingness to learn from outside of traditional policing frameworks, to bring in talent and expertise from other fields, and to use existing talent and expertise in the police community. Law enforcement leaders are not often formally trained in implementing organizational change. Although some agency leaders had both a strong vision for the future and the capability to make it a reality, others did not. Some led agencies with staff members who were willing and able to campaign for change; others looked outside their agencies for expertise in departmental reform. The desire to change sometimes outpaced the ability to do it. North Carolina’s Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD) is a good example of successful organizational change. The CMPD brought in outside experts to walk the department through each step of the problem-solving process to implement organizational change. These national experts taught teams of officers how to use the scanning, analysis, response, and assessment (SARA) model and increase the use of technology and data in all phases of the process. Although often tedious, this training built the organization’s capacity to solve community problems by imparting the skills and knowledge to implement organizational change. In Massachusetts, the Boston Police Department (BPD) has benefited from a long-term working relationship with a change-management consultant who helped create and implement strategies. They have systematically crafted citywide strategic plans and change-management efforts that influence the basic operations of the department. The New Haven, Connecticut police department has made training in community policing a fundamental part of its academy and promotion system. After sergeants are promoted to lieutenants, they train other sergeants in community policing. New Haven also has developed a close working relationship with nearby universities to create a reservoir of expertise that can be used in academy training programs and community collaborations. In San Jose, California, the police department employed an active, situational role-playing system that taught officers and community members how to work together to solve mutual problems. Longmont police leaders applied the work of an organizational change professional to flatten the organizational structure and create the Partners in Performance evaluation system. Some agencies’ infrastructures lacked the capacity to handle the proposed grant activity. In Oakland, California, for example, the police department realized it did not have the organizational capacity to handle the accounting for a community-based mini-grant program. Many departments also reported that existing civil service job descriptions and salaries did not meet their needs to hire and pay highly skilled crime analysis or technology personnel. Communication To communicate effectively, both externally and internally, the agencies used many channels, from new methods such as websites to old-fashioned practices such as encouraging residents to know their neighbors. In Salinas, California, the police department developed a state-of-the-art intranet to update and share critical day-to-day information so that at the beginning of their shifts, officers could see who had been arrested, when the next community meeting would take place, or where to focus attention because of community concern. The goal in Portland, Oregon was to integrate all communication and technology systems, building each new phase on the last. The agency also created an emergency response system that not only alerts citizens to impending situations, but also notifies them of their successful resolution. Almost every department realized the importance of creating a website to serve as a community resource and a vehicle for interactive communication. California’s San Jose Police Department developed an intranet that acts as a repository of information and resources only for members of the department. Another crucial form of communication is day-to-day contact between law enforcement professionals and the neighborhoods they patrol. Building trust between the department and the community is a core part of community policing; officers and deputies learned that the only way to build and maintain relationships is through regular i nteraction with residents. Organizational change can create tension, suspicion, and resistance among the rank and file. It is natural to want to know what is going on, how it will affect one’s job, and whether the change is permanent or part of a short-lived trend. Successful change requires patience and communication both inside and outside the agency. That communication can come in many forms. In Windsor, Connecticut, the police department’s union president created the agency’s first website, which signaled support for the chief and community policing practices. Developing and sharing the strategic vision for community policing with key stakeholders, including community groups, elected officials, union officials, and department personnel is critical for success. In Los Angeles, the County Sheriff’s Department tracks initiatives that are a source of pride for deputies and that produce concrete results. The department then informs elected officials and the community about those initiatives. In many cases, police personnel learned how to listen, present their ideas in front of their peers, and participate in community and neighborhood meetings. A lack of communication, however, sometimes led to misunderstandings and resistance. In Sacramento, California, an organizational struggle developed between the officers currently patrolling neighborhoods and the officers the city council wanted to appoint to those neighborhoods. This resulted in confused lines of authority, difficulties with command and supervision, and a communication problem between the city council and the police department. Resolving the problem took time and patience. Communication through newspapers, websites, email, fliers, focus groups, foot patrols, and direct engagement with the community helped sell community policing practices. Making the most of these available communication channels strengthened relationships, increased trust between law enforcement and citizens, and pulled together critical information to help agencies and their communities work together to increase public safety. Community Oriented Government Community policing must share strategies and the skills, expertise, and resources of other community and government agencies to be effective. Each agency participating in ACP developed working links to other community and city/county agencies. These links often helped resolve mutual problems. For example, officers in Charlotte-Mecklenburg’s Police Department worked with the city planning department, local businesses, the city council, and others to solve an auto larceny problem. Police identified solutions, and cooperation with other agencies made those solutions possible (in this case, improving lighting and adding fences). Fundamental causes and conditions that create community problems are many and complex; often, local problems can only be solved through cooperation among agencies. A problem with domestic violence, for instance, may involve the police department, the health department, mental health services, the faith community, and family services. The challenge in many agencies is local politics. A sheriff, for example, may need to work closely with a board of supervisors who can access county services on behalf of the department. In other cases, the city’s department of parks and recreation or public works may be called on to provide such services as after-school recreation centers for area youths. Many grantees needed help with the civil service system. In changing an agency, new jobs often must be created and other job descriptions (and salaries) changed to accurately reflect the work needed. Accomplishing this may be cumbersome and require the support of the city council or another such group.6 In one case, city accounting system operators lacked the experience or resources to handle the demands of a federal grant. Sometimes departments had a hard time accessing their grant funds.7 It was rare to see a community-based law enforcement problem for which the solution did not involve working with many different sectors, including politicians, policy-makers, community service groups, neighborhood associations, local businesses, parks and recreation departments, and transportation, health, and housing organizations. The law enforcement agency may have been the originator, but it was rarely the only organization needed to get things done. When communication across agency lines was well established, limited resources were more likely to be well applied, with minimum redundancy. Customized Services to Fit the Location Each grant had to reflect the community’s needs and the agency’s priorities for community policing. Because each city and town had its own ethnic population, economy, and political structure, a cookie-cutter approach would not work. Law enforcement agencies developed individual approaches in applying their grants and were free to pursue what worked best. In spite of the differences between agencies, each wanted to gather information and ideas from colleagues across the Nation and use the lessons to do a better job in its own community. Some departments (including Boston and Longmont) had already made great strides in creating organizational change before the ACP program began. Others, such as Windsor, were just starting the process. Many agencies, including Portland and Charlotte-Mecklenburg, used sophisticated data technology. Others had problems developing multiple collaborations on technology projects. Some agencies, such as the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, had an entire community policing bureau. In others, such as Albuquerque, New Mexico, grant activities were the domain of a small research and planning department. Agencies had to address local conditions in developing ACP projects. Many involved the community throughout the process; others kept the process more internal. Each agency described in this report achieved outcomes that helped its organization advance community policing and work better in its community. Engaging and Investing in Mid-Level Management One important theme that emerged from ACP programs was the need for leadership investment up and down the line. Although the chief must be the ultimate champion, a lack of support among mid-level managers almost guarantees that community policing efforts will ultimately break down. Agencies found that investing in people who were in charge of day-to-day activities resulted in more creativity, accountability, and ownership within the organization. For example, the Savannah Police Department sent mid-level managers to other police departments to gather ideas and build new relationships. This decision was an act of confidence and insight. Not only did it help the department as a whole, but it validated mid-level managers, gave them exposure outside of Savannah, and created links with other departments. In Boston, mid-level managers were asked to make problem-solving presentations before the command staff. In New Haven, newly promoted lieutenants served as mentors and teachers to sergeants. The support of sergeants, lieutenants, and captains ensures effective implementation of community policing. These frontline supervisors and mid-level managers are the leaders who must make changes happen and hold others accountable. Leadership The leaders in the grantee agencies had to impart their vision of community policing. They needed to lead their organizations through a trial and error transition period to create new cultural norms and behaviors. The change process required their constant attention and persistence. However, when agency executives were passively supportive, ideas often came from the field. It was compelling to find captains, lieutenants, sergeants, deputies, and line officers as agents of change. Many law enforcement leaders observed that community policing practices built stronger relationships with their diverse communities, building trust and communication where little had existed before. In Charlotte-Mecklenburg, police wanted to reduce drug trafficking in a neighborhood plagued by the problem. To accomplish this, they had to listen to and engage the community, then apply with confidence new approaches based on community input. This led to great success. In Longmont, the chief of police has integrated community policing into every facet of the department. He continues to initiate innovative ways to involve the community and work through difficult relationships. He has a clear vision of what community policing means, what it should look like, why it is important, and how it will improve the police department and the communities it serves. Networking, Connecting, and Learning ACP grantees noted the need to network, connect, and learn about innovation both within and outside of the law enforcement community. Agencies wanted to hear about successful practices, adapt proven responses to their local problems, and create a vision for successful community policing practices in the future. They requested opportunities to form networks and wanted to know more about outside resources to help with training, technical assistance, and expert consultation regarding methods of organizational change. Most law enforcement agencies saw their learning processes as cyclical rather than linear, with no beginning, middle, or end. They were invested, not because they had federal grants, but because they knew community policing made them better at fighting and preventing crime and increasing public safety. Resources Although the grant money made more of a difference in smaller than in larger agencies, the amount of the grant was not the determining factor in successful change. Almost every agency believed that its grant was a catalyst for internal change. Grants were more effective when agencies had some experience in implementing community policing, launched strong initial efforts, and maintained a strategic plan. Agencies that were already positioned to be responsive to the community were in a stronger position to further advance community policing. The ACP program supported a variety of initiatives that otherwise could not have been pursued or could not have been pursued so comprehensively. Agencies that used funds to begin new initiatives found that they could develop more support from their city by demonstrating the value of the activity, which they might not have been able to do before. Because of the success of the ACP program, many agencies’ positions or programs continued after the grant ended. Even with different organizational structures, community demographics, and community issues, all of the grantee agencies found the process of responding to a grant opportunity—particularly one such as ACP, which demanded creativity—to be a healthy and helpful experience. Time for Change Time is always an issue, and change takes time. Institutionalization of organizational change and community policing practices does not happen overnight. Taking and making the time to work on change was a vital ingredient of successful efforts. Many grantees reported that even the simplest things took more time then they expected— sometimes a lot more time. Although the ACP grant program was intended for only one year, most grantees required no-cost extensions. Unions Whether a department was unionized (e.g., Boston, Lowell, Windsor, and New Haven), semi-unionized (San Jose), or non-unionized (Rock Hill) affected the degree of difficulty of the change process. Unions can make organizational change easier (as in Windsor) or more challenging and complex (as in Boston). Vendor Selection Selecting a vendor was a challenge for most grantees. Many departments simply did not have the expertise to evaluate or choose the right vendors. Some had difficulty finding qualified vendors, some chose vendors that did not include the agency in the development of their product, and some received inferior or outdated work products. Portland and Charlotte-Mecklenburg chose vendors well. They knew their own needs, understood the vendor selection process, and had well-defined expectations. Recommendations for Future Policy More and more, those involved in public policy and law enforcement are coming to understand the importance of supporting collaborative efforts among law enforcement, other municipal agencies, and social service providers. Officers and deputies are not the only critical stakeholders in responding to crime and disorder within communities. Community policing relies upon the involvement of citizens, local government, and other outside partners in developing and sustaining innovative problem- solving initiatives to address seemingly intractable local crime or disorder. Following the short-term successes of ACP grantees, the question remains as to whether the projects will sustain continued transformation to community policing. The challenges are that these changes are time consuming and require a process orientation (as opposed to an action or outcome orientation). Also, no grant exists to encourage the commitment. It will be interesting to see whether the organizations involved in ACP continue incorporating community policing into their traditional culture and practices. Community policing represents a change from traditional policing that not only affects the relationship of the police to the broader community, but also requires complex internal changes. It requires endurance and a willingness to build bridges. If these changes are integrated into day-to-day practices and sustained, community policing activities will no longer be viewed as special programs that require special support. Flexible support must be available to devote to change efforts, because they are typically long-term efforts with outcomes that are unique to federal programs. The lack of structured support for change efforts is precisely why departments need additional support and outside expertise. Agencies can recognize and promote strategic and systems planning through a special set of skills that can either be fostered and developed internally or supported through external consultants. Departments that have invested in developing skills within a cadre of their own employees have experienced strong results. But, agencies also can recognize the value provided by consultants with expertise in change management. Private sector organizations frequently use consultants with such specialized skills; law enforcement may benefit by experimenting with this same approach. Conclusion As the following chapters will show, organizational change in a law enforcement environment can be a challenging endeavor. Law enforcement agencies are complex organizations with critical missions. Adapting processes, modifying systems, and allocating resources in order to reorient such an organization to community policing takes time, careful attention, commitment, and strong leadership with a clear vision. The lessons derived from ACP-funded agencies’ experiences can serve as references for other agencies attempting to implement and advance community policing. Perhaps the most powerful lesson from the ACP program is that one of the most important elements of successful organizational change is careful attention to the process of change, as opposed to focusing solely on its intended results. Because these agencies embarked on changes that often ran counter to prevailing methods, they often found it necessary to first create the capacity for these changes in order for them to succeed. Many successful ACP-funded efforts involved personnel from all ranks that brought energy, passion, creativity, and commitment to process. Although very few projects achieved complete success, a desire to learn from the process—especially where that process achieved unexpected goals— resulted in greater benefits over the long term. These change efforts also frequently changed expectations of what law enforcement is and how it works—in officers and deputies as well as the communities they serve. Tensions often developed between more traditional public expectations and the new expectations produced by the move to community policing. Working with the community, as well as other private and public partners, created a sense of shared ownership of community crime and disorder problems. Active support from elected officials helped build public support, just as strong leadership and vision from the chief and senior command staff helped build support among the agencies’ rank and file. Just the determination to change was not always enough. Some organizations found their desire for change was much stronger than their actual ability to change within what were nearly universally very mature and complex organizations. Agencies that found themselves in this situation often benefited greatly from external consultants. Some of the most successful projects harnessed agents of change across all levels of the organization, each of which made important contributions. Many ACP grantees found that once communities gained exposure to community policing, they became active stakeholders and supporters, thus resulting in grassroots support for the philosophy’s full implementation within the agency. Day-to-day contact with the community in a community policing context seemed to invariably forge better relationships and stronger trust between law enforcement professionals and the members of their communities. Some agencies found that embracing community policing required specific changes to policies and procedures, communications vehicles, project tracking systems, and personnel tools. Solutions ranged from developing new tools, such as problem-solving tracking and reporting systems and websites, to modifying performance evaluations and recruitment tools that had been in use for years. These changes were rarely easy and sometimes created uneasiness and distrust within the agency. There were both creative and traditional approaches for overcoming these understandable reactions to change, but ignoring them in the hope that they would ultimately go away didn’t seem to be a viable option for most. Successful change required both patience and communication. Finally, many agencies recognized the range of expertise that can be brought to bear by involving other government and social service agencies in the resolution of community problems. Beyond the more traditional community partnerships, some agencies also partnered with such public and private entities as social service providers, planning departments, local businesses, and parks and recreation departments. This recognized that the list of potential interventions to crime and quality of life issues has greatly expanded, resulting in a greater likelihood of success. This is the underlying premise of what many view to be the next logical phase of community policing: community government. 13 Law enforcement agencies participating in the ACP program addressed organizational change in support of community policing from different perspectives and starting points. Although this impacted their approaches and how far they were able to go, they wanted to gather and share information and ideas from colleagues across the Nation and use these lessons to improve their work. Many see these processes as cyclical rather than linear, crediting innovation not to a grant but to the law enforcement professionals who believe that community policing helps them serve their communities more effectively. The ACP program—and this report—are meant to help these practitioners share their experiences. Hopefully, the lessons they learned will help other agencies beyond the range of the ACP program. About This Report Each of the nine chapters that follow closely examines one of the ACP grantee sites. The chapters are organized alike to help readers compare and revisit areas of interest. The report is intended to serve as a useful, working resource for agencies implementing or considering implementing community policing initiatives. Chapter 11 briefly sums up the report and provides COPS contact information. The four appendixes focus on the nitty gritty details of methodology, typology, and identity. Appendix A discusses the fellowship and expert panel that visited sites, interviewed participants, made observations, and derived conclusions and lessons learned. Appendix B gives more details about the five priority areas identified at the beginning of this chapter as encompassing the many projects developed under the ACP grant program. Appendix C is the complete list of ACP projects by state and project focus. Appendix D provides short biographies of the authors. Notes 1. The ACP grant period was 1998 to 2001. 2. The COPS Office acknowledged that the change process would be challenging and viewed it as a multiyear effort, even though ACP funding was provided for only one year. 3. More information about the ACP Grant Program, the fellowship, and expert panel that evaluated grantee sites appears in Appendix A. 4. Descriptions of the project types appear in Appendix B. 5. Some examples cited in this chapter are taken from grantee sites that are not discussed at length in this report. For a list of all 96 grantees, please see Appendix C. 6. Dealing with outdated civil service codes was a big problem as agencies tried to hire civilians to meet their needs, particularly in technology- related jobs and crime analyst positions. 7. Although the grant money went to local agencies, the agencies did not always have direct access to the money. Sometimes the processing took a long time, or, as in Oakland, California, the agencies were not set up to handle this type of grant. CHAPTER 2 BOSTON Same COPS/Same Neighborhood The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 Lessons Learned. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 CHAPTER 2 BOSTON Same Cops/Same Neighborhood The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background The department’s full-scale commitment to the philosophy of community policing dates back to 1992 with the development of its initial Neighborhood Policing Plan of Action. That plan sought to align and integrate both the service delivery and management models of the organization with the community policing philosophy being adopted by the total organization. In 1995, a BPD citywide strategic planning initiative paved the way for more extensive implementation of its neighborhood policing efforts. The commitment to community/neighborhood policing was a shift for the whole organization, not the creation of a special unit or program. BPD has created a strong, ongoing professional relationship with an organizational change psychologist. This rather unusual situation has had great influence on the projects and processes undertaken by the department in community policing and organizational transformation in recent years. External organizational change consultants worked with BPD leaders to design and implement the strategic planning process, which involved more than 350 individuals. For more than six months, police officers, citizens, community leaders, politicians, clergy, and key municipal officials worked together on 16 teams, each of which focused on a set of community problems. The police commissioner chaired a planning team of police personnel and community leaders that addressed broader organizational and citywide issues. A different eight-person core team composed of BPD personnel and external consultants managed the design, training, and implementation of the strategic planning effort. The strategic planning teams at the district and citywide levels identified “having the same police officer in the same beat” as an important change needed to support neighborhood-level problem solving and the fuller implementation of community/neighborhood policing in Boston. This goal came to be known as Same Cops/Same Neighborhood (SC/SN). The intent was to have police officers know the geography and inhabitants of their beats and take ownership of the problems on those beats. The officers were expected to work with community partners to deal with the public safety issues identified by the police and the community. In the course of planning for SC/SN, the department’s mission statement was revised to state, “We dedicate ourselves to work in partnership with the community to fight crime, reduce fear and improve the quality of life in our neighborhoods. Our mission is Neighborhood Policing.” Grant funding under the Comprehensive Communities Program of the U.S. Department of Justice supported this stage of strategic planning and community mobilization in Boston. As the focus of its Advancing Community Policing (ACP) organizational change grant, BPD undertook the challenge of moving to SC/SN and shifting structures and strategies to implement beat teams. The ACP grant funding provided needed resources for training, production of beat plans, assistance from outside consultants, and overtime to enable personnel to participate consistently in implementation efforts. Because of collective bargaining agreements and staffing level issues, overtime was necessary to replace superior officers on shifts to enable beat team supervisors and commanders to participate in meetings on a change of shift. Thus, overtime enabled their participation in the multirank Beat Team Implementation Group and training. Civilian union contracts also necessitated overtime funding for key civilian employees who were involved in certain efforts. The Project Although the police and the community set the goal of SC/SN, changing organizational processes and practices was another matter. Major impediments to implementing neighborhood policing were administrative and other practices that created barriers to problem solving by beat officers. Working to change them meant systematically identifying and modifying layers of organizational processes, functions, and mechanisms. Discussions began regarding ramifications of the “beat team” concept. Issues included organizational implications of changes in assignments, changes in use of officers’ time, changes in the expected outcomes, and training and supervision issues. It became increasingly apparent that the initial success of the program depended on individual officers being consistently assigned to and kept in the same beats. To strengthen their efforts, a SC/SN Working Group was formed and activated. They linked their efforts to work that was already being done on one of the police commissioner’s six Priority Change Initiatives, which related to building department competency models based on high performers in each rank and/or role. These models would be used to articulate the core competencies necessary for the department to evolve its neighborhood policing strategies, act on its mission, and shape the content of future training. Realizing that such a wide-ranging organizational change would affect a broad cross section of ranks and roles in the organization, the SC/SN Working Group conducted a one-day offsite working session. It used a modified version of a whole systems change strategy called a “search conference.” More than 200 personnel, who represented each rank that would be affected by the change, took part in working groups to recommend to members of other ranks what they would need to do differently for beat teams to succeed. Applying the input from the search conference to the implementation of beat teams was the next challenge. One specific challenge in the next phase of the change effort was to balance the more localized authority and responsibility with the organizational need for coherence, coordination, and consistency. The SC/SN Working Group set the parameters for core elements for the beat plans, and district captains and members of their local planning teams developed plans for their districts’ implementation efforts. Each district’s implementation plan had to specify: . Name/neighborhood designation of each beat team. . Rationale for composition of teams (some teams included detectives and other personnel). . Names/functions of officers and the assigned beat team leader on each beat team. . Communication protocols to be used concerning problems on the beat (among team members over shifts and timelines, among teams within districts, and with adjacent districts’ teams). . Specific planning processes for determining priorities of each beat team. . Strategic planning goals to be implemented through the beat teams. . Training needs. The next implementation step called for beat team leaders to take part in an orientation and training session that focused on: . Data on community perceptions about police services. . Data on public safety from a citywide public safety survey. . Underlying assumptions and success factors related to beat teams. BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT LOCATION: BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS CHIEF: PAUL EVANS CONTACT: WWW.CI.BOSTON.MA.US/ POLICE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: MODIFYING ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES AMOUNT FUNDED: $245,200 SITE VISIT: FEBRUARY 5, 2001 Founded in 1630, Boston is the state cap- ital of Massachusetts and the largest municipality in New England. The city’s 48.9 square miles are currently home to a resident population of slightly over 589,000, which increases to 2 million people during the day. The population is 49.5 percent white, 14.4 percent Hispanic, 23.8 percent black, 7.5 percent Asian, and 4.8 percent other.* The oldest metropolitan police force in the Nation, the Boston Police Department (BPD) was formally char- tered in 1854. It has a current force of 2,169 sworn officers and 850 civilian employees. Boston is divided into 11 police districts, each of which is served by officers who work out of a local dis- trict station under the command of a captain. BPD operates 26 facilities throughout the city. BPD is both a civil service and a highly unionized work environment with four bargaining units that represent different groups of sworn personnel. Each union negotiates a separate contract for its members. Five distinct bargaining units represent civilian personnel. Overall, approximately 99 percent of BPD employees are members of a bargaining unit. This circumstance creates a chal- lenging environment in which to under- take any significant organizational change efforts. DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. As part of the orientation, each team leader was required to create a profile of the beat. To create this profile, team leaders used the array of data that the organization had available and the more local knowledge of district officers. For clarity of expectations and content, the SC/SN Working Group provided templates for the profiles both in hard copy and on disks. Challenges, Needs, and Solutions As implementation progressed, several challenges, needs, and solutions emerged. One was holding sergeants (the beat team leaders) accountable for doing their jobs differently. Conventionally, paperwork sent to headquarters was seen as something that simply went into a file or pile unless it related to a violent crime or other critical incident. To change that, the chief of patrol and others in the SC/SN Working Group read, commented on, and questioned each beat profile they received. Sergeants quickly got the message that beat profiles were important. Defining the nature of beat teams was another challenge. It became clear that police districts were using somewhat different definitions. Although individual efforts at decentralization were to be honored, consistency was needed. Officers had to have a clear understanding of what was expected of them in their day-to-day work as part of beat teams. Beat Team Implementation Group members developed a definition: A beat team is a designated group of sworn and/or civilian personnel assigned to a geographic area within a police dis trict whose function is to address criminal and quality-of-life issues by sharing infor mation and utilizing all BPD and communi ty resources. Throughout the implementation process, the Beat Team Implementation Group met monthly with the chief of patrol and the rest of the SC/SN Working Group and worked continuously on how to implement the beat team concept most effectively. The discussion focused both on what was working and what was not. Because they were living with the ground-level realities of the implementation effort, the group took on a vital role in the change efforts. As they grew confident that speaking the truth would not result in punishment by the chief of patrol, they grew increasingly forthright in sharing their views. This proved invaluable in the organizational change effort. During this time, the emphasis shifted to reconsidering some of the organizational structures that affect patrol strategies. The existing patrol strategies, structures, deployment plans, and schedules were based on supporting rapid response. The group began to work on how to integrate problem solving and technology into a new patrol model based on geographic accountability rather than 911-driven responses. Beat teams needed additional training to perform all the required tasks. More than 100 mid-level managers—beat team leaders on all shifts and other district sergeants— participated in a three-day training course on the scanning, analysis, response, and assessment (SARA) problem-solving method. In addition, senior managers held a retreat. For SC/SN and beat team efforts, the following key issues and action steps were identified: . Ensure that beat team leaders and members have all necessary technology training and skills. . Enforce and implement the plans that the district commanders presented. . Review and evaluate call scheduling and stacking efforts. . Learn how to best facilitate cross-shift communication among beat team leaders. . Handle challenges that result from contractual and overtime issues. . Determine the most effective methods to foster beat team leaders’ accountability for challenges on their beats. . Devise effective methods and strategies for sharing best practices and solutions to problems. . Update mobile data terminal software and begin using laptops, beginning with beat team leaders. In 1999, beat team leaders took part in presenta- tions on crime issues by district commanders at biweekly crime analysis meetings (CAMs), which drove accountability for addressing crime and quality-of-life issues down to lower ranking offi- cers. It was also a way to integrate beat team activities with other changes in the department. Linking the problem-solving efforts of beat team leaders to the reporting and analysis of crime statistics signaled a new level of seriousness about district-based problem solving. Because such presentations represented an unfa- miliar form of accountability and responsibility for beat team leaders, the Beat Team Implementation Group offered training in presentation skills and the preparation of visual presentations. A CAM newsletter also began to include examples of best practices devised by the beat teams. A section related to each district’s beat teams was included on the BPD intranet. Building momentum and maintaining morale is always a challenge for any change effort. The Beat Team Implementation Group suggested sending specific beat team leaders (sergeants) to the annu- al Problem Oriented Policing Conference in San Diego, California, to recognize them for their work. This suggestion was approved with the stipulation that, when they returned, those who attended would make a presentation to the group about what BPD could do differently based on what they had learned. In January 2000, other organizational changes in BPD affected this change initiative. At that time, the police commissioner made a number of changes in his senior command staff. Approx- imately one-third of the executive leadership of the department changed. As in any police organi- zation, such changes led to intensive scrutiny, dis- cussion, speculation, and reaction. One member characterized the ACP effort as ”a Rubik’s cube, where if you change one thing, you find out it then doesn’t work with how other things are positioned.“ During these staff changes, the chief of patrol who had led the SC/SN and beat team effort was transferred, which interrupted the momentum of that change effort. While the new chief of patrol became acquainted with his new role and responsibilities, the SC/SN Working Group and Beat Team Implementation Group were placed on hold. Almost concurrent with the senior command changes, external circumstances necessitated a new focus. Priority had to be given to department- wide preparation, mobilization, and development of tactical plans for the upcoming International Bio-Technology Conference and demonstrations that were expected to follow protests in Seattle. Cross-bureau cooperation, planning, and coordination and updating the tactical skills of all sworn personnel became critical for the new senior command staff and the entire department. Department Observations The ACP process in Boston was seen as “overcoming organizational barriers and changing the organizational paradigm regarding doing business.” After initially thinking that making these changes would be simple, many of those involved realized the process would be complicated. One member characterized the ACP effort as “a Rubik’s cube, where if you change one thing, you find out it then doesn’t work with how other things are positioned.” Decentralization presented challenges. Chief of Patrol James Claiborne saw his role and responsibility as “changing to be one where I responded to the needs of those working under my command, facilitated change, and attended to process, as well as giving people room to make mistakes.” A further challenge was that, as in many departments trying to work with a decentralized model, tension between the field and headquarters could make systemic and systematic change difficult. This challenge was exacerbated by the lack of enthusiasm some district commanders felt for the changes that would be required to implement SC/SN; some were even apathetic. Sergeants were not used to keeping the same officers working in the same neighborhood for extended periods. Assignments were to cars, not to beats. Neighborhood assignments had been a way sergeants could informally reward or punish officers. Further, the internal organizational systems provided little broader accountability regarding the system of assignments. However, as part of the SC/SN initiative, new beats were developed and monthly compliance audits were conducted by the chief of patrol’s office. The biweekly Change Management Working Group meetings provided consistent command- level focus on SC/SN and the other Commissioner’s Priority Change Initiatives. At a minimum, these sessions provided a forum where the top 25 leaders of the department came together and built in follow up and accountability related to their collective work on the change initiatives. Chief of Patrol Claiborne, a member of the Change Management Working Group, said, “No other community policing effort received the extent and range of persistent change planning and attention to learning from what we were doing as this.” Like departments elsewhere, Boston faced challenges in making such changes—these challenges were a mix of prior police practices and public expectations. The reform model of policing, driven by rapid 911 response and random patrol, continued to exert pressure in certain directions long after a commitment to the philosophy of community policing and efforts toward problem solving had begun. Most patrol structures and practices, including contractually negotiated shift schedules, staffing levels, and overtime assignments, were designed to support rapid response as the core function of patrol officers. A common complaint heard from officers was that they were too busy handling radio calls and did not have time to devote to problem solving. But the teaching team was equipped with the facts and data to dispel such notions. The chief of patrol himself cotaught the class to send a message that the BPD was serious about the change and to respond to questions and resistance. Other issues included reaching agreement on key concepts and definitions, the question of staffing levels (for the agency overall, for districts/sectors, and for beats), and the sectoring of the city’s police districts. It became apparent that a solid foundation would be needed and that this fundamental shift in patrol strategies would need to occur in stages over a period of years. It also became increasingly evident that some of the biggest challenges would involve dealing with the ingrained human behaviors and mindsets that maintain an organization’s structures and systems. Lessons Learned The ACP program in Boston produced the following challenges and taught the following lessons: . It was important to pay attention to “process,” listen to those who were working to implement changes, and be willing to change tactics to achieve the intended outcome. . Resistance to ACP diminished over time, and members remained fluid, flexible, agile, and adaptable. . A shared definition of SC/SN was needed. Defining the system required agreement on what the implications of SC/SN would be. For example, if such definitional issues and implications had not been clear, the new Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) setup and operations could not have effectively supported the SC/SN and beat teams’ effort. . Both the organization and the police leaders needed to commit to change and the effort involved. . Additional training was needed. During the annual inservice training at the Boston Police Academy, a half-day session was conducted to orient and educate all patrol officers, detectives, and superior officers up through the rank of lieutenant about the intended shift of the BPD patrol strategy to SC/SN and beat teams. The department also had to address the change in philosophy and practice of “how we do business” by 911 call takers and dispatchers in the Operations Division. . Overlapping players (some of the same personnel working on a variety of aspects of different change efforts in multiple settings) provided “checks and balances” that supported a consistent message. . Union-related challenges emerged. Part of the plan had called for patrol officers to attend community meetings related to problems on the beat. Overtime was available to enable officers to attend if the meetings occurred during a different shift. The department was unable to implement this part of the plan, however, because the patrol officers’ union contract specifies that overtime moneys must be made available on the “lowest man principle.” Other challenges noted by those who worked on the SC/SN and beat team initiatives included: . The impact of losing high-ranking officers who were committed to ACP’s changes due to the changes in the command staff. . The importance of thinking systemically, because these changes affected the whole organization. . The importance of having a clear vision of the intended changes, and a clear understanding of what impact those efforts would have. Other lessons learned included the need for: . A “face to go with change”or a “champion.” . Explicit processes and mechanisms to maintain coordination. . Time to compose teams to work on various aspects of change efforts. . Winning over the “working cops” level of the department—informing them of the intended change, giving them a role in crafting the design, and welcoming their input into how it will occur and their feedback on the process. . Custom-designed technology applications that support specific change efforts, not just “ off-the-shelf” products. The effort should be “end-user oriented,” and any technology must support officers’ real needs. Ideally, there should be “killer applications” that are so powerful and effective that police officers will not want to work without them. Panel Commentary As the nation’s oldest municipal police department, Boston has distinguished itself by approaching community policing and organizational change in a progressive, comprehensive manner. Integration of the ACP grant into the department’s strategic plan helped them implement the grant successfully. Boston knew the strategic direction it wanted to pursue, and approached the implementation of its goal through a series of strategically developed steps. The personal involvement of the commissioner and the chief of patrol in key committees and initiatives was critical to the overall successes of the change effort. All agency personnel were viewed as critical to the success of the plan; thus, their involvement was planned throughout the change process. However, the panel notes that initiatives slowed upon the transfer of command of the chief of patrol. The panel applauds the work done to ensure consistency of terminology and effort across the department and individual stations. This level of coordination is critical to demonstrating fairness between stations, creating accountability, and ensuring an even field against which all activities can be compared. Boston’s commitment to comprehensive organizational change was also evident in its use of outside expertise to guide the department through an extremely complex and long-term process. The panel noted the value of the chief of patrol’s creation of a safe environment within the Beat Team Implementation Group to enable them to share their views of what was working and what was not. This action by a top administrator is of incalculable value in fostering long-term support and participation. History is replete with examples of worthwhile change efforts thwarted by a clear message that unpopular views are discouraged. Boston faced significant organizational obstacles to change from the structure of its many and varied labor organizations. This structure naturally resisted some of the flexibility that a changing organization demands. That the department was able to integrate the varied interests and mitigate this resistance is impressive. The panel notes the challenges Boston faced with the structure and rules of established collective bargaining units, particularly as they relate to the requirement that paid overtime be given to senior officers first, who may be less accepting of change. The challenge that this rule places on an organization that desires to become more agile can be significant. These agreements reflect the many individual cultures of the organization, the result of hundreds of years of experience. Few departments seeking change will ever face such a high degree of established tradition and culture. Boston’s use of competency models based on high performers in each rank/role is a smart approach to establishing a credible standard that raises the expectation for all personnel within the organization and demonstrates clearly that higher and different performance can be expected. This component of the overall process demonstrates a high level of sophistication in the change process. Boston took risks with creative organizational change methods and demonstrated the qualities of a learning organization. It adapted to new needs to address making all members of the team stronger and more accountable. There was logic and depth in Boston’s strategic planning, training, and implementation, always circling back to integrate needs and improvements. Also interesting is how a change in the environment or a change in leadership can have dramatic impacts on the success of the effort. In Boston’s case, changes to the senior command team, and an impending biotechnology conference, which promised to drain resources, impacted the progress of the change effort. Despite their careful planning, circumstances emerged that were either beyond their control or were unanticipated. The panel notes that like other departments, one of the most challenging steps for the BPD involved changing the predominant police practices and public expectations that center around 911 response and random patrol. Despite their planning, this remained one of the biggest challenges and merits careful consideration from other agencies attempting to make organizational changes. CHAPTER 3 CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG: A Living Lab For Problem–Solving Policing The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 CHAPTER 3 CHARLOTTE- MECKLENBURG A Living Lab For Problem-Solving Policing The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background Charlotte used its Advancing Community Policing (ACP) grant to bring Herman Goldstein, who is considered the father of problem- oriented policing, to the department as a scholar in residence. Goldstein visited Charlotte for week- long visits over a period of one year. He performed an audit of the department to see how consistently community policing and problem-solving models were being applied. Goldstein was also available to work with individual officers and help departmental units define their roles in a community policing environment. The Project Goldstein identified the need to strengthen police officers’ problem-solving skills and efforts. “Most officers did a quick scan of the problem and then moved immediately to the response phase,” said Darrellyn Kiser, Assistant to the Chief. “Goldstein felt that officers were missing an opportunity to use the power of available data to understand the true nature of a problem, who was affected, what were the consequences, and how to tailor a response based on the results of data analysis.” CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT LOCATION: CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA CHIEF: DARREL STEPHENS CONTACT: WWW.CHARMECK.NC.US/ CIPOLICE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AMOUNT FUNDED: $153,588 SITE VISIT: FEBRUARY 20, 2001 Charlotte, North Carolina is a mid-sized sunbelt city with a jurisdiction population of 540,828. The population is 55.1 percent white, 32.5 percent black, 3.4 percent Asian/Pacific Islander, and 7.4 percent Hispanic.* Charlotte is experiencing a period of rapid growth. It is headquarters to two of the 10 largest banks in the Na- tion, making it the second-largest banking center in America. Charlotte is the center of the Nation’s fifth-largest urban region and covers 530 square miles. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD) is a consolidated metropolitan police agency that serves both the city of Charlotte and all of the unincorporated area in Mecklenburg County. CMPD has 1,533 sworn person- nel and 456 civilian members. It has four divisions—Administrative, Field Opera- tions (patrol), Investigative Services, and Special Services—and 12 patrol districts. CMPD recently established an International Relations Unit, staffed by a sergeant and six bilingual officers, whose goal is to develop initiatives that reduce crime, enhance quality of life, and foster mutual trust and respect with members of Charlotte’s increasingly diverse community. CMPD has used federal grants to strengthen its efforts in community polic- ing, problem solving, and the use of technology. The department hired 211 officers under the COPS program and has used COPS Making Officer Redeployment Effective (MORE) grants to put laptop computers in all of its vehi- cles, develop a records management system with a problem-solving compo- nent, and design a new Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system. DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. Goldstein suggested that, under his guidance, the department should identify several difficult crime problems and apply a fuller problem-solving model. Given the need to emphasize the data collection and analysis phase, Goldstein suggested using a portion of the grant funds to bring in Ron Clarke, a member of the faculty at Rutgers University. Consequently, CMPD used the department as a “living lab” for linking the use of data and computer capacity to problem solving. Four problems were identified for intensive analysis: . Appliance burglary from single-family homes under construction . Vehicle larceny in central city parking lots . Drug-related violence in the Belmont community . Pawnshops and their possible connection to burglaries Appliance Burglary From Single-Family Homes Under Construction. A police captain and two officers developed a plan to reduce thefts from construction sites. The plan targeted the three elements that make up a crime: suspect, victim, and opportunity. The idea was to work with burglary detectives to identify suspects. Once a suspect was arrested, officers would petition the courts to get the maximum prison sentence on conviction. Officers would get after-hours contact numbers for the builders who were victimized, in case suspects were apprehended in their neighborhoods. Officers also would exchange crime prevention ideas with the builders to improve and increase the builders’ use of crime prevention techniques. To reduce opportunities for theft, officers altered their method of patrolling the neighborhoods under construction. They staked out neighbor- hoods using marked and unmarked patrol cars and altered the days and times of their patrols. The problem was that after six months, the plan was barely intact. Site managers who had been contacted either were reassigned or had left the construction company. This made the after-hours contact list and distribution of crime prevention information worthless. No suspects were identi- fied and the directed patrols did not reduce the reported crimes. One major aspect of the initial plan had been left out: analyzing the problem. With the help of Goldstein and Clarke, Captain Johnson and Officers Cunius and Rost started again from scratch. First, the scope of the project was narrowed, because the category of construc- tion site theft was too large. Instead, the plan focused on reducing the theft of appliances in bur- glaries from single-family homes that were under construction. This plan had a greater chance of success because serial numbers could be located for stolen appliances, the appliances could be secured, and this type of crime was responsible for a high percentage of the commercial burglaries in the district. The next step was to investigate why these thefts were occurring. The neighborhoods were surveyed to learn the location of new construction and how many houses would be built during the next few years. Builders were surveyed on their methods and practices while on the construction site. Building inspectors were asked about building regulations for installing appliances. The questioning yielded several important pieces of information: . Homebuilding in the district was increasing and would continue to do so for the next few years. . Most homebuilders were installing “plug-in” appliances approximately 21–28 days before houses were sold. . Before the house was issued a certificate of occupancy, the only appliances required to be installed were those that were hardwired directly into the house. An analysis of crime at construction sites led to the discovery of a data problem, so officers had to look through hard copies of two years of police reports and locate each burglary report for thefts of construction appliances. Although time consuming, this process ensured accurate data. Next, officers created an appliance profile, noting the types and makes of the appliances stolen, the builders involved, days of the week, incidents per month, and cost per incident. In reviewing the risk rates and the appliance profiles, officers discovered that nearly 75 percent of the appliances stolen were plug-in appliances that did not need to be installed before the sale. The next step was to formulate a response. The data were presented to the homebuilders in a PowerPoint presentation. The goal was to get them to delay the installation of appliances from the normal 21–28 days in advance to the day of closing. A six-month test period was proposed. Ten of the 15 builders who viewed the presentation agreed to participate in the test. During the test period, all houses under construction within the district were checked 15 times; more than 11,000 field checks were conducted. The data collected during these checks proved invaluable later when the project was assessed. After the trial period ended and the data were analyzed, officers found a reduction in the number of appliance burglaries (from 76 in 1999 to 45 in 2000) and in the rate of burglaries (from 5.3 per 1,000 in 1999 to 2.5 per 1,000 in 2000). Using a geographic information system (GIS), officers mapped the areas that had high concentrations of appliances that were installed early. These same areas had most of the appliance burglaries. The results were shared with the builders, most of whom agreed to continue to delay the installation of appliances even after the trial period ended. If all builders participated in the project, officers believe the problem of appliance theft could be virtually eliminated. Vehicle Larceny in Center City Parking Lots. Larcenies from autos (LFAs) were increasing each month, having grown from 428 offenses in 1998 to 700 in 1999, according to Sergeant Harold Medlock. Analysis revealed that 73 percent of those were from surface parking lots, 15 percent were on the street or on the property of single- family residences, and 12 percent were on parking decks. Captain Jerry Sennett assembled a problem- solving team that included Goldstein and Clarke. The team decided to conduct a survey of Center City parking lots. They collected information on lighting, vehicle and pedestrian access, night and day parking, presence or absence of an attendant, cost of parking, number of parking spaces, number of floors, geographic location, dimensions, and perimeter fencing. The team ultimately decided to focus the problem-solving initiative on surface parking lots. Analysis confirmed that unsecured surface lots that were adjacent to railway lines/former rail lines, were close to highway overpasses, had poor lighting and inadequate fencing, lacked attendants, and were close to the Center City nightlife district were disproportionately prone to higher numbers and densities of incidents. During the analysis phase, Captain Sennett sent team members to Portland, Oregon to learn about their success in combating a similar problem. The team gathered valuable information that helped them develop their own strategy. Based on the information gathered during 18 months of research and analysis, the problem- solving team proposed and implemented the following strategies: . Captain Sennett proposed forming a partnership with the parking lot owners and managers to develop strategies for improving safety. The parking lot owners agreed that a grading system for parking lots would produce positive results. The owners also provided letters of support for an amended fence ordinance that CMPD proposed to the city planning department. . Officers implemented a radio system that linked private security firms and security units for major institutions to provide everyone with immediate information in the event of a crime. A side benefit was that the private security firms began to feel like legitimate partners with the police department. . The problem-solving team recommended creating a specialized, proactive, nonpolice LFA bicycle patrol unit with direct radio links to the police department. The Center City Crime Prevention Council is trying to find a cost-effective way to implement this proposal. . Detailed Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) surveys of six surface parking lots in Center City provided valuable information on how the physical environment affects criminal activity. Based on these surveys, team members began to educate parking lot owners/managers informally about changes and improvements that could be implemented at minimal expense. . The team recommended implementing a grading system to encourage parking lot owners to improve environmental design and/or increase active security throughout their properties. Each lot or deck would be graded (A, B, C, or D) based on a CPTED survey. The grades would be posted prominently at several locations in each parking lot. . Captain Sennett helped obtain a portion of the police department’s block grant funds to purchase and install a closed-circuit television system in Center City, with cameras placed in close proximity to the surface parking lots. Nearly all of the private partners allowed and paid for the installation of the cameras on their buildings at no cost to CMPD. . Team members identified a major obstacle to parking lot safety/security in a current city ordinance that mandates opaque wooden fences surrounding every surface parking lot, which blocks sightlines. Captain Sennett and the team members have begun working with the city planning department to amend the city fence ordinance. . The project team is beginning to provide LFA education to the homeless population in the center city. The team agreed that, although the homeless are not solely responsible for LFA, they have a right to know about the increased attention to this problem. Officers will go to soup kitchens and homeless shelters to provide more information. . Early on, the project team learned that many victims of LFA were not sure where the incidents occurred because most of the surface parking lots did not have street addresses posted. When parking lot owners began to post addresses, LFA incidents began to decrease. . The project teams identified repeat offenders. Officers began to work with the district attorney’s office to ensure that repeat offenders were properly prosecuted. Officers now ask the presiding judge to issue territorial exclusions as part of an LFA suspect’s sentence. Captain Sennett presented the entire LFA project during a Center City Crime Prevention Council meeting, further strengthening the partnership between the police and the business community. An additional benefit of this project was that officers became more aware of suspicious activity in surface parking lots as they traveled throughout the district. Officers began to stop and talk with suspicious people who were in parking lots. This increase in officer interest and activity, along with all the other remedies implemented, has decreased the larceny from auto rate, with the number of reports during 2001 expected to be less than half of the 700 incidents reported in 1998. Drug Violence in the Belmont Community. The Belmont Drug Violence Reduction Project began as a response to a series of homicides and serious assaults in which firearms were used. During one 9-month period, 5 homicides and more than 100 aggravated assaults occurred in the neighborhood. On initial scanning of the problem, officers learned that victims did not live in or near the Belmont community. The majority of these incidents appeared to involve people coming from outside the neighborhood to buy drugs, a theory that preliminary analysis supported. A GIS analytical capacity was employed to analyze problems and trends based on a number of variables. Data included U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Section 8 public assistance properties, Habitat Homes, rental and owner-occupied properties, businesses, and levels of streetlight illumination. To increase analytical accuracy, crimes were mapped to property building footprints rather than estimated along street centerlines. Crimes and other violations could then be assessed house by house. The result has allowed police to view crime trends more accurately than ever before in the department’s history. Police can now compare and associate patterns, changes, and trends with numerous variables relating to the community, such as rates of crime between types of housing. One outcome of the analysis was that Habitat Homes in this area were found to be high in violence. Officers investigated and found that many of the Habitat Homes were secretly being rented. Habitat for Humanity was informed of this finding; the organization is now working to eliminate the rental violations via contractual adjustments. With an analysis of the data confirming that 60 percent of the arrests in northeast Belmont were for drug offenses committed by people from outside the area, officers knew the area’s easy accessibility by automobile was a problem. Further analysis pointed out two of the most prominent routes, so officers suggested installing barricades on these two streets. The hypothesis was that the barricades would create sufficient insecurity among drug buyers and thus reduce their frequency of visits, and by extension reduce their risk of victimization. With mixed support from the community, a single solid-concrete highway barricade was installed at the popular intersection, effectively turning the roads into dead-end streets. The community agreed to allow the barricade on a temporary basis and to remove it if it proved ineffective. To create a relatively sound test environment for analyzing the impact of the barriers, no other intervention strategies were applied at that time. An analysis of the crimes committed on the same date one year before and one year after the barricades were installed found a 54-percent decrease in violent offenses. When there was no relationship between offender and victim (typically assumed to be buyers and sellers), violent offenses decreased by 78 percent. Arrests were also down by 43 percent. The highest rates of decrease for all statistics came specifically on those streets that were barricaded. Other area streets showed less substantial decreases. During the course of this study, many community residents objected to the use of the barricades. The community leadership lent cautious support, requesting periodic evaluations of their effectiveness. Ironically, a year after installation, the residents most strongly supported the continued use of the barricades, while the community leaders objected. Supporters said drug activity in the study area, although not eliminated, was noticeably less prevalent, and they were positively impressed with the reduction in violence. Neighborhood leaders were now opposed to the barricades because they feared the city was imposing them as a permanent solution, which they viewed as inadequate. Everyone involved agreed that the unsightly appearance of the concrete barricades was a problem. As a result, the barriers have been replaced with a post-and-chain divider surrounded by a garden, which pleases area residents. More than a year after the installation of the barricades, a seven-member Street Drug Interdiction Team was created. Individuals known to be drug dealers were targeted for investigation, arrest, and prioritized prosecution in a joint effort between police and prosecutors. Between November 2000 and February 2001, violent offenses in the area dropped by 30 percent. Pawnshops and Their Possible Connection to Burglaries. The study of pawnshops in Charlotte- Mecklenburg was designed to examine the activities and behavior of individuals who frequently pawn multiple items, according to Crime Analyst Kristen Knight. Police believe the study was vital both to the recovery of stolen merchandise and to the investigation of crimes such as burglary, robbery, and larceny. Prior examination of data suggested that people who pawned items occasionally accounted for approximately 90 percent of business, while the remaining 10 percent pawned items quite often. The study examined nine components of the behavior of frequent pawners: . Whether the transaction involved a loan or a sale . The type of property pawned (e.g., firearms, electronics, tools) . The addresses and frequency of pawnshops visited for GIS analysis . The number of items pawned per visit and the average value of these items . Each customer’s criminal record, if any . The average value of items . The point at which a pawnshop owner or manager became involved in the transaction, based on the value of the item . The average distance from home the customer travels to pawn items . A comparison of the above factors for frequent pawners and a random sample of less frequent customers One of the most interesting aspects of this project was its application of the problem-solving philosophy and the scanning, analysis, response, and assessment (SARA) model to an investigative issue. The Investigative Services Division has sought ways to involve detectives in problem- solving activities so they can more closely apply these concepts to their work. This project took an investigative issue and used extensive data analysis to test the theories. The project gave detectives a chance to see the benefits of more extensive data analysis, which the department hopes will be an impetus for similar projects in the future. Officers often described the SARA process as tedious and slow; however, this project helped them see that their efforts had concrete results. This ACP project is a good model for the integration of problem solving with data. This particular project did not demonstrate the expected correlation. It was a good example of using SARA to check and overturn an assumption of the relationship between pawnshops and burglary. Panel Commentary Charlotte-Mecklenburg used its ACP grant to demonstrate the power of bringing an outside expert with international prominence to a department. Goldstein‘s and Clarke’s involvement caused officers to take this project seriously. Having an expert onsite for a week at a time created many informal opportunities for spontaneous interaction, including the flexibility to pursue ideas as they came up. As a result of working with Goldstein, people from the department accepted the concept of community policing more powerfully and effectively than they would have through training in another location. The immediate question that arises, however, is the degree to which this process could be replicated elsewhere. How many agencies can afford such an investment, and how many scholars have the cachet and immediate credibility of Goldstein? Perhaps the larger lesson is that community policing programs benefit from having access to continuous feedback from an independent, critical source. This function, which should be embedded in implementation programs whenever possible, can be fulfilled by a variety of sources: police personnel, community members, business leaders, and/or retirees. The point is that the inclusion of a credible “touchstone” in the process of program implementation is worth considering, and Charlotte-Mecklenburg clearly benefited from novel and creative use of the ACP grant. The summary of the “appliance burglary project” is a classic case study and worthy of extended analysis. The panel hopes that Charlotte-Mecklenburg will work up a detailed paper on this project and focus on the process of redefining a program that initially failed. It is rare for police agencies to provide indepth analysis of programs that do not work, and to explain how they redesigned their approach to achieve ultimate success. Charlotte-Mecklenburg learned a profound lesson in its initial attempt to address a specific crime problem without first undertaking rigorous analysis of data and causalities. The point is that failures should be examined and triumphs should be celebrated with equal interest. Although false starts and failed initiatives are plentiful in the law enforcement profession, they are seldom reported. It is tempting to minimize several of the Charlotte- Mecklenburg initiatives as rather mundane and uninteresting. But there is a profound message in the department’s experience: Choose battles that can be won. A police agency at the early stages of organizational transformation would do well to focus on perfecting the SARA process by using it to address some basic problems, which in turn would allow them to demonstrate substantive success by dramatically reducing a solvable crime and disorder problem. Once a record of accomplishments has been established and the process has been tested in a real-world laboratory, the chances of acceptance of organizational change and institutionalization of the problem-solving model will be greatly improved. The pawnshop study is noteworthy in part because of the involvement of the investigations bureau in a SARA project. Much has been said about the rarity of SARA applications in detective bureaus around the country. For all the rhetoric about how the integration of problem-solving methodologies into investigations is the next frontier, few case studies indicate progress in this area. Together, the four varied projects provided the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department with a rich framework in which to address future issues. Personnel who worked on these projects are now armed with immensely valuable institutional knowledge that will allow them to teach others and pass along their successes, trials, and failures. Although the process often seemed tedious and overly time consuming, the organizational wisdom and experience that were gained were invaluable. CHAPTER 4 LONGMONT: Community Policing Starts With Communication The Advancing Community Policing Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 Department Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 CHAPTER 4 LONGMONT Community Policing Starts With Communication The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background In 1993, the Longmont Police Department (LPD) was typical of most police departments in the United States. It consisted of men and women working in a top-down, command-and-control environment. Personnel were managed with excessive policies and procedures. Employees depended on their superiors for inspiration and for sustaining morale. Policing in Longmont was done by the rules, in a “cookbook” fashion. It was almost entirely budget-driven and restrictive, leaving little room for ingenuity or creative problem solving. The Advancing Community Policing (ACP) grant was awarded to LPD approximately two years after the department’s long-range strategic plan was completed. That plan called for several initiatives to build better communication and discussion links with the community. Although the city council had agreed to help fund the initiative outlined in the strategic plan, the plan required the police department to use multiple budget years over an extended period of time, which created a time delay in the implementation of some strategies. Projects would be funded over four years. Police Chief Michael Butler says there was another concern: “It seemed that unless the police initiated and continued to maintain the community policing efforts, there was a good chance that viable options for dealing with issues would just wither away for lack of interest.“ Butler went on to say that the information and communication links between police and citizens had traditionally been one-way and not frequent or substantive enough to develop partnerships. Other challenges for LPD included the following: . Police were isolated within the community, with little cooperation from businesses and other entities. . There was an us-versus-them mentality between police and the community. . There was no planning process. . There was no cooperation between police and other city departments. . The department had poor media relations. . Citizens depended on police to solve all crime and social problems. . There was no data and trend analysis (the department lacked personnel and equipment). . There were too many internal affairs complaints. Because of the historical lack of communication between police and citizens, the grant was submitted with the request that the COPS Office help LPD fund the necessary communication links to increase the department’s capacity to develop true partnerships with the community. LPD had two positive attributes that indicated fertile ground for community policing: good, dedicated employees and a community that seemed open to participating in a partnership with the police. ”It seemed that unless the police initiated and continued to maintain the community policing efforts, there was a good chance that viable options for dealing with issues would just wither away for lack of interest.“ Police Chief Michael Butler The real challenge within LPD was creating a place where people believed they owned their work and that what they did had meaning and purpose. Creating an environment where employees worked as partners was also a significant challenge. LPD’s main objective with community policing was to build true partnerships with the community that included the elements of joint accountability and absolute honesty between partners, equal responsibility for determining the future, and giving each partner the right to say “no.” The Project Chief Butler says he knew that only an integrated approach to organizational development would work. “All of the management systems, leadership practices, and architecture,” says Butler, “had to be on the same page. We had to change not only the systems and the architecture to support the internal partnership-based philosophy, but also the relationships we had with our community.” The management systems that needed overhauling were: . Recruitment and selection . Training . Performance management . Budget . Directives (rules and regulations) . Beats (from quadrants to beat and staff development system) . Communication (not dispatch, but how to talk with each other) . Recognition and rewards . Behavior modification . Planning (strategic plan) LONGMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT LOCATION: LONGMONT, COLORADO CHIEF: MICHAEL BUTLER CONTACT: WWW.CI.LONGMONT.CO.US/POLICE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: RE-ENGINEERING OTHER COMPONENTS AMOUNT FUNDED: $249,791 SITE VISIT: JANUARY 16, 2001 DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND Longmont, Colorado is a fast-growing city located 30 miles north of Denver. It lies just east of and parallel to the Rocky Mountains. From its agricultural beginning in 1870, Longmont has grown into a community that supports service businesses, light industry, and high-tech and manufacturing businesses. Longmont’s population of 71,093 is 76.8 percent white and 19.1 percent Hispanic, 1.7 percent Asian, and 2.4 percent other.* The Longmont Police Department (LPD) is composed of 107 commissioned and 35 civilian personnel. The majority of complaints made to police are about traffic and disorder. * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. Recruitment and Selection. Chief Butler began by changing the profile of the police officers hired in Longmont. The department began looking for life-experienced, educated people with good interpersonal and other communication skills and the capacity to work in partnership and diversity. The recruiting philosophy was also changed to find people more interested in the spirit of service than in the spirit of adventure. Training. Several courses on problem solving, communication skills, and utilizing community resources were added to the police training curriculum. The objectives were to teach employees the concepts of partnership and how to work in partnership with citizens and each other. Performance Management. The performance appraisal system was changed from a top-down methodology to a partnership format. Employees and supervisors began to work together closely to develop and clarify expectations for the upcoming year. A career development program that included an increase in salaries for police officers was developed. Budget. Butler says, “We redesigned our budgeting process to give more ownership to smaller units within the police department.” The change allowed more people to be involved with the purchasing and procurement of equipment and capital, as well as spending some discretionary money. Directives. The department’s directive system was condensed from several large manuals into one and redesigned to look less like a tool for management and more like a resource guide for employees. In the past, such changes occurred via managers’ recommendations; now, every employee had the opportunity to recommend such changes. Beats. The former beat system consisted of dividing the city of Longmont into quadrants, with officers assigned randomly on any given shift to any part of the city. In the new system, the city is segmented into districts defined by neighborhoods. Officers are assigned to a district for a full year and often renew their beat assignment during the annual shift/beat bid. Butler says this “has been an invaluable tool in supporting our officers into taking more ownership for their areas and helping them to work successfully in partnership with our citizens.” Communication. All meetings are now open to any employee to attend. Agendas, to which employees can contribute, are published in advance. Monthly staff meetings, called “departmentwide conversations,” are now held. Recognition and Rewards. The annual awards banquet and ceremony has dramatically increased the number of citizens who receive recognition by including new awards such as the Community Policing Award. Behavior Modification. The entire discipline system was modified to reflect management working in partnership with employees. The responsibility for evolving behavior was pushed away from the chief’s office to first-line supervisors. Prior to the changes that moved the department toward both partnership and community policing, formal citizen complaints averaged 100 per year. Since 1995, the average has been only two formal complaints per year. Planning. Perhaps the most comprehensive strategy to help initiate community policing was the development of a long-range strategic plan. To develop that plan, teams of employees were sent on fact-finding missions to seven police departments across North America. Each department was recognized as a leader in community policing, and some had already developed strategic plans. Each team of employees prepared and presented comprehensive reports on their site visits to the department and community members. Chief Butler says the result was an increased understanding of community policing and a significantly better grasp of the importance of creating and implementing a long-range strategic plan. One of the main objectives of the planning process was to identify the responsibilities of the police department and the communities. As the discussions evolved and the police became more comfortable talking about their true capacity, it became more apparent that the police were merely partners in improving the quality of life in the community. The resulting strategic plan now includes more than 200 initiatives. It is modified every other year and reviewed monthly in staff meetings. “Over time,” says Chief Butler, “we have turned the corner. In fact, the other departments in our city have converted many of their systems to work more in partnership with their employees. “The Advancing Community Policing grant opportunity could not have come at a better time for us,” says Chief Butler. “We believed we had already done all the groundwork in preparing for a grant, not knowing the ACP grant would be available. We wanted the decision-makers for the distribution of grant money to understand and appreciate that we were not developing a new idea because grant money was available, but that all of our planning and preparation would increase our likelihood of obtaining the grant. It worked. In fact, our strategic plan was the goose that laid the golden egg for many grant opportunities; truly an unintended, but very successful consequence.” The ACP grant funded several initiatives that greatly enhanced the department’s capacity to create and maintain ongoing communication, which led to sustained partnerships within the community. The grant was paramount to the department’s process of building and maintaining true community partnerships, and it significantly accelerated the department’s timetable for implementing the partnerships. Since being awarded the ACP grant, Longmont has funded other key initiatives with grant money. The catalyst for that funding, however, was the valuable experience the entire community—police and citizens—received by implementing the initiatives funded by the ACP grant: . Community services coordinator . Website information and homepage . Spanish immersion training . Problem-oriented policing (POP) conference . Crime analysis and software mapping program . Quarterly newspaper inserts . Crime prevention through television . Community survey . Flattening organizational structure . A local conference The following sections describe the initiatives that were funded by Longmont’s ACP grant and summarize the effect of each on the community. Community Services Coordinator. Funding for the community services coordinator position allowed the department to coordinate and centralize all communications between LPD and the community. The coordinator facilitated meetings and the exchange of information between police and citizens. This position coordinates the volunteer program that saves the taxpayers approximately $150,000 annually. Citizens enforce handicapped parking restrictions, removal of junked vehicles, and ordinances in the parks. The coordinator developed such programs as Play- It-Safe, a program that focuses on elementary school student safety, and the Police Intern Program, which partners with local colleges. In this program, college students who want to be police officers are trained and then patrol the streets of the community, handling mostly disorder- related issues. This has become a significant recruiting tool for the department. The coordinator position assists with and coordinates much of the marketing for the department on a local level. The positive impact of having the coordinator on board was recognized immediately by police personnel, citizens, schools, businesses, and other organizations, including the city council, which has funded this position permanently. Website Information and Homepage. Grant funding helped LPD develop its first homepage and, subsequently, its capacity to communicate with the community through the Internet. The components of the website include a recruitment section, a crime map, crime prevention information, police/community programs, an interactive question-and-answer section, links to other sites, and a tour of the police department. According to LPD, the website has become a good recruiting tool for the department, and it has enabled employees to answer many questions from citizens about police-related issues. Teleminder™ System. The Teleminder™ is a community messaging system. Through multiple phone lines, the department can send out prerecorded notices of neighborhood meetings, crime alerts, special interest information, and more. Five hundred messages can be sent in an hour; recipients can be targeted geographically. At first the department believed that information sent out should be law enforcement-related, which limited the system’s use. When the grant period ended, however, the department made the Teleminder™ available to other city departments; for example, the fire department uses it for severe weather warnings. One of the most frequent users is the neighborhood group coordinator, who is closely aligned with the police department on quality-oflife issues and neighborhood revitalization. Spanish Immersion Training. Because LPD is concerned with maintaining a positive relationship with the Hispanic population, efforts have been made to train officers to speak Spanish. Since the ACP grant expired, the department has continued to pay for the language training, which has become a high priority on the annual training schedule. As the population that speaks only Spanish continues to grow, police personnel fluent in Spanish are an essential resource. Problem-Oriented Policing Conference. Held annually in San Diego, California, the POP conference has been a destination for Longmont police personnel for several years. ACP funds enabled the department to send not only police personnel but also 10 citizens from local businesses, neighborhood groups, and youth groups to the 1999 POP conference. The conference offered many ideas and projects to the civilians who attended, and it gave them the opportunity to spend time with police officers in an environment that was educational and social, rather than official. This particular form of partnering has continued to provide positive connections between officers and citizens. The neighborhood group leaders, with whom the police department works closely, benefit from this experience. They have taken a significant leadership role in organizing the community’s neighborhoods. Crime Analysis and Software Mapping Program. The ACP grant allowed the department to move ahead with updated software and crime mapping. Through these upgrades, the crime analyst was able to provide operations personnel, citizens, and neighborhood groups with current crime trends and patterns and to address those trends more effectively. The mapping is also used in the department’s weekly cable television show (see ”Crime Prevention Through Television“). Quarterly Newspaper Inserts. One of the department’s most successful communication tools, these custom-sized inserts in the local newspaper disseminate information about such topics as crime prevention, school and workplace violence, and safe gun storage. Feedback is excellent—the community has consistently found these inserts quite helpful and informative. A recent insert focused on disorder in the city and featured the most frequently cited code violations, along with appropriate citizen responses. Because of its value to citizens, this particular insert was translated into Spanish and distributed to Spanish-speaking households. The department continues to fund the publication of these inserts. Crime Prevention Through Television. Longmont’s weekly cable television show devoted to the local police is called “Behind the Badge.” According to LPD, the show has a loyal following, and viewership has increased over the past three and a half years. The format includes a crime map, discussion of traffic hot spots, crime prevention tips, and guests who discuss the show’s featured topic, along with calls from viewers. A popular segment on “Behind the Badge” is “Longmont’s Most Wanted.” Viewers have called in information that has led to numerous arrests. The show has had continued funding from the department and city following the ACP grant. Community Survey. In 1996, the police department conducted a professional and scientific community survey that proved useful. The Strategic Plan 2000 called for the survey to be conducted biannually, and the ACP grant was used to conduct a new survey in 1998. This second survey was also conducted scientifically by a professional company. The new survey was expanded in scope to include not only the resident survey but also youth and business components. The expanded survey was designed to be a baseline for future surveys conducted by police staff. Part of the survey applied to citizens who had prior personal experiences with the police and included questions about what those experiences entailed. The results of the biannual survey have been useful in developing programs, allocating funding, and assessing the community’s opinion of the department. LPD incorporates information from the survey when drafting operational plans, developing new projects, enhancing existing educational and other programs, building partnerships, proposing budgets, and allocating and deploying officers. Community surveys will continue to be part of LPD’s strategy for delivering police services. The department has employed a crime, information, and research analyst who will continue to administer the surveys. Flattening Organizational Structure. The department flattened its organization by combining two high levels (lieutenants and captains) into one (commander) and eliminating one-third of the top-level management positions. The resources saved by the restructuring were used to hire more police officers. This minimized the number of filters in the organization and gave police at each level more authority to make decisions. Chief Butler says that flattening was initially met with a good deal of resistance but has been successful. The Our Town Conference. The department initiated a conference called Our Town for people in the community who seldom have the opportunity to attend conferences. Attendees learned cutting- edge information regarding trends in technology, business issues, the media, education, government operations, and community building. To date, three conferences have been conducted. Organizational development experts Peter Block, John McKnight, and Patch Adams have been keynote speakers. As a result of these conferences, several new neighborhood groups have been formed and nonprofits such as Youth as Resources have been created. In addition, 250 youths from local schools have committed themselves to community service projects. Department Observations Department officials are aware that the implementation of community policing should be an integrated, systematic approach and that any new program will have systemwide impact. Thus, the department ensures that new programs conform to its community policing philosophy and fit successfully within its management systems. “Our ongoing challenge,” says Chief Butler, “will be shifting some of the responsibility of public safety from the police to the community, as well as the power to deal with related issues responsibly.” Butler goes on to say that the department needs to “give people a chance to create their part of that vision. Create an environment that gets people talking on their own and with each other. Encourage disagreement. Give people a voice.” But he also says it is important to “remind them that their voice comes at a cost. The cost for people to have a voice revolves around agenda. Their agenda must be about the organization and/or the community and not about themselves.” Panel Commentary Many of the grants and programs the panel has evaluated asked for monetary support to initiate or complete a strategic planning process. In contrast, LPD requested and received ACP grant support several years after completion of its strategic plan. This phased support of analysis, implementation, and possible expansion of strategic goals is a worthwhile model. Strategic planning is the cornerstone of agency progress; an agency should not wait for a funding opportunity before initiating the strategic planning process. LPD’s strategic planning process is remarkable for its inclusion of community and business leaders in site visits and for reporting back to the department as a whole. Ongoing modification of the plan through outside retreats demonstrates the department’s commitment to process. In fact, paying attention to process is an underappreciated skill in law enforcement, and some departments have languished for years as a result. Using a grant to fund a full-time position is generally a risky proposition. Invariably, there are startup losses in time and energy. There is also the possibility that the program will not meet basic goals before the position can be funded again via a continuing grant or transferred to a general fund or other budget line item. In the case of Longmont’s community services coordinator, however, this risk paid off. Not only did the department advance important strategic goals, but the success of the program prompted the city council to fund the position permanently. This outcome (which unfortunately remains more the exception than the rule) reinforces the power of a clearly articulated vision of both the objective and the plan for implementation. The use of the Teleminder™ system for communicating messages to community members is noteworthy. While these automated outdialing systems are used by large agencies under a variety of trade names, it is unusual to find an agency the size of LPD deploying such a system. Moreover, these systems tend to be used by public safety agencies for emergency management and mobilization. The use of these systems to communicate with the community maximizes their value, particularly when one considers that they are idle for most of any given day. Longmont’s work is an excellent example of how purposeful leadership combined with public funding can bring about change within an organization that, without the grant, would not be motivated or prepared for the change immediately or quickly. Chief Butler’s attention to integration of services and organizational structure demonstrates a fundamental understanding of how these aspects of a police department are related and how they affect the work of each officer. Officers will work more willingly and effectively in the community if behavior inside the department serves as a model of the behavior they are expected to display outside the department. CHAPTER 5 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: A Sheriff’s Vision For Community Policing The Advancing Community Policing Grant. . . . . . . . . .39 Department Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 Panel Commentary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 LOS ANGELES COUNTY A Sheriff's Vision For Community Policing The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background Community policing efforts in the Los Angeles County Sheriff‘s Department (LASD) include officers working in patrol, custody, court services, detective, or administrative functions. The department has patrol deputies assigned to the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Bureau to address problem-solving and community policing activities. Part of the Advancing Community Policing (ACP) grant money went toward bringing in more staff to help develop LASD’s COPS Bureau. The ACP grant also provided overtime funds that were used to pay for 300 sergeants, 100 lieutenants, and other sworn and nonsworn managers to attend the Community Policing for Supervisors and Managers course offered at the California Regional Community Policing Institute (RCPI) at Los Angeles. “Misconceptions about community policing were addressed in the training,” said Lieutenant Bruce Pollack, RCPI’s director. “Many mid-level managers who were initially very much against the COPS Bureau and philosophy became some of its most ardent supporters.” Many deputies have admitted that they did not initially support the program but participated because it was the new policy. After learning and practicing the philosophy of the COPS Bureau, however, they discovered that it did not mean that the department was going “soft on crime.” Instead, it was redirecting its approach to community problems and involving community residents to a greater degree in addressing criminal matters. After participating in the department’s community policing efforts, these deputies have become “believers in the program and philosophy and are convinced that this is the manner in which law enforcement agencies should function,” says Deputy Dan Waidner. LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT LOCATION: LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SHERIFF: LEROY D. BACA CONTACT: WWW.LASD.ORG ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AMOUNT FUNDED: $250,000 SITE VISIT: JANUARY 3, 2001 DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND Los Angeles County is one of the Nation’s largest counties, with 4,081 square miles, including the islands of San Clemente and Santa Catalina, and a 76-mile coastline. The county has a population of 9.5 million, the largest single- county population in the nation. The population is 44.6 percent Hispanic, 31.1 percent white, 11.8 percent Asian, 9.5 percent black, and 31 percent other.* Approximately 29 percent of California’s residents live in Los Angeles County. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) is the largest sheriff’s department in the world, with 9,000 sworn and 6,000 civilian members in 21 separate policing stations. The department is responsible for the enforcement of all laws and regulations as required by statute. The department participates in programs for rehabilitation, crime prevention, and delinquency suppression; directs and coordinates emergency services; maintains security for and supports the functions of the superior and municipal courts; and operates county detention facilities. These law enforcement services are provided throughout the unincorporated areas of the county and within 42 incorporated cities that contract with LASD for services. LASD is unionized. Two unions represent the sworn members of the department and one represents the civilian personnel. No one is obligated to belong to any union as a condition of employment within the department. * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. The Project Major elements of LASD’s ACP project included: . The COPS Bureau . The Vital Intervention and Directional Alternatives (VIDA) program . The Nuisance Abatement Tracking System . The fiscal system . The Activities Tracking System The COPS Bureau. Sheriff Leroy D. Baca made community policing a centerpiece of his administration when he was elected in 1998. LASD’s COPS Bureau is responsible for all community policing activities within the unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. “The Bureau was created in an effort to unify the services provided by all of the COPS deputies under one command,” says Commander Paul Tanaka. “The primary objective of the COPS Bureau is to have each station’s team develop a rapport with the residents of its specific community. The goal is to give the community an opportunity to become acquainted with the deputy sheriffs who police their area and, in turn, obtain information regarding the community’s needs.” The COPS Bureau now has five specialized programs departmentwide and 309 deputies and 41 sergeants assigned to 35 COPS teams in 20 stations. Prior to the development of the COPS Bureau, residents of the unincorporated areas of the county received basic law enforcement services from the department. Patrol deputies, whose primary function was to answer calls for service, provided most of these services. Due to the large number of calls and a shortage of officers, patrol deputies did not have the time or resources to respond effectively to every community problem. As a result, patrol deputies spent most of their time handling such higher priority crimes as violent felonies. Lower grade crimes such as illegal drug activity, prostitution, drinking in public, and quality-of-life issues had not been thoroughly addressed, and problems such as vacant properties, abandoned vehicles, illegal vending and dumping, and curfew and truancy violations were often completely ignored. All COPS Bureau deputies are selected from the cadre of patrol deputies assigned to a specific station. As openings within the COPS Bureau occur, any station deputy can rotate out of patrol into the COPS Bureau. The basic difference between the two roles is that, unlike deputies in the COPS Bureau, patrol deputies answer calls for service and do not have time to investigate or handle problems that require long-term solutions. The COPS Bureau deputies work as a team. They address problems at specific locations that can vary from barking dogs or excessive trash accumulation to hardcore gang or narcotics activity. When patrol deputies notify COPS Bureau deputies of a problem, the COPS deputies take on the problem as a dedicated mission. “Many mid-level managers who were initially very much against the COPS Bureau and philosophy became some of its most ardent supporters.” Lieutenant Bruce Pollack As deputies rotate through the program, LASD expects that, eventually, every member of the patrol force will have served within the COPS Bureau and will know how to address more complex and varied community problems. Each deputy assigned to a COPS position is responsible for a particular reporting district, community, or neighborhood. This is to reduce the size of service areas to smaller, more manageable communities. COPS deputies assigned to these communities identify and develop solutions to problems in conjunction with community members and neighborhood leaders. Three types of COPS teams work within LASD: COPS, Special Prevention and Intervention (SPI), and High Impact Target Area. SPI COPS teams typically work in bicycle patrols, which have been effective in both apprehending criminals and allowing officers to get to know neighborhood residents. SPI teams work throughout the station area on both mission-specific patrols and saturation patrols, and they act as additional support for other COPS teams. The High Impact Target Area COPS teams operate at each station and work within specifically targeted areas for short periods of time (approximately four to nine months, depending on the area and community problems encountered). These target areas are selected based on such criteria as overall criminal activity, specific gang activity, calls from residents identifying problem locations, and other outside influences. These teams begin targeted community projects by surveying the community and asking the residents to identify their concerns and, if possible, locations where criminal activity occurs. These results are tabulated and problem locations are identified as specific missions that the entire team combats. When the High Impact Target Area survey is complete, the COPS team discusses the results of the survey with residents in a townhall meeting. Community leaders are invited to meet with the team to discuss the project’s outcome. Any mission that is not completed during the project time period is turned over to the regular COPS team and the appropriate COPS deputy continues to work toward solving the problem. Other COPS deputies are assigned to community relations duties and to the VIDA program. The VIDA Program. “The VIDA program is the only program in Los Angeles County that deals with at-risk youth before they become just another inmate in the juvenile justice system,” says Sergeant Arlene Berner, the VIDA program coordinator for the department. The program utilizes community volunteers (such as U.S. Marines based in the Los Angeles area) to teach discipline and instill healthy habits through physical training. The program allows deputies to become mentors and positive role models for troubled youths. VIDA program deputies work with youths at 12 sites in Los Angeles County. The 16-week program is a collaborative effort between LASD, community- based organizations, the juvenile courts, the probation department, schools, and parents. VIDA focuses on youths between the ages of 11 and 171/2 who have no serious law enforcement contacts but have exhibited such antisocial behavior as truancy, incorrigibility, threats of violence, or affiliation with street gangs. The juvenile courts, the probation department, the Department of Children’s Services, schools, parents, and law enforcement refer youths to this program. More than 600 youths have graduated from the VIDA program since it was expanded countywide in January 2000. ”The VIDA program is the only program in Los Angeles County that deals with at-risk youth before they become just another inmate in the juvenile justice system.“ Sergeant Arlene Berner The Nuisance Abatement Tracking System. The Board of Supervisors has created a Nuisance Abatement Tracking System in conjunction with LASD. The purpose of this system is to track the progress of nuisance abatements. Deputy sheriffs respond to citizen complaints of nuisance problems (code enforcement) in their area of responsibility. They can access the Nuisance Abatement Tracking System website and check on the status of any property in the county. This system provides a history of past inspections (if applicable) and whether the location has been a safety concern in the past. The system gives the user information about the owner and the names of informants. The program has a built- in email capability, which allows deputies to forward information to specific contact people at designated public agencies who can respond to aproblem or complaint. The program also can generate statistical reports that satisfy monthly report and grant requirements. The system is user friendly with pulldown menus, FAQ guides, and help programs. The website, which is located on Los Angeles County’s intranet, can be accessed by personnel from county agencies. The system is currently used in two of the five supervisor districts. The Fiscal System. All of the COPS funds are incorporated within the department’s budget and earmarked for the COPS Bureau. Due to the many requests for specific financial details from the County Board of Supervisors and federal, state, and local grant agencies, the COPS Bureau created and maintains a fiscal tracking system that can quickly produce reports that are tailored to each agency’s need for information. The Activities Tracking System. The Activities Tracking System consists of the statistical records of COPS deputies’ actions. It summarizes the activities conducted within each community, team, station, supervisor district, and Field Operations Region and in the COPS Bureau. Additionally, a one-page narrative is included for each team to highlight its most recent accomplishments. This allows deputies to express themselves beyond what mere numbers can portray. This type of report, in which the narrative and the statistical sections complement each other, effectively addresses requests for information about the COPS Bureau. Department Observations Challenges When LASD was creating the COPS Bureau, there were many misconceptions, including different ideas about the duties of the newly assigned deputies. Some thought that this would be only an extension of the community relations function and that no “true police work” would be involved. Others saw this as a “fluff” assignment not worthy of a deputy who wanted to do “true police work.” Because most LASD deputies enjoyed protecting communities by being very proactive in law enforcement through the apprehension of criminals, many deputies did not want to be associated with this very different kind of program. As it turned out, the sheriff wanted a COPS Bureau in which the deputies would be very proactive against gangs, narcotics activity, and general lawlessness, in addition to being in close touch with community residents. This included addressing the criminal activity that was important to the residents rather than to the deputies. When the true nature of the COPS Bureau and the philosophy were made known, and when communities eagerly accepted this new approach to law enforcement, deputies became less critical of the program. Benefits The COPS Bureau has allowed deputies to form community partnerships that have benefited both the community and the department. Placing deputies who do not have the responsibility to handle radio calls in the community can provide long-term solutions. Nuisance Abatement Teams are examples of such partnerships. Members of the COPS team meet monthly with representatives of the code enforcement, building and safety, and health departments. The meetings address safety and nuisance issues that are beyond the scope of law enforcement, but are brought to the attention of police almost daily. Another example of a working partnership is the Azusa Law Enforcement Group (LEG). Members routinely attend meetings and work on projects together. The Azusa Police Department, West Covina Police Department, Covina Police Department, San Dimas COPS Team, Sheriff’s Department, Operation SafeStreets, state parole department, and county probation department all provide representatives. Joint LEG operations have resulted in many arrests. Sharing of information within the group benefits each participating organization. The county areas that the San Dimas station serves are within several cities. Criminals do not recognize jurisdictional boundaries; they may live in one area and “caper” in others. LASD now can share information, which allows it to thwart the efforts of such criminals. LASD also has built relationships with the local schools. Although many schools are outside the county area, the students who attend them live in the county area. The students see LASD deputies in and around the campuses and soon realize that COPS teams can cross jurisdictional boundaries. An example is Sierra Continuation High School in the Azusa School District, which is across the street from a county park. LASD found that good truancy enforcement reduces daytime burglaries, so it works in partnership with the school. The school gives the department the names of habitual truants and a team from LASD picks them up. LASD has formed good relationships with the Board of Supervisors’ staff field deputies. They have provided information, support, and, in some cases, resources. Their ability to get responsive action from other county departments has been a valuable asset. According to Deputy Dan Waidner, an unintended outcome of the department’s COPS Bureau and philosophy is somewhat like the proverbial ”double-edged sword.“ He says: On one hand, our COPS Bureau and philosophy has been amazingly successful in bringing communities together, decreasing crime and the residents’ perception of crime, enhancing residents’ quality of life, creating nicer looking neighborhoods, forming partnerships with other county agencies, intervening with ‘at risk’ youths, and being able to address and handle almost any type of request for service. But, on the other hand, Waidner notes that “because the program and philosophy have been so successful, COPS Bureau personnel are being inundated with service requests.” The community has become accustomed to the increased level of service, and LASD is finding it difficult to continue at this pace. The deputies’ workload has increased so significantly that the end result could be a reduction in their ability to respond. The irony is that this is similar to the situation the department faced before it formed the COPS Bureau. Personnel were so busy handling calls for service that they could not provide adequate service to the communities. Now the department is providing all of these services, stretching itself to its limits in doing so. Executives in the department are attempting to address this concern. Panel Commentary The panel chose to include this grant for study for several reasons: It allows discussion and consideration of the difficulties involved when implementing community policing in a sheriff’s department, as opposed to a municipal police department; a large number of initiatives already under way were supported and enhanced by the training this grant provided; and the size of the agency raised questions of how to get the most for its money. This case is another example (like Longmont and Boston) in which the department had already engaged in a strategic process to expand community policing and the grant funds furthered that plan. One might assume that providing $250,000 in ACP grant funds to the largest sheriff’s department in the nation would have little effect. LASD, however, demonstrated that the specific amount of grant money is secondary to the catalytic effect of applying for, receiving, and expending a grant. Many agencies evaluated by the panel reported that the process of applying for the ACP grant occasioned often intense analysis of programs and goals and reinvigorated the agency’s commitment to community policing. While the ACP grant represented a minute percentage of the overall LASD budget devoted to community policing, it was clearly instrumental in supporting two objectives: to make training possible for 400 sergeants and lieutenants and, as part of the financial package, to create and define the COPS Bureau. It is laudable that LASD had the foresight to wed the training initiative to both community policing in general and the COPS Bureau in particular, because there was resistance in the critical ranks of sergeant and lieutenant to both the general philosophy of community policing and the creation of a specific bureau. The use of grant funds for training sergeants and lieutenants was well-advised and quickly allowed LASD to develop a common understanding and language of community policing among a large group of supervisors and command officers. The panel applauds the choice of RCPI as the training venue for the Community Policing for Supervisors and Managers curriculum attended by LASD sergeants, lieutenants, and managers. The RCPI network needs this kind of recognition and engagement. The concept of the RCPI network is a good one and worth supporting. The challenge of designing a community policing approach in a county sheriff’s agency is both profound and unique. The logistics of transforming an organization charged with policing an area of more than 4,000 square miles are daunting, to say the least. For this reason, the panel believes that Sheriff Baca’s efforts have national significance. LASD is a unique laboratory, and its successes or failures may have significant implications for the overall future of community policing in non- metropolitan areas. Sheriff Baca has made a dramatic long-term commitment to community policing. The department’s plan that all deputies and supervisors will eventually rotate through a community policing assignment is impressive. This rotation will create a broad-based understanding of practical problem- solving skills among the key individuals in the department who can make community policing successful. Rotation can do much to offset the difficult separation some agencies feel when they adopt a model that dedicates some officers to community policing within a cadre of patrol officers who have limited or no community policing expectations. The rate of calls for LASD patrol officer service was described as so high that it prevented patrol deputies from engaging in community policing problem solving. It will be interesting to see how LASD balances the increasing demand for problem solving within the community with an already taxed patrol force. If effective, community policing could contribute to a decrease in calls for service, thereby allowing more patrol deputies to join COPS Bureau deputies. One answer to the mandate to meet rising expectations is to focus on the “community” part of “community policing.” One of the more important insights advanced in the LASD summary is the need to plan for success. LASD believed that if the COPS Bureau met or exceeded its goals, there would be “unintended outcomes,” some of which would be negative. But this is a common dynamic: success gives rise to higher expectations and increased demands. Overwhelming success can have significant human, budgetary, and time management implications. At the risk of oversimplifying a complex issue, LASD may have a long way to go in the area of community empowerment. One answer to the mandate to meet rising expectations is to focus on the “community” part of “community policing.” The community’s expectations suggest a one-way service dynamic, instead of the shared responsibility between citizens and police that is the cornerstone of community policing. The Nuisance Abatement and Tracking System is a highly valuable tool that also has been used in afew other departments. LASD seems to have been successful in integrating its system into city and county systems. The department’s use of the system of accountability is laudable. It ensures that projects are coordinated and that they benefit from the greatest possible amount of information. We recommend that LASD share both the process used to develop the system and the specific format and structure with other departments. This model will be helpful to any agency that wants to create such a system. CHAPTER 6 PORTLAND: Emergency Notification System The Advancing Community Policing Grant. . . . . . . . .47 Department Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 Panel Commentary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 CHAPTER 6 PORTLAND Emergency Notification System The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background By the time the Advancing Community Policing (ACP) project began, the Portland Police Bureau had more than 10 years of experience in computerized desktop mapping. Mapping had become increasingly popular. Citizens were aware of and officers were using the Crime Analysis Management Information Network (CAMIN) as a tool to visualize crime. The idea that citizens could perform similar mapping functions via the Internet was formed during development of the CAMIN project. Desktop mapping can effectively make selections on an electronic map and create a file, so it seemed logical to combine the power of desktop mapping with telephone communications. Making a selection from an electronic map and delivering a message to the telephones in that area would save lives and property. Administrators, officers, and community members were brought together to select and implement the program and its individual components. Community involvement was critical. Several previous incidents had highlighted the need for an emergency notification system. In one case, a storm caused severe flooding that necessitated the evacuation of nearby residents. In other cases, an armed gunman held hostages in a downtown high-rise office building and another barricaded himself in an apartment complex. In all of these examples, an emergency notification system would have provided a more efficient and timely means of alerting area residents to the potential danger. In 1990, the Portland Police Bureau adopted a Community Policing Transition Plan. The department realized that improving its technological abilities was critical to advancing community policing. Developing and using geographic information systems (GIS) technology as part of its community policing initiatives became part of the department’s infrastructure. However, the growing popularity of electronic mapping within law enforcement meant more training would be needed, and it would have to be better coordinated within the bureau. The Project In 1997, the bureau applied for an ACP grant to continue building on its efforts with the installation of a “dial-and-deliver” GIS system. The proposed system would have a number of uses, including automated community reminders and the delivery of emergency automated telephone contact during a crisis situation. In addition, implementing the dial-and-deliver system would continue to enhance the department’s GIS infrastructure on which the calling system would be built. Specifically, the objectives were to: . Implement a dial-and-deliver notification system (including the development of policies for its use, the selection and installation of components, and testing and going online with the system). . Evaluate the dial-and-deliver notification system to determine whether customers (both officers and citizens) find the system an effective and useful tool. . Provide training on GIS technology at all bureau levels. . Coordinate between the various GIS technologies to integrate all systems that use computerized mapping. . Upgrade existing GIS technology by providing needed enhancements. Before implementing the ACP project, officials had to research the various types of systems and equipment available. The Portland Police Bureau released a request for information (RFI) to all companies known to provide products or services in the emergency notification industry. In response to the RFI, three companies provided demos and answered technical questions about their systems. Department officials learned there were two basic types of systems available: equipment and service based. Based on its prior research, the bureau realized that a service-based system would best suit its needs. Selecting a provider was time consuming, but critical to the project’s success. The Portland Police Bureau included members of the community in development of the GIS system. Two neighborhoods were eventually selected as test areas. A public information and media campaign was launched to inform the residents of Portland about the program, named Portland’s Emergency Notification System (PENS). Brochures were sent to agencies and users who would be affected. Establishing a system for making emergency phone calls using a computer involves breaking the process down into its major components: policy, procedure, closure routine, command involvement, location of equipment, support, citizen involvement, media involvement, subscriber lists, and training. Policy. The Police Bureau was concerned that system calls would become commonplace or even ignored if there were too many nonemergency messages. Therefore, the city council directed that the system be used only for notification involving threats to life and property. A phone call from PENS must be considered an emergency. Procedure. The commander of each of Portland’s five precincts is responsible for police operations within the precinct’s jurisdiction. Only the commander can authorize activation of the emergency notification system within that precinct. Officers, specialty units, or outside bureaus (including the Fire Bureau) must obtain approval from the precinct commander to activate the system. The procedure for operating the system is outlined in a manual supplied to all precinct commanders. Closure Routine. When the danger or threat has passed, a closure message can be sent to assure the citizens that the incident is over. This closure routine contacts the same people who originally were called and both informs them of the outcome and thanks them for their help. One officer stressed the importance of this callback component, believing that follow-up with residents is an integral part of community policing. Command Involvement. Both precinct commanders and command staff were involved in the approval of policy and procedures as outlined in the training bulletin. Although the precinct commanders were the only authorized activators of the system, they could delegate authority at their discretion. Commanders must set the policy within their precincts. Location of Equipment. The police information line unit was selected as the location for the equipment. The supervisor and staff both welcomed the program and took ownership of it. This unit is the contact point for citizens who need information on police-related matters. With six staff members and a supervisor, the unit both answers questions and refers citizens to the appropriate precinct, division, or unit. Officials believed members of this unit would feel more personally involved in the program because they maintained responsibility for the system. In addition, because of the group’s small size, training was held in just one day, only hours after the system was installed. DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND The Portland, Oregon metropolitan area is located in the northwestern corner of Oregon at the confluence of the Columbia and Willamette Rivers on the Oregon-Washington state border. Portland has a population of 529,121. The population is 75.5 percent white, 6.5 percent black, 6.8 percent Hispanic, 6.3 percent Asian, and 5.0 percent other.* The police department has 1,045 sworn and 312 nonsworn personnel. The Portland Police Association represents officers as a union. * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. PORTLAND POLICE BUREAU LOCATION: PORTLAND, OREGON CHIEF: MARK KROEKER CONTACT: WWW.PORTLANDPOLICEBUREAU.COM ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: RE-ENGINEERING OTHER COMPONENTS AMOUNT FUNDED: $247,223 SITE VISIT: JANUARY 8, 2001 The police information line is also the data entry point for all unlisted or unpublished phone numbers that are not supplied with commercially prepared data. During the course of the grant, the city of Portland and the Police Bureau had no statutory right to access those numbers from the phone company, so the Police Bureau asked citizens to submit their phone numbers and addresses if they wanted to be added to the system.1 The service-based system allows for a remote system in the field for emergency notification. The Police Bureau has one mobile precinct online and a second on the way. The laptop computer can be taken into the mobile precinct and emergency notifications can be sent from the remote location. In addition to notification capabilities, the laptop has fully functional mapping that can be used in the mobile command center. Support. PENS is built on the desktop mapping program the Police Bureau has been using for more than 12 years, which allows the Police Bureau to maximize return on its investment in programming and training. The Planning and Support Division is the support unit within the Police Bureau; the grant manager was assigned to this unit. The service provider handles technical support for the software supplied in the PENS program, the maintenance of map layers and data files, and the completion of changes or updates to the system via a phone line. The updates and upgrades are seamless. The service provider also updates the unlisted numbers with numbers supplied to them by the Police Bureau. Citizen Involvement. Portland has 96 neighborhood associations that cover virtually the entire city. The Police Bureau worked with the Office of Neighborhood Involvement to find neighborhoods that would be willing to participate in a test. Two neighborhood group leaders volunteered. Information was released to the local newspapers, and articles informed citizens that the tests would occur. Through the mayor’s office, Portland has a program called Neighbor Safe that provides a forum in which neighborhood residents can voice their concerns on local issues. The Neighbor Safe program mailed a package to each household within the city that included information about PENS, a phone number for more information, and a form on which citizens could submit their unlisted phone numbers. Media Involvement. Media involvement and assistance in sharing information about PENS was important to the project as a way to distribute information and introduce citizens to the system, especially because the grant did not provide funding for a paid media campaign. Subscriber Lists. PENS is capable of much more than the delivery of emergency messages. The system can inform citizens about upcoming events and neighborhood meetings, as well as crime prevention tips and other information. One jurisdiction surveyed uses its system to contact the elderly on a daily basis. If there is no response, the operator is alerted to dispatch a car to the location. Another jurisdiction uses the system to notify banks and stores of counterfeit checks or money orders being passed. Training. Coordination of the training is ongoing and an expansion is planned. The CAMIN project established a computer lab for training and the computer lab now provides training in additional areas, including advanced mapping and crime analysis. The lab is equipped with mapping and other complementary tools that are used by the entire Police Bureau. Plans for the Future. The goal of implementing an emergency notification system has been met. The system is ongoing and fully functional. Although it will not replace officers in all instances, PENS will reduce the number of officers needed to evacuate citizens or inform them of danger. There is no question an emergency notification system can alert citizens and businesses faster and more efficiently than officers going door to door. The notification system should be enhanced in those areas that would benefit from its use, including contact with the elderly, suspect alerts, fraud alerts, and callbacks. Training in mapping as a way to display data for analysis and presentation must be continued, and training on all mapping programs is ongoing within the Portland Police Bureau. The bureau remains committed to training and supporting its members to provide the best service to the community. Department Observations Challenges Many citizens with unlisted numbers are still not included in the database. Portland has a high proportion of unlisted numbers, but officials are currently working on this problem and are encouraged by a new law that allows cities to obtain those numbers for the purpose of emergency notification. Technology has progressed greatly over the past few years, but it has not solved some of the most common problems. For example, TTY/TDD machines cannot be contacted at the same time hearing telephone calls are being made. TTY/TDD calls must be made separately and to known phone numbers. The ideal system would identify a TTY/TDD machine and leave a message, but such technology is not available at this time. Benefits At the conclusion of the ACP grant, an evaluation of the implementation process and the system was completed and submitted with the final report to the COPS Office. The evaluation found that the PENS system can deliver messages to any segment of the community much faster than traditional means. During actual events within the city, as many as 2,000 messages were delivered in about 30 minutes, including up to 5 attempts to phone numbers that were not answered. Another key benefit is the system’s ability to deliver a closure message to the same segment of the community when an incident is concluded, informing citizens about an incident’s outcome. This is critical because sharing information to gain the cooperation of citizens is a primary goal of community policing. Certainly, the community supports the concept of emergency notification. Even citizens with unlisted numbers have embraced the concept and supplied their numbers to the Police Bureau. The Portland Police Bureau and the city of Portland have benefited greatly from this project and will strive to continue the progress that the ACP grant made possible. Panel Commentary The exposition of Portland’s PENS system was outstanding. The Portland Police Bureau provided an analytical and historical summary of an impressive technological program that can serve as a model for other agencies. The cogent, comprehensive, and candid program assessment fully explains the development and implementation of a program that provokes commitment and inspires change. The selection of a service-based versus an equipment-based system was a critical decision point. Too often, agencies allow technology to define the parameters of service delivery, instead of the other way around. This is the classic form- follows-function dynamic, which time and again has led to dissatisfaction, inefficiency, and obsolescence. By requiring a service-based program, Portland could tap into the CAMIN desktop mapping infrastructure in place. Nevertheless, successful integration of an outdialing system with desktop mapping by a large municipal police agency remains rare. The specific program element of automated closure messaging is without precedent and it is very impressive. The policy of making a closure call, particularly after a police incident in an area, demonstrates a commitment to communication with residents. This simple, considerate act will strengthen the department’s relationship with residents and make residents feel even more fully that they are seen as important members of their neighborhood. Departments that do not yet have this technological capability can accomplish a similar result by purposefully investing a limited amount of time after a major incident to seek residents out, perhaps through neighborhood leadership, to explain what occurred. The Portland Police Bureau is a recognized leader in community organization and involvement. The use of technology to create a community notification system positions the bureau to interact with its residents in a proactive way regarding a number of important issues. The Bureau has considered the interests of its residents by establishing the policy that this system will be used only in the case of an emergency. As the Bureau expands use of the system to nonemergency alerts, it will be important to go slowly and listen carefully to feedback, because people may have a lower tolerance for nonemergency calls. Other departments considering this type of system will be keenly interested in Portland’s experience. The panel hopes that the Portland Police Bureau will report specific information about its project, perhaps through a national law enforcement magazine. Other departments might be especially interested in the level to which residents subscribed, the various layers of neighborhood organization within the database so that different groups within the same area could be reached, and the changes the department implemented, if any, to reach residents who resisted computer-generated telephone calls. It is noteworthy that the Portland Police Bureau developed a Community Policing Transition Plan as early as 1990 and that the plan identified GIS technologies as a seminal component of any credible transition. This reveals a relatively sophisticated understanding of community policing fairly early in the history of community policing programs. This case study validates the Portland Police Bureau’s well-deserved national reputation for commitment to problem solving and progressive policing strategies. This project demonstrates the power of a single strategic enhancement to a well-established and comprehensive community policing plan. The panel has seen other examples where a police department was uniquely positioned to take advantage of one-time funding for a strategic purpose because of extensive prior planning or community involvement. The Portland Police Bureau has capitalized on an already impressive ability to do computer-based GIS mapping for crime analysis. The panel would be interested to know what, if any, resistance or failure was experienced in the implementation of this system. These lessons will be as important as the program’s successes to any agency attempting to duplicate this system, perhaps more important. The panel finds it significant that the Portland Police Bureau can define its city as 96 separate neighborhoods, each of which has provided contact information for neighborhood leadership. This powerful capability demonstrates the extent to which the department has integrated itself into the fabric of the city. Cities that do not yet have this ability would likely find that establishing it not only improves their ability to solve problems, but also dramatically enhances the police department’s position in the community. Note 1. The Portland Police Bureau did not have access to unlisted phone numbers. CHAPTER 7 ROCK HILL: Embedding Community Policing In Neighborhoods and Officers’ Careers The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Lessons Learned. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 CHAPTER 7 ROCK HILL Embedding Community Policing in Neighborhoods and Officers’ Careers The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background Entry-level employees in the police department are empowered to work with the community to solve problems. Officers generally spend the majority of their patrol tours assigned to only one or two of the eight city areas. Being responsible for a limited geographic area allows an officer to know the people and the resources that are available to solve problems. Rock Hill’s leaders have charted a long-term strategic plan to direct growth and make the city more livable. Called Empowering the Community, the plan is a joint effort between the city’s major public and private institutions. The city’s Neighborhood Empowerment Team helps citizens organize neighborhood associations, access city services, and identify resources that can help them enhance the quality of life in their neighborhoods. In addition to community policing, Rock Hill believes in community oriented government. This belief was spearheaded by the city manager. Community oriented government is also part of the police department’s operating philosophy. Led by Chief David Fortson, the department has evolved from a traditional “squad” organization that was assigned community oriented policing duties to an agency that uses a departmentwide problem-solving framework. ROCK HILL POLICE DEPARTMENT LOCATION: CITY OF ROCK HILL, SOUTH CAROLINA CHIEF: DAVID FORTSON CONTACT: WWW.ROCKHILLPD.COM ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AMOUNT FUNDED: $100,900 SITE VISIT: FEBRUARY 21, 2001 DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND Rock Hill, South Carolina is located in the center of the Carolinas, 25 miles south of Charlotte, North Carolina. Rock Hill is expanding very quickly; its current population of about 50,000 is expected to grow to approximately 85,000 by 2017. The population is 65 percent white, 31 percent black, and 4 percent Hispanic.* The Hispanic community is the fastest growing population in the city. The police department has 106 sworn and 45 civilian personnel, divided into the Patrol Division, the Investigative Division, and Support Services. Officers are assigned to beats in eight areas of the city, each of which is continually patrolled by one of four officers. Officers are expected to take immediate ownership of their beats as soon as assigned. The police department is not unionized. * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. The Rock Hill Police Department proposed to advance community policing by undertaking cultural change within its organization. Members of the department needed more training to institutionalize community policing to withstand a change in leadership. The following were major goals of Rock Hill’s Advancing Community Policing (ACP) grant project: . Develop a comprehensive reward system that provides incentives for employees who demonstrate support of the change process . Provide for and institutionalize organizational readiness for change . Institute and maintain an organizational culture that is closely linked to agency goals and objectives . Communicate to all employees the importance of an organizational culture that supports departmental goals, objectives, programs, and activities . Reduce barriers to employee participation in the cultural change process . Increase the value placed on education, research, and participatory management In 1998, a needs assessment found a need for both short-term training and a long-term strategic training initiative. Initially, the grant supported instructors and overtime costs related to courses in understanding community oriented policing, problem solving, Spanish, and improving communications. Long-term training in community oriented policing, traffic, investigations, and leadership/ supervision was integrated into the department’s career ladder program. Additionally, a portion of the grant money was used to purchase equipment for presentation hardware and software. The Project The ACP grant served as a catalyst for organizational change and for development of the career ladder program by Chief Fortson in 1998. This program created a career police officer track that provided for five promotional opportunities for all sworn officers below the rank of sergeant. This program was developed to address concerns about promotion and training opportunities and as a tool to integrate community service into the criteria for promotion. According to Lieutenant Glenn Robinson, head of the Professional Standards Unit, “In our initial community policing efforts, we were like many other agencies, trying to change our organizational culture too far, too fast. We embraced many of the tenets of total quality management. We had work teams for everything. Unfortunately, there was not much followthrough on the accountability aspect of good working teams. What resulted was chaos. There were too many goals, too many programs, and no central direction. The intentions were good, but the results were inconsistent.” As a result, morale plummeted. Many senior managers elected to retire. Many mid-level managers left the organization for other police agencies or for the private sector. The agency lost more than 40 officers in just three years. Even replacement officers were not retained. The agency lost its identity as one of the best in the region. The staff placed the blame on the former management team, the high number of changes, and the speed with which changes were implemented. When Chief Fortson was hired, he brought a more pragmatic management style, with a focus on slow, consistent change. Prior problems were identified, solutions were developed, and the management team was reorganized. Previous goals, objectives, and programs were consolidated and prioritized with a focus on such issues as courtesy, civility, and customer service. Seeking national accreditation from the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA) became a driving force for change. “In late 1999 and early 2000, we recognized that a staff shortage was our biggest problem,” says Robinson. “We not only needed to address this retention problem, but we needed to seriously upgrade our recruiting efforts.” To improve its recruiting system, the department developed working partnerships with local colleges. “In late 1999 and early 2000, we recognized that a staff shortage was our biggest problem.” Lieutenant Glenn Robinson Major elements of Rock Hill’s ACP project included: . The career ladder program . A neighborhood empowerment team (NET) . Integrating community policing The Career Ladder Program. A core part of the career ladder program (see exhibit 2) is mandated training for community policing. More training accompanies each promotion. In addition, each employee (civilian and sworn) must contribute a minimum of 25 hours of voluntary community service on an annual basis, as a requirement of promotion. According to Lieutenant Robinson, “The career ladder program has been our biggest retention tool. More money, more recognition, more responsibility, and more training is a winning formula for police officers and increasing the professionalism of our staff.” The Neighborhood Empowerment Team. Voluntary community service dovetails with the community oriented government philosophy of the city of Rock Hill. The NET is a separate function of the city manager’s office, with five permanent members managing the program. Each member of the management team comes from a different city agency. Three of the five members work part time, and the other two work full time. A police officer is the leader of this team and reports directly to the city manager. The NET helps solve problems identified by the neighborhood associations. They serve as EXHIBIT 2. ROCK HILL POLICE DEPARTMENT CAREER LADDER Table of the career ladder program All advances for sworn officers from within the department are issued based on this career ladder program. Rank Pay Grade Education/Time in Service Specialized Training Performance Rating/Disciplinary Action Community Service Police Officer I (POI) 11 Entry-level position: high school diploma/ GED or above Within 12 months of appointment: • City of Rock Hill customer service training Within first 2 years of employment: • Officer survival (minimum of 24 hours) • Standardized field sobriety training • Public speaking • State-mandated requirements Fully acceptable (2) or higher 25 hours annually Police Officer II (POII) 12 • 2 years as a POI with a B.A./B.S. or higher • 3 years as a POI with an A.A. • 4 years as a POI without a degree • Lateral entry: 1 year as a POI with a minimum of 5 years experience • 40 hours of community policing • 40 hours of traffic enforcement • 40 hours of investigations • State-mandated requirements • Overall rating of fully acceptable (2) or higher • No rating of needs improvement (below an appraisal value of 2) or lower in any job dimension • No disciplinary action in excess of one written warning within the preceding 12 months 25 hours annually Master Police Officer I (MPOI) 14 • 2 years as a POII • Lateral entry: 1 year as a POII with a minimum of 5 years experience • 40 hours of management/supervision • 80 hours of community policing (includes 40 hours completed as a POII) • 120 hours of additional law enforcement training • State-mandated requirements • Overall rating of fully acceptable (2) or higher and scored above the rater’s average • No rating of needs improvement (below an appraisal value of 2) or lower in any job dimension • No disciplinary action in excess of one written warning within the preceding 12 months 25 hours annually Master Police Officer II (MPOII) 15 2 years as an MPOI • 360 hours of law enforcement training • State-mandated requirements • Overall rating of commendable (3) or higher • No rating of needs improvement (below an appraisal value of 2) or lower in any job dimension • No disciplinary action in excess of one written warning within the preceding 12 months 25 hours annually EXHIBIT 2. (CONTINUED) Table of the career ladder program Rank Pay Grade Education/Time in Service Specialized Training Performance Rating/Disciplinary Action Community Service Senior Police (SPO) 17 3 years as an MPOII • 480 hours of law enforcement training • Within 12 months of promotion to senior police officer, must complete 36 hours of leadership development training through the City of Rock Hill Human Resources Department • Overall rating of commendable (3) or higher Officer • No rating of needs improvement (below an appraisal value of 2) or lower in any job dimension • No disciplinary action in excess of one written warning within the preceding 12 months 25 hours annually Sergeant 17 2 years as a POII, MPOI, MPOII, or SPO • 240 hours of department-sponsored or approved training • State-mandated requirements • Within 12 months of promotion to sergeant, must complete 36 hours of leadership develop- ment training through the City of Rock Hill Human Resources Department • Overall rating of fully acceptable (2) or higher on the last two annual performance appraisals, or an overall rating of commendable (3) or higher on the last annual performance appraisal • No rating of needs improvement (below an appraisal value of 2) or lower in any job dimension • No disciplinary action in excess of one written warning within the preceding 12 months 25 hours annually Lieutenant 17/19 • B.A./B.S. or higher, or the equivalent combination of education and experience • 2 years as an MPOII, SPO, or sergeant • 80 hours management/supervision training • 36 hours leadership development training • State-mandated requirements • Within 12 months of promotion, must complete a department-endorsed executive development program • Overall rating of commendable (3) or higher • No rating of needs improvement (below an appraisal value of 2) or lower in any job dimension • No disciplinary action in excess of one written warning within the preceding 12 months 25 hours annually Captain 23 • B.A./B.S. or higher, or the equivalent combination of education and experience • 3 years as a lieutenant • Within 12 months of promotion, must complete a department-endorsed executive development program • State-mandated requirements • Overall rating of commendable (3) or higher • No rating of needs improvement (below an appraisal value of 2) or lower in any job dimension • No disciplinary action in excess of one written warning within the preceding 12 months 25 hours annually facilitators to meet the needs of the community. They help organize area associations, create connections to city services, and recruit the neighbor- hood ambassadors who become the contacts for that specific area. An example of how this process works is the solving of a problem with derelict vehicles within the city limits. When the NET began in 1997, citizens identified this problem as requiring immediate attention. Discussions between the neighborhoods and the city resulted in a very strong ordinance regarding the removal of derelict vehicles. Now, derelict vehicles are no longer a problem. “Today, you do not see vehicles up on cinder block in people’s front yards, on the curbside, or in driveways. Our city places a value on the way our neighborhoods appear. This is just one way where we’ve all come together to ensure that our neighborhoods stay nice,” says Lieutenant Robinson. Integrating Community Policing. Patrol-based problem solving is integrated into the daily practice and philosophy of the department. An example of this is the Community and Youth Services Division. The Worthy Boys and Girls Camp provides a summer camp experience to more than 300 local children, including children from low- income families and high-risk environments. The police department’s Community and Youth Services Division runs six one-week summer camps for these youths as an extension of the department’s outreach programs that target children and young adults. Because there is no budget to run these programs, the police department organizes fundraisers throughout the year to pay for them. “The career ladder program has been our biggest retention tool. More money, more recognition, more responsibility, and more training is a winning formula for police officers and increasing the professionalism of our staff.” Lieutenant Robinson Although the camp is a summer program, the grounds are also used during the school year, in conjunction with the local school district, to host Rebound, the school district’s alternative school for at-risk and disruptive students. A police officer serves on the faculty of Rebound and an officer is permanently assigned to the school. The officer teaches classes, leads activities, and serves as a security presence for students. Department Observations Challenges An initial obstacle was the mindset of the senior and mid-level staff, which was that “this touchyfeely stuff might not work.” However, the chief continually emphasized the need to embrace these concepts wholeheartedly. Another initial concern was establishing a comprehensive sense of community oriented policing as a problem-solving framework. Once established, training had to focus on addressing new problems resulting from the changing demographics in the service area. Acquiring quality training and locating resources has been difficult. Rock Hill partnered with the Carolinas Institute for Community Policing out of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department to meet many of its training needs. To determine the success of their efforts, annual evaluation criteria are in place to measure each city employee’s ability to perform community outreach. Criteria for promotion within the police department are now geared to community involvement. Benefits Embracing community oriented policing as a core philosophy has solved Rock Hill’s biggest problem: a shortage of police officers. The department found that emphasizing the community policing philosophy and explaining to prospective employees how this philosophy is integrated into the workplace attracted more qualified applicants. Moreover, once hired, these employees are more successful and more likely to flourish. The final outcome was that 16 of 18 vacancies were filled in just 18 months, and turnover has been reduced significantly. Lessons Learned Rock Hill’s experience with the ACP grant provided many lessons: . Community trust is not built overnight. It requires a real commitment to learning the community’s concerns, followed by a real effort to address them. . Both management commitment and line-level leadership are needed to solve problems. Employees must be empowered to find solutions and implement them in a streamlined fashion. Employees must also know they will be accountable for their successes and failures and rewarded for a job well done. . Change must be implemented slowly and incrementally. Trying to do too much, too quickly, results in failure. . Investment in training is necessary. Clear outcomes and measurable benchmarks need to be established. . Innovation is necessary to spark the creativity in employees and the community, question the process, and evaluate the community’s input. . Communication with citizens, colleagues, the business community, neighborhoods, and schools is crucial. The department should develop open processes that foster accountability and enhance problem solving. Panel Commentary With candor and some courage, Rock Hill has identified the destructive power of “too many goals, too many programs, and no central direction.” Agencies that do not balance progressive philosophies with rigorous pragmatism may spend years undoing the resulting damage. In its recovery from chaos, Rock Hill focused on a basic concept that was brilliant in its simplicity: integrate the department’s standards, goals, and expectations in the leadership and promotional continuum and make each employee’s advancement contingent on successfully meeting the organizational goals. At the same time, the pursuit of training, which further inculcates agency objectives while increasing employee excellence, was rewarded. The brilliance of such an approach is that it allows the agency to be both dynamic and progressive (that is, the goals of the organization against which an employee’s performance is measured can grow and change). The effect is that the leadership cadre is in dynamic competition around worthy objectives, not simply advanced by memorizing a syllabus. It is laudable that Rock Hill used CALEA and its national accreditation process and standards as building blocks to identify institutional goals and objectives. Unfortunately, many agencies regard the accreditation process as an aggravating exercise or necessary annoyance, instead of as an opportunity to assess, analyze, and clarify a department’s essential mission and organizational structure. The use of the word “voluntary” to describe Rock Hill’s community service program seems to be a term of art. Although the requirement of 25 hours of community service as part of the career ladder program is commendable (and modest), it would be difficult to reproduce such a requirement in all but a handful of agencies, and very likely impossible in agencies that have strong labor unions. In light of this reality, Rock Hill’s weaving of community service activities into the fabric of its institutional identity is laudable. Although it may be difficult for many agencies to formally integrate community service into their employment practices, unlimited opportunities exist for agencies to support, encourage, recognize, and otherwise reward employees who give their time and talents back to the community. Rock Hill’s staffing crisis motivated the department to make long-term organizational changes. Although it is too soon to gauge the success of the career ladder program, any institutional structure that purposefully invests in the professional development of its employees will create positive personal and organizational outcomes that could transcend any other difficulties. By following “community government” principles, the city government gave the community policing initiative a tremendous boost. A synergy of overall services is a fundamental requirement for full community policing effectiveness. In Rock Hill, the police department’s values of empowerment, community engagement, and professional development were aligned with the city’s commitment to neighborhoods. CHAPTER 8 SAN JOSE: Creating A Shared Vision Through Leadership Training The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 Lessons Learned. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 CHAPTER 8 SAN JOSE Creating a Shared Vision Through Leadership Training The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background The San Jose Police Department started community policing efforts in earnest in 1991 and chose to make community policing every member’s responsibility—there were no specialized community policing officers. The police department currently operates out of a single station, although there are now two Community Policing Service Centers and plans for two more. The department is in the design phase for a separate substation to serve the southern portion of the city. San Jose is divided into four patrol divisions, each overseen by a captain. Patrol captains have 24-hour problem-solving responsibility within their divisions. Every six months, the department has a “shift change” in which patrol officers can bid for their next assignment based on seniority. Typically, transfers in and out of other bureaus occur at the same time. San Jose has an active rotation policy for its members, which limits most specialized assignments to three to five years. Even so, many patrol officers remain in a specific area for longer than a single six-month shift. The department wants to implement one-year shift changes for greater consistency in the community. This is a labor/management issue, and contract negotiations have not resulted in a change. San Jose has achieved a relatively high level of implementation of its community policing philosophy and partnerships/programs. The department has active partnerships with schools, neighborhood and community groups, and other city and county agencies. The mayor and city manager have each supported a coordinated response to community problems. Beginning in the late 1980s, Project Crackdown was the city’s most comprehensive program that used principles of community partnership, community development, neighborhood empowerment, and coordination of a broad range of city services to address the problems of gangs, drugs, and neighborhood blight. Following Project Crackdown, the city continued its collaboration with a Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force, which has now operated for 10 years. This task force is a highly collaborative grouping of city and county agencies, schools, businesses, and community-based organizations. It has created many strategic alliances and pursued initiatives involving gangs, school violence, truancy, and community empowerment. At the time of the Advancing Community Policing (ACP) grant in 1997, the department’s community policing efforts had lost momentum. A number of focus groups revealed that a comprehensive program to address leadership development and the creation of a consistent vision for community policing were needed to reinvigorate the department’s efforts. The Project The San Jose Police Department requested grant money to pursue a number of departmentwide initiatives. A professional development course was planned for all 300 sworn and civilian supervisors to teach them the skills critical to implementing community policing. Thirty peer facilitators/mentors were to be identified and trained to lead the professional development classes and act as mentors to newly promoted supervisors. The department also proposed conducting additional training for command personnel. An executive retreat allowed the chief of police to develop the top leadership of the department. A consultant helped the department create a strategic plan while teaching strategic planning skills to department members. Another consultant presented an innovative leadership simulation process that used role-playing to reinforce the importance of community partnerships and collaborative leadership. The department expanded its intranet to allow for the delivery of information, updates, and curriculum to personnel at individual worksites. Site visits were made to Baltimore and Boston to see specific community policing programs and to Los Angeles to evaluate a modification of the West Point Leadership Model. San Jose’s goals and objectives for the ACP grant were to: . Increase the leadership capacity of middle management and line supervisors and develop a core set of attitudes for community oriented policing . Increase the decentralization of decision-making . Develop a comprehensive community oriented policing professional development course through site visits and research . Using leadership simulation gaming, train 300 supervisory and command personnel in practical leadership skills related to community policing issues . Create a shared vision for the future of community oriented policing in San Jose . Institutionalize leadership and professional development training within the department At the time the grant was awarded, a new chief of police was taking over the department. Chief William M. Lansdowne modified terms of the initial grant request to include direct training and development opportunities for sergeants. This allowed more sergeants to attend the state’s Supervisory Leadership Institute, a highly regarded, long-term leadership development program. In keeping with the tenets of community policing, additional community members and government partners were allowed to attend. Also, the peer mentor and facilitator program was revised to become a sergeant’s mentoring program for newly promoted supervisors. In addition, the intranet was expanded to become a virtual library including such topics as personal development, problem solving, and promotion. The chief also asked for a strategic plan for community policing to be developed using internal resources. Ultimately, the San Jose ACP project included the following: . Training for lieutenants and captains on how to create and sustain community policing . A professional development course for sergeants that included community policing skills . The development and training of peer mentors who would mentor newly promoted supervisors and serve as facilitators for the professional development course . Site visits to Baltimore and Boston and a visit to the Los Angeles Police Department to study its West Point Leadership Model . The acquisition and use of technology to support web-based learning . Training on leadership and community policing, including LeadSimm leadership simulation training . Evaluation of the professional development course . A retreat for the chief of police and top command staff to create a consistent vision for community policing Seven significant elements of San Jose’s ACP project are highlighted below. Each one offers lessons for other law enforcement agencies that seek to implement community oriented policing. LeadSimm Training. Some of the strongest outcomes were seen with the two-day LeadSimm collaborative leadership training, in which more than 450 department members and community/ school/government partners took part. After the training, participants said they more clearly understood the need for and the value of partnerships before and during a community crisis. The training was so well received that sergeants used additional sessions to send officers from their teams. Many participants reported learning skills and concepts that have improved their handling of community problems. Other police officer participants formed ongoing relationships with community members that have aided them in addressing community concerns. SAN JOSE POLICE DEPARTMENT LOCATION: SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA CHIEF: WILLIAM LANSDOWNE CONTACT: WWW.SJPD.ORG ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT AMOUNT FUNDED: $249,578 SITE VISIT: JANUARY 4, 2001 DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND San Jose, California was founded in 1777 and incorporated in 1850. It was California’s first incorporated city and the first state capital. San Jose is the 11th largest city in the United States. It is in the center of Silicon Valley, has a population of more than 894,943, and covers 176 square miles. The population is 36.6 percent white, 26.6 percent Asian, 30.2 percent Hispanic, 3.3 percent black, and 3.8 percent other races.* The department has 1,359 sworn officers and 450 civilian personnel. * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. The LeadSimm training broadened the participants’ perspectives. Police officers gained a better understanding of the issues facing the chief. Community members saw police officers as human beings. Officers got to know community members as individuals who were willing to give up their time to learn alongside police. The sessions became increasingly popular for other city employees and school officials, and people outside the department eventually formed the majority of class members. Participants have developed a consistent view of collaborative leadership and its relationship to community problem solving. What began as an internal effort has grown into a powerful outreach tool. The department produced a video of the LeadSimm experience to explain its value as a training tool for community policing and leadership development. Members of the city council plan to provide this training to their constituents. The department’s work with schools was also directly enhanced by the use of the LeadSimm process in school violence training. Responding to concerns about school violence, the department used the ACP grant to try out the LeadSimm process on the issue of catastrophic school violence. An initial simulation was followed by a live exercise at a high school to test procedures that would be required in an “active shooter” situation. The exercises demonstrated what could be expected during an incident of targeted school violence. This process enhanced the relationship between the police department and the school district. Thanks to this exercise, one of the largest high school districts in the city trained directly with the police department and other city partners on responding to school violence. What began as an internal effort has grown into a powerful outreach tool. Professional Development Course. The department has developed a customized professional development course for supervisors. The course curriculum includes leadership, qualities of successful community policing programs, problem solving, team building, public speaking, and mobilizing community resources. A focus group helped identify the major components of the curriculum. This process engaged more than 30 people of all ranks within the department (both sworn and civilian), as well as members of city government and the school administration in a daylong discussion of community policing. The goal was to identify the critical skills that a supervisor needs to be effective. Although the curriculum has been developed, the course has not yet been implemented. Virtual Library/Learning Team. A learning team was created using the concepts promoted by Peter Senge, an expert in knowledge management and author of The Fifth Discipline, to conceptualize and develop an intranet-based virtual library. The team of almost 30 individuals benefited from the learning process and developed skills that will support future creative endeavors. The department now has an expanding and frequently updated virtual library on its intranet site. Use of the virtual library is growing. When the professional development course is taught, the virtual library will present class reading materials, serve as a resource for assignments between sessions, and deliver information on current issues facing the department. Strategic Plan. The department now has a strategic plan for community policing that will guide it for several years. This plan will assist the department as it moves from a centralized force with one station to a decentralized force with four service centers and a substation. A broad cross section of department members participated in developing the plan. Sergeants’ Mentoring Program. A mentoring program has been developed and implemented to help newly promoted sergeants develop the specific skills that are necessary for the creation and continuation of community policing. This program emphasizes the scanning, analysis, response, and assessment (SARA) model and includes scenarios to demonstrate how others have approached problem solving. Newly promoted supervisors now go through a mentoring process with an experienced supervisor to refine problem-solving skills and develop creativity. Site Visits. Three site visits gave approximately 10 members of the San Jose Police Department the opportunity to share experiences and philosophies of community policing with other law enforcement leaders. As a result of these site visits, several specific programs have been started in San Jose, including: . Faith-based initiatives from Baltimore and Boston. This program resulted in a “cops, kids, and clergy” day between top command staff, clergy, and local youths to discuss ways to create better partnerships. Several follow-up meetings were held at the community level. . Decentralized accountability within the patrol structure for problem solving. The Baltimore Sector Command model was used to create a process for some lieutenants to assume problem-solving responsibility for specific geographic districts on a 24-hour basis, where they formerly had responsibility only for a specific period of time on their workdays. . The West Point Leadership Model. As modified and taught within the Los Angeles Police Department, this model has been adopted as a component of the professional development course. Executive Retreat. The executive retreat was held offsite. Reviewing the results of focus group interviews stimulated discussion about community policing and the direction of the department. The results of those interviews (approximately 50 pages of comments and commentary from department members) continue to serve as a resource for addressing common issues within the department. Department Observations Challenges The LeadSimm training was the first concrete activity of the grant. Because this was new and unique, it took some time for word to spread that the training was valuable. Attendance was low until outside participants were invited and word of the value of the training spread. For the past several years, the chief of police has been the strongest proponent of community policing. As a result, the grant met with resistance from individuals who felt that the training and activities were merely a fad to be tolerated. For the duration of the grant, the department engaged in an aggressive training regimen, which created a scheduling strain. That also negatively affected attendance. A possible solution is to institutionalize this training to make it a part of the culture. The department took longer than it intended to produce the curriculum for the professional development course, which slowed the momentum to deliver the course. The curriculum is now complete and the department will train facilitators and schedule classes. The grant encompassed a broad range of activities, which fostered creativity. However, it was difficult for some department members to fully understand how various activities were related and difficult to see the “big picture” of the department’s commitment to community policing. Benefits The ACP grant contributed to advancing community policing in the San Jose Police Department in the following ways: . The process of applying for the grant focused the department’s attention on assessing its needs relative to community policing and allowed the department to strategize and plan an approach to improving leadership development, an issue of ongoing concern within the department. . The grant has re-energized the commitment of both police officers and community members to community policing. Several captains and lieutenants have had responsibility for major portions of the grant. Each applied new ideas to further refine the grant. Each time a new individual or group became engaged, that involvement added sophistication and complexity to the initial concept. More and more people became connected with community policing and understood that the grant was addressing a broad range of initiatives. Department members had new opportunities to meet people inside and outside the department and to build relationships that were directly related to advancing community policing. . Focus groups used in the preparation of the grant generated ideas that expanded the dialogue on community policing within the department. This discussion invigorated participants and demonstrated the department’s willingness to share ideas in an open environment. . Both the grant application and implementation process and the training provided by the grant offered new opportunities for staff and improved their skills. . The grant allowed a large number of individuals to speak on behalf of community policing, removing the burden from the chief of police as the sole promoter. . The evaluation component caused the department to consider desired outcomes and to design elements of the grant specifically to meet those outcomes. The department began with the end goal in mind. As an example, the professional development course was originally conceptualized as an internal course. On consideration, the value of opening the course to the department’s partners and members of the community became apparent. The same thinking was applied to the LeadSimm training. The department aggressively solicited outside participation. . The professional development course curriculum can continue to be used by supervisors to advance community policing. Over the course of the grant, from 1998 to 2001, community policing became more institutionalized as a part of the department’s culture. Other citywide initiatives have complemented the grant. The city has expanded successful neighborhood-based initiatives to additional neighborhoods. This broader effort, named the Safe Neighborhood Initiative, gives comprehensive city attention not only to crime and blight, but also to housing, economic revitalization, and neighborhood organization. Internally, the city has instituted a process to measure the quality of services called Investing in Results, which has allowed the police department to focus on how its efforts support the city’s broader mission. Additionally, the department has opened two of four planned community service centers, which have given the department a valuable presence throughout the city. Lessons Learned When a department invests in its people in creative ways, professional growth and a subsequent positive effect on the community are the results. The ACP grant in San Jose proved to be a catalyst for change in an organization that needed it. The following strategies for implementing community oriented policing emerged from the department’s experience with the ACP grant: . Communicate regularly and in detail about the scope and intent of activities and initiatives. . Convene members of the department on an ongoing basis to discuss progress. . Include community members, key school personnel, and government partners in any training or discussion about community policing. This benefits the department, the other participants see the department as a powerful partner, and relationships that can be nurtured and called upon in the future are created. . Empower individuals to take responsibility for projects. Creative, energetic people should be encouraged to build on the ideas of other people. The outcomes will include a better project, a sense of group pride, and a renewed commitment to community policing. . It is not enough for the chief of police to support community policing. That support must extend through the chain of command and be demonstrated daily. Panel Commentary The panel applauds the candor of the San Jose Police Department in acknowledging that its community policing efforts “lost momentum” and that it consequently had to design and implement a leadership development program to “reinvigorate” its philosophical commitment to community policing. Police agencies rarely self-report that critical programs are jeopardized or are in decline; yet it is universally recognized that any significant program will experience cycles of success and failure. San Jose’s experience is immediately analogous to that of every agency that has attempted an ambitious agenda for change, and their approach to the need for course correction and reinvigoration was reasoned, appropriate, effective, and a model for others. It is not enough for the chief of police to support community policing. That support must extend through the chain of command and be demonstrated daily. The process of grant application and analysis is itself a catalyst for organizational insight and growth. In the case of the San Jose Police Department, the research initiatives and creative thinking of key personnel led to the validation of key challenges and the consequent identification of powerful programmatic responses to those challenges. The retooling of the original grant by incoming Chief Lansdowne was reported with honesty and insight. It is critical that every significant program has the support and imprimatur of the executive. It is a credit to both the San Jose Police Department and the COPS Office that they allowed for opportunities to rethink and ultimately modify the original grant based on the personal vision of a new chief of police. It is worth noting that the specific modifications proposed (i.e., expansion of leadership training for first-line supervisors, the increased involvement of community and government partners, the creation of a virtual library) were creative, progressive, and conceptually powerful. This ACP grant was clearly used to maximum effect. The San Jose Police Department made a significant contribution of its own intellectual capital and organizational talent to leverage the $249,000 award. The LeadSimm training program could stand alone as a substantial accomplishment and, in other hands, might have consumed the total sum of the grant funds. It is remarkable that in addition to the LeadSimm program, the San Jose Police Department undertook and implemented five ambitious programs, including a virtual library, a sergeants’ mentoring program, and a strategic plan for community policing. This level of performance is exemplary and should remind other agencies of the power of a grant—regardless of the amount—when it is wedded to a clear, relevant vision and a plan for its use. This grant is notable because of the broad manner in which it addresses leadership, with all levels of the organization included in training. Civilian personnel from the department and community members also participate in the training, including the professional development courses. These efforts to be innovative and provoke the organization to “shake up” its usual practices to more fully implement community policing are commendable. That boldness, however, must come with a caution: traditional organizations tend to be highly resistant to change. Under such conditions, change must be carefully and deliberately managed. This is a consideration both for those who fund change and for those who implement it. Throughout the process of change, it is important to develop “champions” at several levels of the organization who both support a specific community policing philosophy and value change and innovation. These champions were important to the success of San Jose’s efforts. CHAPTER 9 SAVANNAH: Transferring Offsite Learning Into Neighborhood Beats The Advancing Community Policing Grant . . . . . . . . . .69 Department Observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73 Panel Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74 CHAPTER 9 SAVANNAH Transferring Offsite Learning Into Neighborhood Beats The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background The Savannah Police Department requested grant money for a project called Community Oriented Policing Innovation and Experimentation Strategies (COPIES). The project was designed to improve leadership and managerial skills and encourage experimentation with new community policing ideas. “We hoped to increase the likelihood that captains, lieutenants, and sergeants would make bold decisions to do things differently, to try new approaches, and to emulate the success of other departments,” said Major Dan Reynolds. “We wanted to encourage risk taking.” The project had three primary goals: . To establish a permanent mindset among patrol managers and supervisors that will continue to promote operational changes within the department beyond the conclusion of the grant. . To provide onsite training. . To conduct site visits to other departments with good track records for community oriented policing. SAVANNAH POLICE DEPARTMENT LOCATION: SAVANNAH, GEORGIA CHIEF: DAN FLYNN CONTACT: WWW.SAVANNAHPD.ORG ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT AMOUNT FUNDED: $198,525 SITE VISIT: FEBRUARY 22, 2001 DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND Savannah, Georgia was established in 1733. Savannah’s population of approximately 131,510 is 56.8 percent black, 37.9 percent white, 1.5 percent Asian, and 1.5 percent other.* The city covers 80 square miles. Savannah’s historic district is visited by more than five million tourists each year. The Savannah Police Department has 405 sworn officers and employs 95 civilians and 51 part-time school crossing guards. The department is divided into four bureaus: the Patrol Bureau, the Criminal Investigations Bureau, the Information Management Bureau, and the Support Services Bureau. The Patrol Bureau is divided into four precincts that are designed to be accessible to Savannah’s citizens. The department implemented community oriented policing in 1991, and the process has been evolving ever since. Most recently, the focus has been on neighborhood geography, with an emphasis on collecting data, solving neighborhood problems, and providing services to citizens in specific geographic areas. * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. The Project Savannah’s Advancing Community Policing (ACP) project used several strategies/approaches, each of which is described in this section: . Targeting mid-level management . Training . Site visits . Replication and adaptation . Neighborhood beat approach . Problem solving . ArcView mapping system and CompStat . Savannah Impact Targeting Mid-Level Management. The ACP grant primarily targeted mid-level management in the Patrol Bureau, which has the most citizen contacts. Prior to the ACP project, Savannah’s four precincts operated identically: upper management dictated how policing would be done. “We were holding our supervisors and managers accountable for the move to community oriented policing, but we did not have their interest and support,” Major Reynolds noted. “We hoped that sending supervisors and officers to other cities to see community policing firsthand would win their support. I believe we were successful, since most of those who traveled came back invigorated and more willing to accept new policing strategies.” Training. The grant supported training through a course titled “Value-Centered Leadership,” that was taught first to all lieutenants, captains, majors, and the chief, and next to all sergeants and key civilian personnel. Participants thought the training was outstanding and recommended it to other departments. “We were able to conduct valuable training in leadership and expand the patrol officer’s role in community oriented policing, through training provided by internationally known experts,” said Reynolds. “This would not have occurred without supplemental funding.” Reynolds said the training exposed personnel at all levels of the department to new ideas and experiences, which improved their attitudes toward community oriented policing. Site Visits. To learn more about community policing, all 33 sergeants, eight lieutenants, and four captains in the Patrol Bureau were required to go on the road. The department worked with the COPS Office to get a list of departments noted for their community policing. Guidelines were developed for the preparation of site visit reports. Four-person teams of individuals from various ranks and precincts fanned out to 14 departments across the country and Canada. Upon their return, they were required to document their findings. The departments visited were: . Austin, Texas . Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina . Cleveland, Ohio . Delray Beach, Florida . Edmonton, Alberta, Canada . Fort Worth, Texas . Fort Lauderdale, Florida . Mesa, Arizona . Overland Park, Kansas . Portland, Oregon . Reno, Nevada . Sacramento, California . San Antonio, Texas . Seattle, Washington The benefits of these visits were numerous: . Attendees discovered successful programs in other cities that could be replicated in Savannah. For example, the Savannah Crime Free Housing Program was inspired by a similar program in Mesa, Arizona. . Exposure to different environments prompted mid-level managers to institute new programs and a new way of doing business. . Officers developed important contacts in other police departments. . Officers acquired a deeper appreciation for community oriented policing after seeing it in action. . Morale improved among mid-level managers, who were given the chance to travel and to learn and incorporate new ideas and procedures. Replication and Adaptation. The site visit to Mesa, Arizona gave Savannah the idea for the Savannah Crime Free Housing Program, which focuses on crime prevention in privately owned apartment complexes. Using a certification process, property managers oversee such things as criminal-unfriendly lease agreements, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), and resident neighborhood watch programs. A three-phase certification process requires rental properties to meet certain crime prevention criteria and takes from three months to a year to complete. The three phases consist of: . The requirement of an eight-hour training session for apartment management. . The implementation of strict security and building requirements for the property. . The enhancement of crime prevention education and awareness among tenants. Twenty of Savannah’s 150 apartment complexes are now fully certified as Crime Free Housing and 20 others are working on their certification. The voluntary program has reduced calls for service by 20 to 70 percent (depending on the type of crime). “Crime overall has decreased, with calls related to drugs, fighting, threats to life, disorderly persons, and juvenile complaints the most reduced,“ according to Corporal Tracy Walden, the project’s coordinator. ”We’re also seeing an increase in calls reporting things like suspicious persons, which is a good change. It shows that tenants are taking a more active role in reducing the likelihood of crime, buying into the program, and taking back claim to their surroundings.” In addition, each apartment complex receives an economic benefit because it can advertise itself as a “certified Crime Free Housing Community.” This is an advantage in that it attracts potential renters and has led to lower turnover among current tenants. The Savannah Police Department has also partnered with the Savannah College of Art and Design, which owns 41 buildings in the city, mostly in the downtown area. The college is a major player in the city’s revitalization efforts. The school has incorporated CPTED concepts into its curriculum, and the police department has conducted a CPTED evaluation of each building. The college also has agreed to install emergency phones around the campus. From their site visit to the police department in Overland Park, Kansas, officers from Savannah learned about the Construction Site Theft Task Force, which has drastically reduced construction site thefts. Savannah now produces a pamphlet that is given to each company that applies for a construction permit. The pamphlet outlines measures the construction company can take to reduce theft from its sites, including instituting CPTED measures, securing and labeling tools and equipment, and getting contact information for both police agencies involved. A site visit to Sacramento, California prompted interest in the Secondary Education Law Enforcement Cadet Training program. A partnership between the Savannah Police Department and the Chatham Board of Education, the overall goal of the program is to provide quality law enforcement technical skills to secondary school students, while deterring their entry in the criminal justice system. This project is under consideration. Neighborhood Beat Approach. In July 2000, Savannah instituted a new beat structure that makes neighborhood boundaries the basic geographic unit for delivering police services. One sergeant is assigned to each beat as the liaison for that beat, having 24-hour accountability regarding program efforts. Permanent beat officers, who cross shifts, meet with the beat sergeant and other beat officers for monthly updates. Beat officers take calls for service and use “uncommitted” time to work on beat problems. The goal is for officers to stay in their assignments for three to four years before they transfer. Calls from the community generally go directly to the sergeants. Sergeants then use community meetings to disseminate information and take questions from the community. A major benefit of the program has been improving the public’s access to the police by giving them someone to call. In addition, by inviting citizens to the table, greater trust and understanding has developed between neighborhood residents and the police. There has also been an increase in accountability, with sergeants taking active ownership of their neighborhoods and becoming increasingly responsive to local problems. Sergeants have learned that it is important to: . Include neighborhoods in planning and determine the role of citizens. . Listen carefully to the community’s view of the problem and be candid about what they can and cannot do to solve it. . Educate the community regarding the role of police. . Assign self-motivated police officers to these beats. . Let officers know they could lose their beats for nonperformance. . Develop departmentwide support for community policing. . Facilitate a group effort to solve problems instead of requiring the officer to take sole responsibility. Savannah has won an award from the International City Management Association for implementing the neighborhood beat approach. Problem-Oriented Policing. Overtime funds from the ACP grant were used to work on problem- solving projects using the scanning, analysis, response, and assessment (SARA) model. The SARA model has been used to close down bars, solve parking problems, and change city ordinances concerning the public consumption of alcoholic beverages. The department has developed a standard format for recording problem-oriented policing projects. The SARA model is taught in classes, and many officers now use SARA as standard operating procedure. ArcView Mapping System and CompStat. Several site visits allowed supervisors to observe the crime analysis function in other departments. They found that many departments used ArcView software for the geographic analysis of crime. Savannah had not been fully utilizing the capabilities of geographic information systems (GIS). After it acquired and implemented the ArcView GIS system, the department began using its own version of the CompStat model of crime analysis and police resource management to help solve problems, reduce crime, and deploy resources. Savannah Impact. One of the department’s new initiatives is Savannah Impact, which is designed to rehabilitate habitual violent offenders by simultaneously providing social services and intensive supervision. The initiative is a collaboration among the Savannah Police Department, probation and parole offices, the juvenile court, the Gateway Community Service Board, and the Georgia Department of Labor. Parolees and probationers in the program will receive increased correctional supervision; they also will have direct access to remedial education, job training, job placement, substance abuse counseling, mental health assistance, and any other services necessary for their rehabilitation. The goal is to identify the 600 most violent adult offenders and 100 most violent juvenile offenders, then work to make them productive members of society and thereby prevent recidivism. Department Observations The organizational change to community policing has been evolving slowly. Cultural change within the department has been the most critical factor. Officers now routinely talk in terms of problem solving, something that was foreign when problem- oriented approaches were first introduced more than 10 years ago. According to Brian Renner, Savannah’s planning and research coordinator, “The police department embraces community policing as a philosophy, rather than a program or special unit. We believe that there is never a finished state of community policing, but instead are always looking to improve the way we provide services.” “We are always evolving and adapting to the needs of our community,” adds Major Reynolds. “As the environment changes, you continually adapt and seek to improve your service to your customers. I think we will always be asking, ‘Are we there yet?’” Panel Commentary The programs initiated by Savannah would not have been possible without the ACP grant. Like Savannah, many agencies are precluded from undertaking progressive programs because they are at a subsistence level of funding. It is commendable that Savannah used the ACP grant to invest in as many of its current and future leaders as practical, and that it involved the COPS Office in identifying the most instructive agencies for site visits. It is refreshing to see an institutional process of accountability following a site visit by an employee. Many agencies do not follow through with reporting requirements when they send their employees to out-of-state training, conferences, or site visits. The value of these relatively modest investments in people is immense, but that value is lost if it is not documented in a systematic and comprehensive way. Capturing lessons learned and innovations gleaned from site visits is one way to ensure continued support for programs that to some appear to be perks of small worth. Departments commonly have limited outside reference beyond what individuals learn from schools, conferences, or research. It is rare for departments to engage in primary research to study the methods of other departments; doing so ultimately forces individuals to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of their own departments. Many of the programs initiated as a result of Savannah’s site visits have been in existence elsewhere for some time (e.g., Crime Free Housing certification, Neighborhood Beat programs, ArcView-based CompStat, and others). It is commendable that the Savannah Police Department translated observations from other jurisdictions into action. The ambitious implementation of this array of significant programs is also remarkable. The concepts that constitute the Savannah Impact program are commendable. If the goals of this program were ever realized, there would be significant interest on a national level. The array of services identified to help rehabilitate chronic recidivist offenders is dauntingly expensive. Nevertheless, the ambitious commitment of the Savannah Police Department to pursuing this program is worthy of recognition. The panel hopes that Savannah will be able to report a successful methodology to other police agencies eager to find solutions to a nationwide problem that has been marked more by failures than success. The Savannah Police Department has distinguished itself by engaging in primary research, which must have had a unifying effect on the entire department. Sending all patrol supervisors on study trips brings support for community policing and innovation to the forefront. It allows these individuals to grow as police officers, to take chances in a new environment, to try new working relationships, and to positively change how they view their own jobs. Including first-line supervisors in site visits gives them a sense that they are valued members of the department whose opinions are important. This is very important for obtaining buy-in, which is, in turn, critically important to the ultimate success of the community oriented policing program. CHAPTER 10 WINDSOR: A New Partnership Between Law Enforcement and Citizens The Advancing Community Policing Grant. . . . . . . . . . .75 Department Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77 Panel Commentary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78 CHAPTER 10 WINDSOR A New Partnership Between Law Enforcement and Citizens The Advancing Community Policing Grant Background The Windsor Police Department sought the Advancing Community Policing (ACP) grant to establish a departmentwide community policing focus and to initiate a promotional campaign to tell citizens about those efforts. When the department applied for the grant, it was still operating primarily under traditional policing principles. Chief of Police Kevin Searles says applying for the grant forced the department to talk about where it wanted to go as an organization and how community policing fit in. The bottom line, according to Chief Searles, was an agreement that community policing needed to be integrated into the entire department and throughout the town to get everyone involved, building strong relationships in the process. The Project Several methods were used to kick off the organizational transformation that evolved under the grant: . Strategic planning . Community relations . Increased communication . Neighborhood Watch program . Decentralization and accountability Strategic Planning. A strategic plan was developed to identify recommendations for successfully implementing community policing. Surveys were conducted with Windsor police officers and the community as part of the planning process. The strategic plan made programmatic and implementation suggestions that helped guide the department in the change process. A key component of the planning process was the use of a Community Policing Steering Committee that comprised a cross section of the department. After a series of developmental sessions, this group met with the department’s supervisory staff and union officials to share its vision and discuss the next steps. Community Relations. Grant funds were used to hire a community relations coordinator to coordinate and monitor ACP grant activities. Those duties included documenting the process, supporting Neighborhood Watch meetings, providing area statistics for police, documenting concerns and problems, alerting sergeants to any new concerns, and creating crime prevention/safety awareness materials for public use. Increased Communication. The Windsor Police Department was committed to open dialogue with the community. Several communications tools were developed with grant resources to help build internal and external relationships. A website—www.windsorpolice.com—was developed by Officer Gerry Bagley, the union president of the department. Officer Bagley is a department veteran who has helped build a strong alliance between the police union and management to support community policing. The website is interactive, includes an abbreviated version of the dispatch log (updated daily), and answers questions. A weekly television show called “On the Beat with the Windsor Police Department” covers topics of interest to the community. One segment followed a new recruit as he went through the police academy. Another show featured the command staff responding to citizens’ questions in an “open mike” format. The Citizens Police Academy is a 12-week course for local residents that meets one night each week and gives residents an inside look at the department’s operations. Neighborhood Watch Program. The Neighborhood Watch program has been revitalized after a hiatus of several years. Reaching out to a larger section of the community, the program has linked organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce, Windsor Realtors, Meals-on-Wheels, senior centers, civic organizations, religious groups, and neighborhood clusters. Reducing crime is a primary focus of the community network, as is improving the quality of life. Helping residents with such quality-of-life issues as noise, potholes, and traffic problems results in obvious benefits to the residents. The most important benefit from addressing these issues is that residents get to see officers working on issues that are important to them. This makes residents more likely to call police with tips, general information, and reports of suspicious activity. With the increase in foot patrols, officers are more visible and approachable. Two members of the department are assigned to each Neighborhood Watch group to provide continuity and build relationships. Assigning all personnel to watch groups is the heart of the new department’s policy. Everyone learns firsthand about customer service, ownership, and accountability. The department promotes the belief that an officer is more effective when he or she has active relationships in the community. Officers now view every resident in town as a potential source of information. The department plans to make the sharing of information a two-way process by providing information to citizens via its website, email, and phone trees. Decentralization and Accountability. The Windsor Police Department split the town into two major districts: north and south. A captain has complete responsibility for the activity in each district. The captains direct the work of all personnel in their respective regions. All command staff are evaluated on problem solving, crime rates, and citizens’ perception of safety (obtained through survey results in their district). Department Observations The ACP grant gave the Windsor Police Department the opportunity and resources to effect changes that probably would not have been possible without that support. The grant added a motivating factor, presented a vehicle for change, and produced a sense of commitment. The department is in the early stages of internal implementation and must still build a philosophical and operational bridge to the officers on the beat, not all of whom have embraced the changes. Chief Searles says that “the real benefit of the grant was that it forced us to think about this whole set of issues and it kept us on track, because we had made a commitment.” But he adds that the process was not without its challenges, especially because many officers were reluctant to embrace the notion of community policing. “Part of the problem was our administrative staff performed poorly in terms of communicating clearly what our vision was and what we were trying to accomplish.” The department learned it is a mistake to have a few community policing “specialists”—everyone in the department must be focused on community policing. WINDSOR POLICE DEPARTMENT LOCATION: WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT CHIEF: KEVIN SEARLES CONTACT: WWW.WINDSORPOLICE.COM ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CATEGORY: ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AMOUNT FUNDED: $241,173 SITE VISIT: FEBRUARY 7, 2001 DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND Windsor, Connecticut is located in the Hartford capital area, along the Connecticut and Farmington Rivers. Windsor is 91 miles south of Boston, 106 miles from New York City, and has 28,237 residents over 29.63 square miles. The population is 62.9 percent white, 26.7 percent black, 5.0 percent Hispanic, 3.1 percent Asian and 2.3 percent other.* One-third of more than 1,200 businesses in town is connected with the service industry. The Windsor Police Department is a small department, with 56 sworn and 10 civilian employees. * U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. Windsor’s community policing philosophy has evolved to incorporate four strategies: . Making sure that citizens feel safe at all times . Providing citizens with customer service . Doing good police work . Ensuring the long-term economic viability of the town Chief Searles says that the last point is important because “you don’t get budgets approved if the town is hurting, because people don’t want their taxes going up. So it all works together—cops working in partnership with the community to solve problems. It works.” Officer Bagley says the police union has been supportive of the community policing efforts because they have proved so effective. He observes that early efforts already have made a difference, and he is looking forward to the future: “By getting into the neighborhood and walking it with residents, our experience has shown a much better understanding of the neighborhood by the officer, as well as greatly improved citizen input. Officers will now have detailed information about criminal activity in the neighborhood, so citizens will have a more accurate view and therefore an improved perception of public safety.” Panel Commentary Two days of training for each department member is a powerful start for a small department. It establishes a common language, reinforces the philosophy and department commitment in a short time, and builds skills for all who are interested. The website is well done and provides services that larger departments would find helpful to review. It has a personal feel, yet is professional at the same time. The feedback section is important, because it lets residents know the department is working on their concerns. The townwide referral system and intranet tracking system are also well done and should be shared with other departments. The photo gallery included on the website puts a friendly face on the department. The department made a smart observation that success depends on everyone having community policing responsibility, not just a few people. That attitude and the department’s philosophy are apparent in the images and features on its website. CHAPTER 11 CONCLUSION CHAPTER 11 CONCLUSION The nine Advancing Community Policing (ACP) grantee sites featured in this report approached the process of advancing community policing with strategies that were designed to meet specific community needs. Although the organizational structures of law enforcement agencies and goals for community oriented policing differ by locality, the ACP efforts described in the previous chapters offer lessons for other law enforcement agencies that plan to implement or enhance community oriented policing. This report highlights in depth the most significant elements of each site evaluated. The contact information provided within each chapter offers access to additional information on topics of particular interest. Law enforcement agencies that plan to implement community oriented policing initiatives or to enhance existing efforts are invited to use the nine ACP sites as resources. The COPS Office also offers assistance to law enforcement agencies that want to develop or enhance community oriented policing projects. For more information, contact: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 1100 Vermont Avenue N.W. Washington, DC 20530 202.514.2058 800.421.6770 (U.S. Department of Justice Response Center) www.cops.usdoj.gov APPENDIXES A: The Fellowship and Expert Panel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81 B: Project Types. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83 C: ACP Grantees and Organizational Change Components. . . . . .87 D: About the Authors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91 APPENDIX A The Fellowship And Expert Panel In August 2000, the COPS Office sponsored an Advancing Community Policing Visiting Fellowship, housed in the Policy Support and Evaluation division of COPS, to explore the successes, challenges, and experiences resulting from this unusual grant program. Site visits conducted by the visiting fellow were informal and conducted in the spirit of cooperation, trust, and respect. Of keen interest to everyone was the opportunity to find out what the grantees had done with their projects and to help them connect with each other to share innovative ideas. Each project was a local effort supported with federal funds. The fellowship style of inquiry was designed to be congruent with such community policing values as collaboration, respect, and partnering for successful results. A significant part of the methodology included the creation of an expert panel of senior law enforcement executives and practitioners. An expert panel was convened to analyze and comment on the Advancing Community Policing grants. The unique methodology and working relationship of the panel merits recognition. At the outset, the members of the expert panel agreed to provide meaningful commentary on the work of their peers to advance community policing efforts at an institutional level. At its first meeting, in November 2000, the panel agreed that analysis of practical, working programs would represent the most compelling and catalytic testimony on the effectiveness of community policing. It also noted that a practical investigation of the subject would add needed information to the field. As a consequence, the panel proposed an ambitious methodology of analysis and written commentary that could contribute to the important and growing body of literature about community policing. To meet this goal, the panel first identified the most critical issues confronting agencies that were attempting to transform their organizations to support community policing. These issues included the degree of innovation and creativity of the grant application, the extent to which an organization was receptive to change, the capacity of an agency to sustain innovation, and the candor and thoroughness of an agency in its assessment of what succeeded and (just as important) what failed. In addition, the panel took into account geographic location and demography, jurisdiction, mission, agency size, and other factors in an effort to establish a representative sample of agency programs on a national level. The panel first analyzed each of the grantees against these criteria, then developed a series of tiers that identified and focused on two clusters: the nine agencies that would receive indepth inquiry and the additional agencies whose initiatives could be captured in more abbreviated case descriptions. The overarching goal of this exercise was to summarize and analyze the initiatives, innovations, ideas, lessons learned, successes, and false starts that, in their totality, paint a comprehensive picture of community policing as it currently exists. Fellow Andrea Schneider undertook a rigorous process of review and dialogue with the agencies that were selected. A key element of this process was a series of site visits during January and February 2001. Members of the expert panel accompanied Schneider on several site visits and contributed to an often intense examination of programs, obstacles, and lessons learned with agency commanders, representatives, and community members on their home turf. On occasion, the team provided technical assistance to an agency it visited, specifically in the areas of strategic planning, training, and overcoming resistance to change. This was a concomitant—and much appreciated—benefit to the site assessment approach. At the same time, the panel and each agency selected for examination participated in an ongoing written dialogue. Upon receipt of program summaries and assessments, the panel submitted new questions and challenges to the agency, which in turn generated new, and ever more thoughtful, draft summaries. This correspondence made the process of drafting each case study dynamic and interactive, and ultimately captured those experiences that were unique to each and those that were common to all of the agencies selected for review. From April to July 2001, the panel members communicated frequently via conference calls and email, as the draft visit reports were reviewed and refined. In addition, each panel member contributed written commentary to the nine case studies that highlights the broader issues of organizational change. This report is the result of the commitment of agency leaders, the readiness of organizations to change, and the availability of much-needed resources, skills, and time for implementation. Many variables contributed to both the successes and the failures in achieving and managing change and effecting meaningful outcomes. Examining the challenges was as important as looking at the successes, especially in terms of midcourse corrections and lessons learned. APPENDIX B Project Types Priority Area One: Leadership and Management Managing innovation at all levels of an organization is extremely difficult. Change strategies in this area might focus on enhancing managerial skills through leadership training, developing new techniques for overcoming resistance, implementing short-term and long-term strategic planning mechanisms, remapping managerial systems, redesigning performance evaluation and promotion procedures, decentralizing command to local levels, or improving the relationship between labor and management. Priority Area Two: Organizational Culture Changing organizational culture or reducing its impact on behavior is one of the greatest challenges for any administrator, especially in policing. Innovative approaches might include training for mid-level managers, developing new performance measures for patrol officers, altering traditional field training programs, designing new recruiting strategies to attract (and retain) a diverse field of employees (both sworn and civilian), and other human-resource reform efforts designed to encourage innovation and reward officers for engaging in community policing activities. The COPS Office welcomes other innovative ideas for changing elements of the organizational culture. Priority Area Three: Modifying Organizational Structures The structure of an organization is more than a series of lines and boxes on an organizational chart. Organizational structure defines lines of authority, communication, and responsibility. Research has shown that police agencies often need to restructure in order to enhance their community policing strategy. Restructuring means changing the fundamental design of an organization. Organizational structures are defined by a number of elements—the depth of the hierarchy (rank structure), the geographic spread (number of precincts and beats), formalization (the degree to which the organization is governed by strict policies, procedures, rules, and standards), the span of control (number of subordinates per supervisor), the degree of specialization, and many other features. Many community policing efforts involve changes to one or more of these structural elements. Strategies in this area might include widespread structural changes such as geographical decentralization, managerial decentralization, flattening the rank structure, decreasing formalization, implementing geographic accountability, and other structural reforms aimed at increasing worker autonomy and information flow and otherwise enhancing community policing. Priority Area Four: Research and Planning Unlike private-sector organizations, public-sector organizations often do not devote a significant amount of their resources to research and development. When research and planning units exist in police agencies, they often are used to produce annual reports and track agency statistics for recordkeeping rather than for analytical purposes. 1 Applicants might develop or expand a research and planning unit to conduct in-house research and evaluation, examine ongoing agency operations, conduct sophisticated crime and trend analyses, analyze policy development, rationalize resource deployment, import innovations from other agencies, and generally infuse the organization with an ethos of experimentation and innovation. Because information technologies play an important role in modern policing, applicants may apply for items that enhance their analytical capabilities, including crime analysis software, computer mapping/GIS systems, database tools, statistical analysis software, custom software development, and other related items that will enable the organization to respond more effectively to community needs. Applicants should demonstrate the possibilities of specific information technologies, but how these possibilities will translate into community policing activities such as problem solving, crime analysis and community engagement. Applicants considering such items are reminded that there must be a clear link between requested technologies and the proposed organizational change strategy. Priority Area Five: Re-engineering Other Components of the Organization There are many organizational issues facing American police agencies. Applicants should apply under this category if they have developed innovative organizational change strategies that do not fit clearly within one of the predefined areas. One of the main criteria for any of the organiza- tional change priority areas is the demonstration of a clear set of goals and a realistic commitment to change at the organizational level. Some areas that might fall within this category include: . Call-management schemes so agencies can manage patrol resources more effectively and efficiently . Re-evaluating existing departmental policies and procedures to ensure that they are efficient, effective, necessary, and consistent with the aims of community policing . Community outreach campaigns that better ex- plain the community policing philosophy and the changes necessary to implement this philosophy Note 1. Reiss. A.J., Jr. (1992), “Police Organization in the Twentieth Century,” in M. Tonry and N. Morris (eds.), Modern Policing, pp. 51–98. APPENDIX C ACP Grantees And Organizational Change Components AGENCY PROJECT FOCUS Arizona Tempe Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Tucson Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Arkansas North Little Rock Police Department Organizational Culture Pine Bluff Police Department Research and Planning California Fontana Police Department Research and Planning Los Angeles Police Department Organizational Culture Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Organizational Culture AGENCY PROJECT FOCUS California (continued) Oakland Police Department Leadership and Management Riverside Police Department Research and Planning Sacramento Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Sacramento County Police Department Organizational Culture Salinas Police Department Re-engineering Other Components San Jose Police Department Leadership and Management Santa Barbara Police Department Research and Planning UCLA Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Ventura Police Department Organizational Culture Westminster Police Department Research and Planning AGENCY PROJECT FOCUS Colorado Boulder Police Department Research and Planning Brighton Police Department Re-engineering Other Components El Paso County Sheriff’s Department Modifying Organizational Structures Longmont Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Summit County Sheriff’s Office Research and Planning Connecticut Bridgeport Police Department Modifying Organizational Structures East Hartford Police Department Organizational Culture Hartford Police Department Leadership and Management Manchester Police Department Organizational Culture New Haven Police Department Leadership and Management Windsor Police Department Organizational Culture Delaware Delaware State Police Research and Planning District of Columbia Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Organizational Culture Police Department Florida Broward County Sheriff’s Department Organizational Culture Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Department Re-engineering Other Components Jacksonville Sheriff’s Department Organizational Culture Marion County Sheriff’s Department Modifying Organizational Structures Pompano Beach Police Department Organizational Culture Santa Rosa County Sheriff’s Department Research and Planning Sunrise Police Department Re-engineering Other Components AGENCY PROJECT FOCUS Georgia Albany Police Department Leadership and Management DeKalb County Sheriff’s Office Research and Planning Savannah Police Department Leadership and Management Illinois Kankakee Police Department Organizational Culture Indiana Indiana State Police Re-engineering Other Components Iowa Sioux City Police Department Organizational Culture Kentucky Jefferson County Police Department Leadership and Management Louisville Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Louisiana Lake Charles Police Department Research and Planning Shreveport Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Maine Brunswick Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Maryland Howard County Police Department Leadership and Management Prince George’s County Police Department Leadership and Management AGENCY PROJECT FOCUS Massachusetts Boston Police Department Modifying Organizational Structures Brookline Police Department Organizational Culture Framingham Police Department Research and Planning Lawrence Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Lowell Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Somerville Police Department Research and Planning Michigan Bay City Police Department Organizational Culture Flint Township Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa Modifying Organizational Structures and Chippewa Indians Police Department Lansing Police Department Research and Planning Minnesota Burnsville Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Duluth Police Department Organizational Culture Mississippi Bay St. Louis Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Missouri Kansas City Police Department Research and Planning St. Charles Police Department Research and Planning AGENCY PROJECT FOCUS New Jersey Hoboken Police Department Organizational Culture Jersey City Police Department Leadership and Management Montclair Township Police Department Research and Planning Newark Police Department Leadership and Management New Brunswick Police Department Leadership and Management Pequannock Township Police Department Modifying Organizational Structures New Mexico Albuquerque Police Department Research and Planning Los Lunas Police Department Organizational Culture New York Buffalo Police Department Organizational Culture Nassau County Police Department Leadership and Management North Carolina Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department Organizational Culture Ohio Akron Police Department Research and Planning Bowling Green Police Department Modifying Organizational Structures Richland County Sheriff’s Office Research and Planning Toledo Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Oregon Portland Police Bureau Re-engineering Other Components Washington County Police Department Research and Planning AGENCY PROJECT FOCUS Pennsylvania Lower Merion Township Police Department Research and Planning Rhode Island Providence Police Department Re-engineering Other Components South Carolina Rock Hill Police Department Organizational Culture Spartanburg Department of Public Safety Organizational Culture Tennessee Bradley County Sheriff’s Department Organizational Culture Murfreesboro Police Department Re-engineering Other Components AGENCY PROJECT FOCUS Texas Arlington Police Department Research and Planning Dallas Police Department Research and Planning El Paso Police Department Leadership and Management Waco Police Department Modifying Organizational Structures Utah Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Department Organizational Culture Washington Bellingham Police Department Re-engineering Other Components Kennewick Police Department Organizational Culture Wisconsin Green Bay Police Department Leadership and Management APPENDIX D About The Authors Andrea Schneider, M.A. Visiting Fellow and Project Director Andrea Schneider holds a master’s in political science and is an independent consultant, facilitator, and community coach for community problem solving. She brings her expertise in community collaboration, systems change, action planning, and nontraditional evaluation to the Office of Community Oriented Policing (the COPS Office) Fellowship. She is best known for developing collaborative community initiatives that address complex social problems and link research with practice, as well as investigating programs for practical results. Ms. Schneider has served on numerous federal and state advisory and task forces, including testifying before the 101st Congress on the prevention of drug abuse; serving on an expert panel to evaluate a $30 million federal training and technical assistance system, California’s Attorney General’s Community Challenge; and participating in a Health and Human Services Foundation Task Force to link the private sector with public initiatives. She was the executive director of the Community Partnership of Santa Clara County, California; directed the Prevention Division of the Santa Clara County Health Department of Drug Abuse Services; and is a founding member of the Prevention Network in California. Ms. Schneider is from Palo Alto, California. Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer Clark Kimerer was hired by the Seattle Police Department (SPD) in 1983. As a police officer, he worked in the East and West Precincts and subsequently as the training officer for the SWAT Team. Promoted to sergeant in July 1987, he held assignments in the DWI Unit before being assigned to the Goodwill Games Planning Group. From 1985 to 1992, he was also chief negotiator for the SPD Hostage Negotiation Team. Following his promotion to lieutenant in late 1989, he continued as lead planner for this group through the completion of that event. He was later transferred to the West Precinct, where he remained as captain from 1992 to 1996. As a captain, Chief Kimerer also commanded the Internal Investigations Section and the Vice and Narcotics Section. He was promoted to assistant chief in January 1999, and served as chief of staff until his promotion in October 2001 to deputy chief. As deputy chief of operations, he oversees Operations Bureaus 1 and 2, the Investigations Bureau, and the newly formed Emergency Preparedness Bureau. Chief Kimerer holds a bachelor of arts degree in classics and liberal arts from St. John’s College and attended the Graduate Institute for the Liberal Arts at St. John’s. He has also participated in advanced courses at the FBI Academy, Northwestern University, and the Harvard Negotiation Project at Harvard Law School. Chief Kimerer is chair of the Downtown Emergency Service Center Board of Directors and serves on several executive and advisory boards, including Childhaven International, Our Lady of the Lake School Board, and Service Integration Advisory Council of AIDS Housing of Washington. In his leisure time, he enjoys skiing, traveling, backpacking, and coaching his sons’ soccer and basketball teams. Chief Scott R. Seaman Scott R. Seaman is the chief of police of the Los Gatos/Monte Sereno (California) Police Department. Previously, he served 27 years with the San Jose (California) Police Department. Throughout his career, Chief Seaman has created or assisted in the development of innovative projects for youth, schools, and the community. Chief Seaman designed and authored the San Jose Police Department’s Advancing Community Policing grant. He served as a member of the COPS Office Expert Panel evaluating the Advancing Community Policing grants. Chief Seaman holds a B.A. in criminology from the University of California, Berkeley and an M.S. in management from California Polytechnic University, Pomona. He is a graduate of the California Command College and the FBI National Academy. Chief Seaman is a recognized expert in issues of police use of force, police procedures, and community policing. He is the recipient of the 1996 Community Leadership Award for San Jose and numerous other community service awards. Editor’s Note: Joan Sweeney’s biography was unavailable as this report went to press.