U.S.

Department of Justice
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

NATIONAL COMMUNITY POLICING ROUNDTABLES

Philadelphia Washington, D.C. Milwaukee Seattle

PRACTITIONER
PERSPECTIVES �
Community Policing in a Democracy

Ellen Scrivner, Ph.D. �

Compiled and Edited by Albert Antony Pearsall III and Judith E. Beres �
PRACTITIONER PERSPECTIVES �
Community Policing in a Democracy

Ellen Scrivner, Ph.D. �

Former Director, Leadership Academy, John Jay College of Criminal Justice �

Compiled and Edited by �

Albert Antony Pearsall III �
Senior Policy Analyst/Project Manager �
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services �
and �
Judith E. Beres �
Editor/Contractor �
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services �

This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement Number 2007-WX-K020 awarded by the Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein do not necessarily represent
the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific agencies, companies, products, or
services should not be considered an endorsement by the authors or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the
references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues.
Contents �

Letter from the Director................................................................................ 5 �

Acknowledgments......................................................................................... 6 �

Introduction ................................................................................................. 6 �

Policing in a Democratic Society ................................................................... 7 �

Building Partnerships to Advance Effective Policing....................................... 12 �

Advancing Innovation: Experiences of Progressive Police Agencies ................. 19 �

Preparing Tomorrow’s Officers: Opportunities, Challenges, and Change.......... 27 �

Where We’ve Been and Where We Are Going: A Dialog............................... 35 �

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (the COPS Office) is the component
of the U.S. Department of Justice responsible for advancing the practice of community policing by
the nation’s state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies through information and grant resources.
The community policing philosophy promotes organizational strategies that support the systematic use
of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address the immediate conditions that
give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime. In its simplest form,
community policing is about building relationships and solving problems.

The COPS Office awards grants to state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies to hire and train
community policing professionals, acquire and deploy cutting-edge crime-fighting technologies,
and develop and test innovative policing strategies. The COPS Office funding also provides training
and technical assistance to community members and local government leaders and all levels of law
enforcement. The COPS Office has produced and compiled a broad range of information resources
that can help law enforcement better address specific crime and operational issues, and help community
leaders better understand how to work cooperatively with their law enforcement agency to reduce crime.

Since 1994, the COPS Office has invested more than $16 billion to add community policing officers
to the nation’s streets, enhance crime fighting technology, support crime prevention initiatives, and
provide training and technical assistance to help advance community policing. More than 500,000
law enforcement personnel, community members, and government leaders have been trained through
COPS Office-funded training organizations.

The COPS Office has produced more than 1,000 information products, including Problem Oriented
Policing Guides, Grant Owners Manuals, fact sheets, best practices, and curricula. More than 500 of those
products are currently available, at no cost, through its online Resource Information [Link] user-
friendly publication search engine is used to make ordering or downloading these documents simple.

The COPS Office has distributed more than 2 million topic-specific publications, training curricula,
white papers, and resource CDs through the COPS Office Response Center and another 2 million
copies were downloaded from the website,[Link],in FY2010 [Link] COPS Office also
distributes these documents at a variety of law enforcement and public-safety conferences throughout
the [Link] COPS Office participated in 45 conferences in 25 states in 2010 in order to maximize
the exposure and distribution of these knowledge products.

The COPS Office launched its new, improved website June 1, [Link] website, which is a resource
used by law enforcement personnel from every state in the union, is now easier to navigate and is fully
up to date. When state, local, or tribal law enforcement officials are looking for COPS Office grant
programs to support their community policing efforts, they’ll be able to quickly find open programs,
application instructions, and specific eligibility requirements. The website is also the grant application
portal, providing access to online application forms. The COPS website is also a clearing house full
of useful information. Publications on a wide range of community policing topics—from school and
campus safety to gang violence—can be ordered for free through the website’s resource library.
Letter from the Director �

Department of Justice
Office of Community Oriented Policing
Two Constitution Square
145 N Street, N.E.,Washington, DC 20530

Dear Colleagues,

I am pleased to present this report about the results of the COPS Office National
Community Policing Roundtables, which provided a unique opportunity to learn from,
and share information with, key stakeholders—law enforcement practitioners and thought
leaders, criminal justice academics, and policymakers, all with strong backgrounds in
community policing.

The honest discussion and highly interactive sharing of information that occurred during
the roundtables may assist you in your efforts to build relationships and solve problems
through community policing in your jurisdictions.

I hope you will find this publication helpful in your local efforts, and we encourage you to
share this publication, as well as your successes, with other law enforcement practitioners.

Sincerely,

Bernard K. Melekian, Director

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

—5—
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Acknowledgments
The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (the COPS Office) thanks the
roundtable participants for contributing their vast experience to the discussions. The
generous use of their time and their thoughtful reflections as criminal justice leaders are
greatly appreciated. We thank Ellen Scrivner, Ph.D., (then) Director of the Leadership
Academy, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, for facilitating the roundtables and drafting
the reports that serve as the basis for this document. We also thank COPS Office staff for
their assistance and support, notably Deputy Director Sandra Webb, Ph.D., former Chief of
Staff/Deputy Director Timothy Quinn, and Supervisory Policy Analyst Katherine McQuay.
We also thank other key personnel of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice: Jeremy
Travis, JD, President of John Jay College of Criminal Justice, Judith Kornberg, Ph.D., Dean
of Professional Studies, for her support of this project, and the Leadership Academy staff
work of Steven Lopez, Keisha Ortiz, Marilyn Simpson, and Amelia Thompson.

Introduction
In 2008, the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (the COPS Office) of the
U.S. Department of Justice, in partnership with the Leadership Academy of the John Jay
College of Criminal Justice, convened four national roundtables throughout the United
States. Participants were a mix of law enforcement practitioners and thought leaders, criminal
justice academics, and policymakers, all with strong backgrounds in community policing. One
hundred forty individuals participated across the four roundtables. Their goal was to advise
the COPS Office on its initiatives that have furthered democratic policing and to provide
direction on where the COPS Office needs to focus future efforts.

Policing in a Democratic Society

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, February 26–27.

Building Partnerships to Advance Effective Policing

Washington, D.C., April 8–9.

Advancing Innovation: Experiences of Progressive Police Agencies

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, August 5–6.

Preparing Tomorrow’s Officers: Opportunities, Challenges, Change

Seattle, Washington, October 14–15.

A highlight of the Milwaukee roundtable was a dialog between Professor Herman Goldstein,
the father of problem-oriented policing, and Dr. George Kelling, architect of the broken
windows theory. See the last section of this document.

—6—
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Philadelphia Policing in a Democratic Society

The theme of the first Roundtable, Policing in a Democratic Society,
is concerned with the principles of protecting the civil rights and
human dignity of everyone. Community policing is fundamental
to this. Roundtable participants placed a strong emphasis on the
COPS Office as the champion of “we the people” policing through
its focus on legitimate and lawful policing and efforts to promote
transparency and accountability in policing. They considered the creation of the COPS
Office as a customer-oriented enterprise within the U.S. Department of Justice as a key
achievement and the foundation for all other accomplishments that have made significant
contributions to reducing crime in the United States, building public trust, improving
quality-of-life opportunities throughout the country, and creating credibility for community
policing in the field.

Achievements
Roundtable participants recognized the following achievements of the COPS Office:
‹ Creating accessible grant programs. Such programs provide grantees with direct access to
funding, rather than to state formulaic programs, so that grantees can support local
responses to local problems.
‹ Adopting a strong customer orientation. The COPS Office listens and is responsive to
customers who identify what is needed to prevent and reduce crime.
‹ Adopting a convener-facilitator role. The COPS Office brings together and encourages
collaboration among diverse stakeholders who otherwise would not be inclined or
have the opportunity to collaborate.
‹ Implementing programs with a strong focus on integrity and cultural diversity.
‹ Improving the responses of rural law enforcement and sheriffs. The COPS Office includes
them in community policing training that is accessible across the United States.
‹ Encouraging customers to think out of the box. Customers are able to create innovative
solutions to reduce and prevent crime.
‹ Supporting the use of civilians in certain jobs and the use of technology. Such activities
facilitate streamlined and better-prepared law enforcement organizations.

—7—
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Challenges
New challenges are straining law enforcement resources and the institutionalization of gains
made by community policing. Participants outlined the following as major responses to the
challenges.

‹ Revitalize the passion for community policing to ensure that “we the people” policing is
preserved and institutionalized.
‹ Ensure mutual coexistence with other policing strategies because community policing and
aggressive policing strategies that control crime need to work in unison to reduce
crime and prevent disenfranchising significant elements of the community.
‹ Define the “community” in community policing because the role the community plays is
central to ensuring that policing is as lawful as it is legitimate. This focus not only
needs to be internalized at all levels of an agency, but throughout the community, as
well.
‹ Establish accountability by internalizing community policing as normal behavior
at every level of an organization. This enhances the ability to hold the agency
accountable for patterns and practices that are consistent with policing in a
democratic society.
‹ Adopt intelligence-led policing. This is a natural outcome of the community policing
capacity for building trust—policing that protects the civil rights, human rights, and
dignity of all.

Emerging Issues
Participants identified emerging issues that need to be addressed from a community policing
perspective. These issues are having a significant impact on community policing strategies
that are meant to build public trust, reduce crime, shape attitudinal responses to policing,
improve information sharing, and enhance quality of life.

‹ Unresolved issues of race, immigration, homelessness, mental illness, and youth crime shape
current living conditions in many communities and emphasize the need for public
safety practitioners to develop strategies that are as effective in reducing crime as
they are responsive to meeting community needs.
‹ A growing leadership and staffing deficit is reflected in the difficulties in recruiting and
retaining culturally sensitive practitioners and has the potential to limit both the
advances in community policing and gains made in building public trust.

—8—
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

‹ The need for devising new training and development experiences using new initiatives that
draw on existing resources. One example is to create so-called “teaching hospitals”
for law enforcement that bring together scholars, practitioners, and students to
identify best practices and evaluate innovative experiments. Other examples include
supporting training and development internships or fellowships where officers spend
time in other agencies; supporting platforms that provide leadership development
experiences for new chiefs that are different from current management and executive
skills training; and supporting the cultivation of practices that reinforce integrity
outside of the academy.
‹ In media/public safety relationships there is a gap in the mutual understanding of roles
and responsibilities that plays out in ways that undermine the goals of both police
and press.
‹ Help for small to midsize agencies is critical, although some of the more creative
community policing work has been carried out in these agencies.
‹ Develop a broader array of partnerships including institutions that have an economic
stake in preventing crime. Educate those institutions so that when pursuing their
own self-interests they also can play an important role in assisting law enforcement in
controlling crime in their communities.
‹ Support a new business model for law enforcement that incorporates knowledge-based
perspectives, the latest in technology advances, and both an internal and external
focus on procedural justice.
‹ Develop outreach to other countries to connect American policing with international
and national police forces to share COPS Office knowledge resources and training as
well as to learn how they are using community policing principles.
‹ Position community policing as the umbrella philosophy that links all other law
enforcement strategies. Community policing has the capacity to take on this
role because it incorporates a broad array of strategies that focus on community
engagement and collaborative problem solving designed to control and prevent all
crimes, including terrorism, within the framework of democratic policing. Other
strategies that emphasize just crime control, for example, could benefit from a
community policing focus on civil rights, human liberties, and dignity for all.
‹ Take advantage of name recognition that signifies an action-oriented, highly responsive, and
value-driven [Link] COPS Office has become a “brand” that stands for policing
in a democracy.

—9—
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Key Recommendations
Roundtable participants made several recommendations for action at the federal, state, and
local levels.

Recommendations to enhance the federal government’s ability to support the COPS Office:
‹ Encourage U.S. Department of Justice Monitors to provide technical assistance,
training, information sharing, and research assistance.
‹ Create avenues for large and small police departments to share resources and ideas.
‹ Commit many of COPS Office achievements to writing, specifically the work that
has been done on police integrity.
‹ Advocate for models that move beyond bureaucratic processes to those that support
institutional change. Examples of advocacy positions include:
‘ Expand accreditation: requires internal and external evaluation
‘ Broaden sense of policing: Operation Boot Straps (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
‘ Narrow the gap between education and training
‘ Develop new chiefs institutes
‹ Acknowledge the criticality of leadership development for 21st century public safety
executives.
‹ Strengthen institutional capacity and agenda-building by funding topic-specific
centers based on case studies that will narrow gaps in knowledge-building and
infuse policy with evidence-based findings.

Both the state governments and local police departments have responsibilities for supporting
other agencies in their efforts to institutionalize community policing. Local police
departments, for example, could reinforce reciprocal relationships to strengthen policing.

For its part, the COPS Office could improve its state-level response by engaging in the
following:
‹ Share resources with local/smaller departments

‹ Encourage more outreach between cities and the federal government

‹ Develop training to prepare state police to work in cities

— 10 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Participants identified several areas where the media and community policing interests
intersect and made the following recommendations:
‹ Provide reasonable access to information for community/ethnic media and broader
media outlets to encourage effective reporting
‹ Partner with the media to suppress panic during crises
‹ Consider the emerging trend of police journalism
‹ Work to eliminate bias in print and broadcast reporting
‹ Enforce the importance of accuracy and context in responsible reporting
‘ Contextualize news in accurate assessments of criminal justice policy
‹ Educate new reporters on law enforcement issues and educate law enforcement on
demands faced by reporters

Participants also recommended continued support by the COPS Office of initiatives

designated as most helpful and/or creating value:
‹ Sponsor regional roundtables that address law enforcement integrity issues such as:

‘ Racial profiling
‘ Training and education of recruits and supervisors
‘ Use of force, and internal investigation
‘ Recruitment, selection, and retention
‹ Develop more publications such as the POP Guides, that are useful for officers and
stakeholders
‹ Continue the COPS in Schools program
‹ Develop a Weed and Seed philosophy that is emblematic of the COPS Office
‹ Publish more on the evaluation of outcomes of hiring grants and changes brought
about by the COPS Office
‹ Use the COPS Office knowledge base to adopt a stronger focus on how community
policing fights fear and how collaboration and communication create more blended
responses to crime
‹ Institutional capacity demonstration and agenda-building: Fund topic-specific
centers based on case studies to narrow gaps in knowledge-building and infuse
policy with evidence-based findings.
‹ Promote more information sharing between practitioners and policymakers that
does not focus solely on hiring grants to encourage funding for training and
technical assistance

— 11 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Washington, D.C. Building Partnerships to Advance

Effective Policing
In this Roundtable, participants in Washington, D.C., discussed
the mechanics, constraints, and key elements necessary in creating
lasting and effective community policing partnerships. The
process of creating partnerships is complex and includes political
and leadership implications. Roundtable participants saw the
COPS Office as providing a framework for partnerships to become a fundamental base of
community policing and noted that the COPS Office clearly established the standard by
which law enforcement partnerships are measured because of a strong focus on partnerships
in all activities as a central way to sustain community policing. This commitment is clearly
reflected in the following COPS Office achievements and activities that have created
credibility for community policing in the field:
‹ Legitimizing and encouraging partnership building within law enforcement and the
Department of Justice, as directed by former Attorney General Janet Reno
‹ Taking a leadership role in developing a customer orientation that prioritizes
responsiveness to partners and to issues that the community defines as important
‹ Supporting diversified outreach by law enforcement in communities across the
country
‹ Providing leadership and resources to bring law enforcement agencies together
to learn from one another, such as using leading law enforcement agencies as
laboratories for learning
‹ Creating the capacity for improved information sharing across the criminal justice
arena
‹ Creating high-quality knowledge products with online availability
‹ Promoting private security and public partnerships
‹ Providing guidance for managing short-term events that require strategic public
safety solutions
‹ Supporting the evolution of long-term community policing strategies

Effective policing partnerships not only advance the field of policing, they also advance the
day-to-day problem-solving paradigm. In this way, systematic partnerships are understood
to inform change from the top, produce cultural change within participating agencies, and
change how police do business through collaborative engagements with the community that
are designed to prevent crime and enhance public safety.

— 12 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

The Mechanics of Partnering. Partnerships mean more than just sitting in the same room
and sharing work [Link] need to develop trust is the lifeblood of [Link]
following are the critical elements that are necessary for successful long-term partnerships
and for creating a climate of trust:
‹ Select partners and topics carefully to ensure the likelihood of achieving results,
making sure that all partners do not see the issues in the same way.
‹ Provide continuity and follow-up with all partners. A successful partnership cannot
be based on one-time events that respond to a single issue.
‹ Define roles in the partnership clearly, including who is responsible for what and the
resources that different partners have to create solutions.
‹ Be willing to get out of comfort zones and rise above territoriality.
‹ Recognize that even though each partner may have a different agenda, it is possible
to put differences aside and work with each other to solve a common problem.
‹ Recognize that partnerships are based on mutual interests and that there needs to be
a mutual accountability for success.
‹ Collaborate with stakeholders because collaboration is the glue that sustains
partnerships. Interactive engagements drive collaborations with stakeholders so that
all who have a common interest in solving a community problem remained engaged
over time.
‹ Build trust, take down walls, and create mutual [Link] will result in
long-term collaborations and signify how the systematic use of partnerships leads to
significant change.

Current Constraints. The above critical elements were defined by the group as necessary
for achieving dynamic, effective partnerships and responding to the COPS Office focus on
systematic use of partnerships in community policing. It was clear from the discussion, though,
that many see a drift away from some of the important benchmarks that define community
policing partnerships, and they expressed concern that theme-oriented partnerships may be
replacing goal-oriented partnerships.

— 13 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Many participants have engaged in theme-oriented partnerships with the COPS Office and
have produced products that advance policing in general, but have not always been specific to
community policing. Consequently, participants urged the COPS Office to consider refocusing
and guiding the field toward achieving dynamic, effective partnerships. There was concurrence
that a renewed emphasis on the criticality of partnerships, along with the expanded definition of
community policing, would help to answer questions such as the following:
1. How are partnerships defined?
2. What is the goal of partnering?
3. Who are the stakeholders?
4. How do partnerships function?
5. How can they be improved?
6. What role do they have in legitimizing community policing?
7. How should the field move beyond theme-oriented partnering in favor of goal-
oriented partnering?

The Community as a Key Partner. Despite a fairly sophisticated level of awareness that
a goal of community policing is to engage the community as a key partner, roundtable
participants were less emphatic about detailing current efforts to do this. Many endorsed the
notion that building mutually beneficial relationships between the police and community
demands that the police take the lead in functioning in a problem-solving capacity.
Conversely, others agreed that both the community and police should bring the agency into
play to identify problems, develop a methodology for responding to problems, and create
solutions. The lack of a strong, unified direction could be a reflection of other dynamics at
work, such as: some erosion in support for community engagement as departments struggle
with resource issues and expanding portfolios that now include homeland security; the lack
of participants at the table who represented community advocacy groups who actually are
working with the police; or, the previously referenced issue of increases in theme-oriented
partnerships, in contrast to those that are goal-oriented.

Current community issues that require attention from the community policing perspective
and have strong implications for engaging unique sectors of the community as partners
include the following:
‹ The need to negotiate strategic relationships with community members and groups
including youths, immigrants, formerly incarcerated and court-involved individuals,
and the faith-based community.
‹ Building trust to prevent isolating the perception of crime to communities of color,
as insensitivity to the implications of racially biased attitudes and perceptions of the
criminal justice system are important concerns that create distrust of law enforcement.

— 14 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

‹ The current law enforcement recruitment and hiring crises, as well as workforce
changes that affect all occupations, may result in hiring officers who are less-sensitive
to communities of color and who have no clear understanding of the importance of
engaging in critical partnerships in these communities. Consequently, community
policing initiatives that have been carefully developed could be seriously jeopardized.

Roundtable participants encouraged the COPS Office to provide the support for local
police departments to proactively seek opportunities to engage all community groups in
mutually beneficial partnership-building opportunities that protect the best interests of all
members of the community. Further, they urged the COPS Office to listen to others who
represent community partnerships such as advocacy groups or partnering agencies within
the criminal justice system, including probation and parole.

The Politics of Partnering. Partnerships cannot be sustained without the support of elected
and appointed officials. City government buy-in and cooperation on the part of the mayor
and/or city manager, the city council, and others contribute to a well-functioning policing
culture. If city governments become dysfunctional, the police department may be expected
to assume responsibility. Law enforcement has to view itself as part of the government
team and develop partnerships with all city government agencies. Effective government
partnerships require stakeholders to assess each other’s strengths and weaknesses and align
themselves in ways that produce more effective governance for all. In so doing, policing
becomes a visible, proactive institution that is rooted in continuity and good governance.

Political elections and changes in administration have a direct effect on priorities and
funding; therefore, this is another reason for an effective law enforcement executive to seek
partnerships with government executives and agencies. Further, funding goals should be
linked to the interaction of public safety and counterterrorism goals that resonate strongly
on the national register.

Research Partnerships. Roundtable participants acknowledged that there is a critical need

to encourage partnering with researchers to build the capacity to collect and analyze crime
data and establish evidence-based models for public safety. University partnerships are a
favorable option to fill the void in policing research.

— 15 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Ten principles for successful police–research partnerships.

1. The research should address an area of practice that is currently important and that
matters to the department.
2. The research should add value and meet a need that the police department cannot
satisfy internally.
3. Research objectives should be well-defined and limited. No fishing trips.
4. The research timetable should be realistic but reasonable.
5. A comprehensive, reviewable research design should be developed and approved so
that a police department knows what it is getting into.
6. All affected organizations should commit at “command” levels and get everyone on
board.
7. A formal memorandum of understanding should be developed and signed by the
organizations that will be involved and affected to satisfy the lawyers.
8. The department should establish and monitor procedures for protecting human
subjects.
9. Researchers should keep the police department informed, while the police
department should provide timely response and review to researchers.
10. The police department should review draft reports before they are disseminated so
that there are no surprises or ambushes.

The researchers at the roundtable encouraged the COPS Office to create partnerships with
other components of the Department of Justice and weigh in on the kinds of knowledge
and evidence that needs to be supported and informed by research.

Leadership and Policing. Recruitment problems pose formidable challenges to a police

department’s ability to maintain effective levels of responsiveness. A concerted effort is
needed to recruit, train, and prepare officers to responsibly grapple with challenging issues
such as race, mental illness, poverty, gangs, trafficking, and violence.

In addition, many chiefs are facing a significant loss of infrastructure and institutional
knowledge accompanying the retirement of staff members who have more than 25 years of
experience. In many parts of the country, police departments are in need of guidance on key
leadership issues.

Differences between rural and urban law enforcement also affect leadership options. The
average term of a police chief is 2 to 2 1/2 years and is dependent largely on changes in the
local political climate, whereas the average term for a sheriff is 12 years.

— 16 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Leadership and training are significant factors that have both short- and long-term effects
on crime-prevention possibilities. Further, differences in rural and local law enforcement
require a nuanced strategy in an effort to widen and strengthen learning in the professional
law enforcement pipeline. Investments in recruitment and training are necessary and should
be regular features of the national community policing landscape. Roundtables such as those
convened by the COPS Office were acknowledged as an opportunity to bring both experienced
and newer leaders together to develop partnerships among law enforcement agencies.

Opportunities and Recommendations. Roundtable participants reaffirmed the basic

realization that drives the development of community policing reform—that crime is not
just a police issue and that police can not control crime by [Link] need to partner
with others because crime is a community issue. As such, the nature of partnership with the
community is critical.

Participants agreed that to leverage the COPS Office’s success and achieve clearly defined
and fully articulated partnerships, they made the following recommendations:
‹ There needs to be a “return to the fundamentals” of community policing—training
and professional development opportunities should be standardized.
‹ Major police departments should serve as regional information and leadership hubs
to which smaller and rural departments may turn for direction.
‹ Crime needs to be defined, measured, and contextualized in contemporary and
community-based terms.
‹ Consideration should be paid to diversity within law enforcement; for example, rural
versus urban law enforcement differences.
‹ Encourage law enforcement to consider new business models that are more
responsive to human resources and funding issues. �

The group made several additional broad-based recommendations:

‹ Roundtables are excellent networking and learning opportunities. Including
both experienced and relatively new leaders in future roundtables is a way to
institutionalize the thinking that leads to change. �
‹ Develop and sustain strategic partnerships that align disparate groups around a
common resolve to improve public safety outcomes.
‹ Group differences highlight the important concerns of trust, accountability, shared
understandings of roles, resources, and [Link] COPS Office needs to support
the type of partnership building that may be similar to what occurred with racial
profiling [Link] initiatives involved a systematic use of unique partners
and created strategies for solving persistent problems that were highly sensitive
in [Link] COPS Office should consider how to use its knowledge of
partnership building to enhance this kind of problem solving.

— 17 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

‹ As evidenced in this roundtable discussion, there is considerable knowledge about

what needs to be done to satisfy the critical elements of developing partnerships,
but there is far less knowledge about how to do what needs to be done. The group
recommended that the COPS Office consider ways to support this kind of focus to
strengthen partnerships and reignite a passion for community policing partnering.
‹ Seek opportunities to promote the outstanding array of knowledge products that are
available online. In addition, consider building on them or taking them to the next level.
‹ Focus on key areas that represent partnership-building opportunities that have the
potential to reinforce the permanency of the COPS office.

Other recommendations pertained to identified groups that require specialized effort. They
include the following:
‹ Continue support for tribal needs because they are unique and frequently not
captured in programs that apply generally to law enforcement.
‹ Create opportunities to form partnerships with groups that represent immigrants.
‹ Support cyber approaches to create youth outreach such as the initiative launched
in Boston, Massachusetts: the Text-A-Tip program, which marries public safety
goals and the prevalence of cell phone technology to reach youth. It exemplifies
how innovation on the part of law enforcement practitioners and thought leaders
can create greater opportunities for partnerships that include members of the larger
community.
‹ Explore comparable partnerships with programs for ex-offenders, support groups,
and ex-offender groups.
‹ Consider conducting summits, such as on youth crimes and hate crimes, as a way to
spread knowledge at a time of diminishing resources.

Moving Forward. The COPS Office has been challenged to vie for permanency in the
American sociopolitical landscape and to reignite passion for many of the ideas that literally
reversed the course of policing. Roundtable participants confirmed partnership building as
a basic element of the COPS Office mission and acknowledged the COPS Office’s history
of functioning as an institution where innovation, effectiveness, and accountability are
valued. Further, the COPS Office will continue its effort of guiding organizational change
throughout national and local law enforcement bodies. The COPS Office can become
a voice for expanding local government and community oriented partnerships that are
effective in advancing the field; improving on-the-beat strategies, particularly with unique
but under-represented groups; and supporting robust research—all in the quest to prevent
and reduce crime in communities across America.

— 18 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Milwaukee Advancing Innovation: Experiences of

Progressive Police Agencies
Milwaukee’s Roundtable addressed concerns raised at the earlier
events about struggles to institutionalize community policing.
Roundtable participants from a number of law enforcement
agencies reflected on their progress in implementing and
institutionalizing community policing innovations in their
communities and on the challenges they encountered. The multiple trains of thought that
emerged are captured under three major themes:

1. Successful initiatives that support institutionalization

2. Impediments to institutionalizing community policing
3. Current needs for sustaining institutionalization

Successful Initiatives
Participants demonstrated how a range of complex activities are required for successful
institutionalization; how a full implementation of these activities takes considerable time to
implement; and how prolonged involvement at many levels of the agency is necessary to have a
full impact on the operations of the agency. This multilevel approach embodies seven elements:
1. Strong communications strategy
2. An internal and external message: this is the way we do business
3. Cultural renorming (change)
4. Using terminology that reflects a change in norms
5. Clear identification of roles, responsibilities, and accountability
6. Organizational changes
7. Problem-solving training at all levels of the organization

Strong communications strategy. First and foremost is the requirement for a strong
communications strategy that generally involves a four-pronged approach:
1. Sell the concept to, and educate community about, community policing.
2. Give every officer the message that he or she has the opportunity to do
community policing.
3. Communicate with elected officials and the community about a changing and
differential police response.
4. Use multimedia to tell the story and advance institutionalization. One department,
for example, listed the status of current problem-oriented policing projects on its
website and continually updated the information.

— 19 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

An internal and external message: this is the way we do business. Accepting community policing
and problem-solving policing as “the way we do business” is a critical dimension of
institutionalization. This message has implications for other organizational elements, for
example: Is the organization aligned to empower officers to conduct problem-solving
activities? Is it reorganized into teams to compel problem solving? Is it reorganized by time
of day and geography on a 24/7 basis? Does the agency employ a vertical staffing approach?
Does the agency conduct problem-solving training sequentially, coherently, comprehensively
across all ranks? Have evaluations been restructured based on a current system of outcomes?

Everyone in the organization should understand and speak the same language. Roundtable
participants endorsed the idea of developing the new generation of leaders in the
“Nordstrom model.” (In the Nordstrom model or “way,” Nordstrom department store
employees work in a culture in which they have the freedom to make decisions and are
supported by management in those decisions.) That is integral to the “way we do business”
message. One agency’s success story reported that it took 11 years to ingrain the message
of shared responsibility and ownership across all levels of the organization, as well as to the
external community.

Cultural renorming. In another success story, an agency engaged in a seven-step process of

cultural renorming that systematically changed its organizational norms:
1. Trained all law enforcement personnel on problem solving
2. Moved from a specialist to a generalist approach where everyone practices
problem-oriented policing as part of the strategic plan
3. Restructured the job performance appraisal process and included the union in
the design of the evaluation process
4. Revamped promotional processes, which also addressed roadblocks at the
midmanagement level; the process now includes an assessment center process that
involves problem-solving role-playing
5. Revamped an awards program and instituted an internal Goldstein-type award that
was submitted as an official Goldstein award candidate
6. Reconsidered the hiring process
7. Implemented a CompStat-like session that focused on problem-oriented
policing projects

Using terminology that reflects a change in norms. The terminology that defines effective policing
has a significant effect on the mindset of officers and supports the institutionalization
of community policing. In addition to implementing a strong communication strategy,
cultural renorming, intensive training, and changing organizational practices, one success
story agency adapted the term “co-active” to signify that police and community are jointly
engaged in problem solving.

— 20 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Clear identification of roles, responsibilities, and accountability. The role of the police chief is
critical in mobilizing local government to address the social problems that lead to crime.
The chief executive needs to seek opportunities for police to engage in work that is
truly preventive and to work with community partners and other managers outside the
department. In working with these groups through the network of assistant city managers,
the chief reaches those who are accountable for reducing the conditions that lead to
crime. In another success story, the chief joined the local community business council to
open a dialog with members of the business community and to let them know what the
department was doing, as well as to better assess their needs.

At best, roundtable participants agreed, community policing should be the city’s program
rather than the police department’s program. It cannot depend simply on extraordinary and
talented individuals; rather, it needs to become routine at the city [Link] may help when
changes in leadership in the department occur and may also allow community policing to
survive crises within the [Link] city’s accountability system can also support the
community policing philosophy and practice.

Organizational changes. Implementing community policing affects all elements of an

organization. Starting with hiring processes and extending to performance appraisal and
promotion, recognition for engaging in problem solving and community policing becomes
essential. An agency success story described how this extended to succession planning that
was coupled with generational training. Nevertheless, other organizational changes may be
necessary, particularly as the process begins to mature.

Within this context, another success story discussed how an agency that had practiced
community policing since 1985 faced the challenge of taking itself to the next level and
dealing with balancing proactive and reactive [Link] agency elected to reach its full
potential by becoming “preemptive.” One example involved looking at hot spots and asking,
what did this hot spot look like before it became a hot spot? Subsequently, the agency
developed a predictive formula (sociocultural variables), the Neighborhood Strength Index
(NSI), and worked with assistant city managers who take on the issues geographically and
marshal multiple agencies to stem the indicators of [Link] date, they have designated
four areas of the city as NSI sites and crime is down in those sites.

Still another success story determined that it was feasible to have officers provide technical
assistance and advice over the telephone. Light-duty officers manned computers and
telephones and were empowered to call complainants and work with them to resolve their
problems. As a result, more than 40 percent of Priority 3 calls are being handled over the
telephone, thereby reducing the call load and giving officers more time for preventive
problem solving.

— 21 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Problem-solving training at all levels of the organization. Various success stories emphasized
the need to require community policing and problem-solving training at all levels of
the organization to reduce the gaps between officer, middle managers, and executives.
Roundtable participants generally agreed that middle managers are key to institutionalizing
community policing. They need to be involved from the outset because they control
so much that is critical to institutionalizing problem solving and community policing.
Frequently, officers receive the training but supervisors do not and then they fail to
understand what the officers can do.

To implement problem solving at all levels of an organization, many agencies reporting

success stories found that training has to occur at those same levels and that vertical training
throughout the organization is preferable. Further, providing training for communities
throughout the state has to be supported because best practices in various parts of the
state may be unknown. Accordingly, new police officers should be encouraged to read
community policing and problem-solving literature, particularly if they are being mentored
by people who were not trained in during the community policing era.

Summary of Success Stories

‹ Community policing as the way we do business is communicated throughout the
department and within the community.
‹ A strong communication strategy also involves cultural renorming, with changes in
terminology that develop the capacity to change the mind-set of officers.
‹ Creative management of calls for service and balancing proactive and reactive
strategies is critical to success.
‹ Police agencies share the responsibility and accountability for solving
community crime and disorder problems with other community organizations
and stakeholders. Engaging others in owning crime problems and participating
in solving social problems that may lead to crime is the backbone of
institutionalizing community policing.
‹ First-line supervisors and middle managers are critical to the institutionalization
of community policing and must be the focus of training on engagement in
community policing practices
‹ Performance evaluation systems need to be redesigned to reflect problem solving and
community policing. Measuring outcomes—that is, what matters—is essential.
‹ Recruiting new officers who will have the capacity and desire to practice
community policing requires an intensive focus and a change in traditional
approaches.
‹ Community policing is not a program; rather, it is the methodology of effective or
good policing.

— 22 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Impediments to Institutionalizing Community Policing

Seven trains of thought emerged from roundtable discussions of impediments to
institutionalizing community policing:
1. Pressure to respond to calls for service
2. Resistance to the use of civilians
3. Internal resistance
4. Gaps in law enforcement leadership training
5. Community policing training is not being mainstreamed
6. External resistance and misinterpretation
7. Linking research and practice

Pressure to respond to calls for service. Participants defined the extraordinary pressure of the
calls-for-service system as a major barrier to implementing or institutionalizing innovation,
especially problem solving. How to manage the effective deployment of officers is a
continuing challenge and supporting opportunities for them to do proactive police work
requires creativity. Consequently, some departments have questioned if any of this work
could be done by civilians.

Resistance to use of civilians. Other than working as analysts, most agencies found that elected
officials are reluctant to hire civilians for a broader problem-solving role. A big element is
selling the concept because most people appear satisfied with the service when the problem
is solved, but it takes some time to get there. Further, departments that conducted focus
groups with citizens to determine their comfort level with civilians indicated that civilians
preferred dealing with officers.

Internal resistance. Resistance from midlevel management, first-line supervisors, and special
units results in the failure to internalize the knowledge and skills necessary to affect
community [Link] is a threat to long-term institutionalization because these groups
have the capacity to sabotage officers and chief executives. Consequently, agencies need to
create opportunities for middle managers to support community policing by training and by
rethinking and redesigning performance evaluations.

Gaps in law enforcement leadership training. The American system of developing police
leaders affects the institutionalization of community [Link] this context, there
is no national entity to train the future leaders of [Link] military was offered as an
example of the kind of emphasis that is needed because the military makes a serious effort
to groom leaders throughout their [Link] focus is learning from history and teaching
that history to a new generation of leaders who will develop doctrine that guides people’s
actions. For police, however, there needs to be a leadership focus on integrating community
policing throughout the department while managing competing demands and expectations.

— 23 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Policing has been slow to recognize the need for leadership training. Despite recognized
management programs, for the most part police leaders are developed in an ad hoc manner
through a decentralized system of learning that has no national focus. Consequently, chiefs
may continue to run community policing out of their own office, or use special units,
or refer to community policing as a program rather than as the way they do business.
Leadership training with a focus on community policing would counter those practices.

Community policing training is not being mainstreamed. Whether community policing training
is lacking or it is simply misdirected was a concern of roundtable participants, as were
questions about police training really emphasizing community and problem-oriented
policing. There was the impression that it may evolve as an add-on or luxury and may not be
mainstreamed in many police training settings. This impedes community policing as being
seen and accepted as the methodology of doing police work instead of something you do
when you have extra time. Statewide mandates may limit the time needed in police training
to make problem solving and community policing the central focus of effective policing.
Consequently, the message is that community policing is not at the center of the business of
policing. That has to be corrected and training needs to expose new officers to the concept
that problem solving and community policing are effective policing and emphasize to them
the daily, practical aspects of community collaboration and problem-solving. Roundtable
participants recommended encouraging state training commissions to incorporate problem-
solving training into all aspects of recruitment and other training curricula.

External resistance and misinterpretation. Effective police practices are often defined by
external groups such as the media, political leaders, or advocacy groups. As the police
mandate expands to areas beyond traditional policing roles, there is a concomitant need
to educate the public and other relevant groups. Public understanding becomes essential
during critical incidents, such as police misconduct, which can further complicate the issue,
create community distrust, and divert the attention of leaders and politicians in what often
becomes a media free-for-all.

Conversely, there was a consensus among roundtable participants that law enforcement
has not done a great job of taking control of the profession. There needs to be a stronger
advocacy for the positions that need to be made and professional police organizations
need to call for the necessary changes that will educate external groups and foster the
institutionalization of community policing.

Linking research and practice. Roundtable participants cautioned that we not lose site of the
important ties between researchers and practitioners in fostering the institutionalization
of community policing. There is a need to engage local university programs within the
department and to nurture the relationship with the academic community to help to head
off the possibility that officers who may have been well-trained have stopped learning.

— 24 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Current Need for Sustaining Institutionalization

Despite efforts to weave community policing into the structure and functions of law
enforcement organizations, one critical variable remains: the need to sustain community
policing and transition it effectively when a new chief is hired. Information presented at
the roundtable confirmed the need to learn how to make the transition from one chief to
[Link] has been very little information about this process but it is clear that the
transition may be more difficult when the new chief comes from the outside, does not share
a community policing perspective, or has no community policing history.

A collateral issue discussed was the selection process for law enforcement chief executives.
Roundtable participants expressed a strong belief that the hiring process for chief executives
needs to be revisited. Mayors and city managers need to understand that the current process
prohibits people from applying for CEO positions because many of these searches appear to
be beauty contests that serve the recruiters and elected officials far more than the candidates
for the chief ’s position. City officials must work with groups like the International City/
County Management Association and other organizations to become educated about the
process of hiring a chief executive and having information on what policing is like today—
what the field looks like, what officials need to look for in a candidate, and ways to search
effectively.

Roundtable participants, many of whom had been through selection processes, had both
horror stories and successful experiences in the search [Link] recommended having
the hiring process done by someone or an organization not in the business of conducting
police chief [Link] also recommended that the COPS Office compile participants’
search experiences into a guide to help prepare prospective chiefs, as well as mayors and
city managers, to conduct an effective, respectful search and to support a national leadership
program that addresses the needs of new chiefs within the framework of community
policing.

Law enforcement agencies need to recognize the political reality that problem-solving
approaches may not garner support from the other city and county [Link] political
perception of what the police should be doing may conflict with a prevention approach; for
example, if drug prevention-efforts affect the productivity of the district attorney’s office
by reducing drug prosecutions, district attorneys may not be [Link] is a need to
foster the continuous sharing of information among chiefs, foster peer-to-peer exchange,
and circulate knowledge from the field.

— 25 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Sustaining Community Policing

Roundtable participants recognized that the policing profession has made substantial
progress in community policing, but they expressed concern about the field losing the
passion for community policing as embodied by the COPS Office in its formative years.

The COPS Office has made significant contributions through programmatic initiatives
with target groups where capacity has been built to sustain community policing in unique
environments that are critical to institutionalizing community policing. The COPS Office
support of training and technology in addition to its many publications were also cited by
participants.

— 26 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Seattle Preparing Tomorrow’s Officers:

Opportunities, Challenges, and Change
Throughout the previous Roundtable sessions, the issue of the
“new generation” of officers continued to surface. While much
has been done in the realm of recruitment and hiring, retention
remains the untouched issue for law enforcement agencies; in
particular, retaining this “new generation” of employees who will
be responsible for carrying on policing in a democracy. Roundtable participants noted that
policing often looks to the experiences of the private sector, especially around organizational
issues. There also is concern about whether the younger generation of officers will stay in
policing or see it as just a current job or stepping stone to something else.

Private- and public-sector representatives at the roundtable saw commonalities in their

approaches to hiring and retaining the new generation; nevertheless, there were distinct
differences. Service mentality was a common theme and corporate participants talked about
the importance of seeking candidates who share the company’s vision, are committed to
the mission, and appreciate the value of giving back. They noted that an organization’s
reputation precedes it and attracts the right kind of candidates who identify with the
organization. They also seek candidates who are “people smart” rather than “book smart.”

Differences showed up when it came to the interview process. Private-sector participants

recommended bringing candidates back a number of times and exposing them to different
divisions and people before making a decision. Such selection becomes a subjective process
that is inconsistent with standards for public employment. The process also is not subject to
constraints such as meeting police academy class deadlines.

Recommendations from the Private Sector

Recruiting: seek those who possess the following qualities:
1. Are genuinely excited about doing well and doing good work
2. Able to connect with the feeling that they can make an impact
3. Are willing to work hard
4. Can make a commitment to the organization and its mission
5. Can weather the ebb and flow of the organization

— 27 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

Retention: the four most successful ways to retain employees:

1. Provide training and the opportunity to learn and grow in one’s career.
2. Have a system in place for performance [Link] employees, especially, seek
constant feedback and welcome continuous acknowledgment of their work. They are
much more open to constructive criticism and will work hard to improve in areas
that need attention. An employee feedback survey shared among managers may be an
effective tool.
3. Spend more time mentoring employees on their careers and not just on project
tasks. The new generation employees respond better when placing the focus on their
careers and how a particular project or series of tasks will enhance and grow their
skills and careers.
4. Schedule routine one-on-one meetings with employees at every level of the
organization.

Who Is Tomorrow’s Officer?

A Perspective on the New Generation of Employees
‹ Although generally one finds four generations in the workplace, in law enforcement,
there may be just three generations: the “Traditionalists” who shaped the policies
and procedures that have an impact on the new generation and are largely retired
from law enforcement; the “Baby Boomers” who are the power-brokers of most
organizations (public and private) and who thrive on work—their identity is their
work; “Generation X,” perhaps the smallest proportion of the workforce but who
currently hold leadership positions in organizations and will most likely stay in their
positions; and “Generation Y,” the new employees or tomorrow’s officers. These
groups tend to be defined by seminal events such as Generation Y being highly
influenced by September 11, 2001.
‹ Workforce shortages are looming, with retirement a threatening issue in most
organizations. Generation X is the smallest group, meaning that there will not be
enough employees to fill all the positions.
‹ Generation Y is the largest generation ever but they are not yet ready to assume the
positions vacated by retirements.
‹ Many of the new generation of employees will not seek leadership roles because they
do everything in packs, they are not traditional, and have distinct communication
styles (cell phones, texting, etc.)
‹ It is possible that many of the careers that these new employees will seek have not
yet been invented.
‹ Organizations need to brand themselves in ways that will make people want to work
for them. For policing, that could mean recruiting people who are more in tune
with both sides of law enforcement: customer service and enforcement.

— 28 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Generation Y: What We Know about Them

A general discussion among roundtable participants revealed what they know about
Generation Y.

‹ They were treated as “very special” when they were [Link] parents were
latch-key kids who over-compensated by “hovering” over them; therefore, they have
felt very protected and special—make me feel important about myself.
‹ They want to be called by their first names; they are very personalized.
‹ They have been told they were “great” and are a very confident generation who
bring strong expectations into the [Link] want to be able to monitor
their progress in meeting those expectations.
‹ They are team-oriented, multicultural, and diverse, and have a global perspective.
‹ They have a strong sense of commitment to public service, are committed to giving
back, and are very philanthropic.
‹ They like rules and constructive discipline but want to know the reasons behind
the [Link] accept constructive criticism and want to know how they can
improve, instead of learning only from punitive measures. Consequently, they could
experience some stress in the workplace and no one is sure how this will play out.
Data are not definitive about whether this group has higher rates of suicide and
depression compared with other generations.
‹ They believe in continuing education and opportunities to learn new skills and to
improve themselves.
‹ They are very patriotic and eventually could become similar to the “greatest
generation,” ending up being more similar to their grandparents’ generation. �
‹ They have been shaped by technology and expect to stay connected in the
workforce through various forms of electronic communication and social networks.

— 29 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

How Is Your Agency Responding to the New Generation

of Officers?
Generations X and Y pose a number of challenges to law enforcement agencies. Generation
X roundtable participants, for example, consider themselves the “worker bees” who are
internally driven. In contrast, the Generation Y approach is, what’s in it for me and who is
going to recognize it? Further, the expectations of Generation Y are significantly higher.

Challenge: expectations. There is concern about the mindset that says you can circumvent the
usual way to achieve success in law enforcement. Past history suggests that there is no way
to circumvent the rise through the law enforcement ranks. Recruits may come into law
enforcement with high expectations for promotional opportunities or for very specific goals
related to policing functions (e.g., narcotics or tactical). The challenge is how to explain to
the new recruit the difference between having high expectations and goals versus building
experience and requisite skills to reach the goals. Recruiters, therefore, need to paint a
realistic picture of the organization, the role of the policing function, and convey that the
measure of success may not be a promotion as much as being the best officer one can be.

Challenge: balancing career and family. Family values are very much a part of the new
generation of officers and they do not see the job as their life. Achieving this balance will
have an impact on 24/7 police coverage, special assignments, overtime, and police socializing.

Challenge: factors in attracting good candidates to law enforcement. Beyond recruitment techniques,
other factors are important—such as marketing the message and interacting with groups in
the community that the department is seeking to attract. The COPS Office-funded project,
Hiring in the Spirit of Service, documents how five departments used marketing to develop
a brand that would change the message they wanted to deliver to the community and
included delivering the message in different languages. All agreed, however, that working
with youth early so that they see the police in a positive way and create positive interactions
with law enforcement personnel can be the most critical factor in framing a perspective that
law enforcement helps rather than harms. One police department is considering advocating
for developing a public safety high school to reach potential candidates.

Challenge: availability of electronic communication. While it is a given, could electronic

communication also be divisive? Typically, technology is seen as a positive, but questions
emerged whether the reliance on technology to facilitate instant communication could also
compromise squad integrity. This challenge poses the need to recognize the criticality of
face-to-face-interaction.

Challenge: encouraging innovation in a paramilitary organization. How does a department sponsor

innovation and creativity in a paramilitary organization? One option is to consider creating
both generalists and specialists within the patrol function. It would require examining
operations to determine opportunities for patrol officers to become engaged in a specialized
role and also allow time for their exposure to a specialized area. At the same time, we should
not sell patrol short. Given the right supervision and support for problem solving, patrol
becomes a specialized position.

— 30 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Other options to encourage innovation include rethinking the organization chart to allow
creative officers to do their best [Link] might also include adapting the 360-degree
performance assessment process focused on helping young leaders become better leaders.
Currently, very few police organizations allow young officers to provide feedback to
superiors as would happen with a 360-degree [Link] approach would satisfy
the critical feedback needs of the new generation and would certainly provide better
performance feedback across the organization.

Internal Changes: Making the Department More Responsive

to Officers
A discussion that centered on internal discipline presented examples of how three police
departments handle problems.

1. � Phoenix Police Department: Discipline System. The maximum time off for infractions
was reduced to a new maximum of 40 hours off with the goal of changing behavior.
The side benefit of this change is that it helped with Generation Y employees who
were not responsive to the stronger punishment and it no longer punished a squad
or a family who often suffered collaterally. As a result, the department has not had
the surge of repeat offenders in 18 months that some may have predicted, and the
number of internal affairs investigations/disciplinary review board activities have
dropped by half.

In retrospect, the 40 hours off discipline may not have been the sole factor in
reducing negative [Link] seemed to matter most was that the commanders
told each offending officer that if an infraction occurred again, the officer would not
be working in the department.

The department now is experimenting with a “last-chance agreement” concerning

any disciplinary problem that occurs during the next 5 years.

2. � Los Angeles Police Department: Strategic [Link] department thinks that when an
offense happens, strategy rather than penalty—and the way people feel due to how
they are treated—is a key part of the disciplinary system, and results in the following:
‘ Try to develop rather than discharge the officer.
‘ Penalty may not be best strategy: the question to ask is what was going through
the officer’s mind when he or she made the decision to commit the offense.
‘ Fears, objections, and questions get answered: if you can’t persuade people to
think differently at the command level, you won’t make progress.
‘ Ask the employee what he or she is going to do differently from now on.
‘ Change the way the officer is thinking and behaving.

— 31 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

‘ Standards-based assessment—commanding officers should consider the question:

what have you done to address the problem?
‘ Values that underlie the rules may not be remediable, whereas behavior is
changeable.
3. Pasadena Police Department: Value-Based Review Board. The Value-Based Review Board
looks at violations as a violation of the department’s values (more so than of the
specific rule or policy) and makes the employee part of the choice to change his
or her behavior. This approach is supported by academy training on value-based
decision-making instead of focusing solely on teaching the rules.

Promising Changes in Law Enforcement Organizations: Police

Executive Perspectives
Although much of the roundtable focused on the new generation of employees and how
to recruit and retain them, a parallel issue involved the need for change in law enforcement
systems. Even if successful in shaping new employees to fit the organization, the question
remains of whether a department can retain the best of the best in an organization that does
not keep pace with economic, social, and technological change. Consequently, both the
organizations and the people who staff them may have to change.

Beyond the changes to discipline systems previously discussed, executives at the roundtable
endorsed a growing awareness of the need to change their systems not just to accommodate
employees, but to create more effective organizations. Many have been trying new
approaches that would have been unheard of just a short time ago. They discussed the
following approaches, some of which are a work in progress, given the tradition of resistance
to change in law enforcement agencies.

‹ Creating new processes for recruit orientation that devotes significant time to the
“front end” of the system similar to college and professional “first-year experience”
programs designed to prevent attrition.
‹ Presenting, as one department does, a 2-week residential pre-academy orientation
that involves team-building exercises, leadership, ethics, fiscal matters, and physical
fitness. Although it represents a sizeable investment in up-front staff, those who are
not suited for the career generally self-select out before they begin the expensive
process of training.
‹ Finding ways to allow creative officers to do their best work and encouraging
problem-solving approaches.
‹ Making internal changes so that the department is more responsive to the officers.
‹ Developing targeted training programs so that officers can be exposed to specialized
training early in their careers and become what one roundtable executive called
“Renaissance” officers with knowledge, and eventually experience, in different
specialties.

— 32 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

‹ Enhancing an awareness of how law enforcement is evolving and creating new and
different types of jobs within the profession (cybercrime is an example), and expose
officers to the skills that they need to develop to function in those new jobs.
‹ Changing discipline systems so that a goal of behavior change is achieved in contrast
to a traditional “days off ” focus and with a stronger emphasis on strategic discipline,
which emphasizes strategies to change behavior rather than simply imposing a
penalty.
‹ Incorporating value-based review boards that look at a violation through the lens of
department values instead of a specific rule or policy.
‹ Teach value-based decision-making in the academy rather than focusing solely on
teaching the rules.
‹ Making the employee part of the choice to change his or her behavior.
‹ Creating a different mind-set at the executive level requires leadership development
that stresses the need for different thinking at the command level if a department
expects to make progress.

The New Generation Perspective

To ensure that the stakeholders of the new generation were heard, a panel of younger
officers and Department of Justice and John Jay staff provided their perspective on their
experiences.

Acknowledging that their growing up experiences may have been decidedly different,
the panel did not feel they were necessarily contraindicative to successful police careers.
This bright and talented group of young people spoke of being committed to making a
difference in their communities and saw policing as analogous to enjoying what you do and
that working in patrol is far more attractive than working in a [Link] was general
agreement that recruitment needs to target younger age groups earlier so that a positive
image of policing is conveyed early on in the lives of youths. Many were uncomfortable
with the fact that some youths resent the [Link] thought that could be corrected and
have sought to do so in their work.

The panel clearly identified with the discussion on need for feedback but rejected any
notion of needing constant [Link] framed feedback as constructive criticism that
goes with good mentoring and career [Link] that context, they appreciate ongoing
performance evaluations rather than the annual report that is often perceived as a punitive
[Link] seek to know the principles and values behind the rules they learn because
many know the rules but not why they exist. Finally, while they feel that ongoing feedback
shows interest in an individual, they think that it also provides a reality check for those with
“illusions of grandeur.”

— 33 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

The panel members also took issue with many of the labels that are applied to them and
agreed that, although they have been shaped by technology, they are far more than the
“point-and-click” generation. Within this context, they see themselves as team-oriented,
multicultural, and diverse, with strong commitments to public service and to “giving back.”
They have equally strong commitments to family and they talked of the difficulties of
balancing work and family, particularly those who are single parents. Some said they would
postpone seeking promotions until their children were older.

All roundtable participants expressed appreciation at the panelists’ willingness to share

their ideas. The real value was clearly articulated through the recommendation from
participants that the COPS Office include similar panels of new-generation officers in all
future roundtables. It was a fitting conclusion to a set of roundtables that produced valuable
information for the COPS Office.

Current Initiatives and COPS Office Resources

IACP Recruitment Toolkit—A Call to Community Service (Kentucky Regional Community
Policing Institute, Eastern Kentucky University) is specifically designed for developing
promotional materials for rural law enforcement agencies. [Link]

Discover Policing is an IACP virtual website project funded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance
and the COPS Office where candidates can post resumes and learn more about policing. It
is based on the Discover Nursing campaign. [Link]

Recruitment, Hiring, and Retention Resources for Law Enforcement is a CD produced by the
COPS Office. [Link]/RIC/[Link]?RID=450

Hiring in the Spirit of Service is a COPS Office-funded project available on CD.

[Link]/RIC/[Link]?RID=390

The RAND Corporation—Center for Quality Policing.

[Link]/ise/centers/quality_policing

— 34 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

Where We’ve Been and Where We Are Going: A Dialog

A highlight of the Milwaukee roundtable was a dialog between two icons of community
policing: Professor Herman Goldstein, the father of problem-oriented policing, and
Dr. George Kelling, the architect of the broken windows [Link] following is
a summary of their discussion, which was facilitated by Chief Edward Flynn of the
Milwaukee Police Department.

Professor Goldstein talked about his observations of policing during the past 53 years.
Despite progress of various kinds, the major thing he observed was that officers at the lowest
rank of the organization are an untapped resource that has not been consistently recognized
as such. Progress in policing, therefore, has been slow, not necessarily linear, and has not
progressively built on itself. In cities, progress in policing has gone up and down and “old”
problems continue to [Link] continue to question where we should put our efforts—
on organizational structure, training, or [Link] reality is that they all need attention.
The larger issue, though, is the conflict for the police as an institution: how the police job
is defined and how policing strategies, resources, and authority are inadequate for what the
police are asked and expected to do.

Professor Goldstein said that there is a need to redefine the police institution in a realistic
manner and develop response strategies that include systems beyond the criminal justice
[Link] who can do the most to prevent some of the most significant social problems
in our communities are not the police, but other community or government agencies.

He suggested broadening the definition of community policing to include engaging

private corporations, social control agencies, and others to prevent the kind of behavior(s)
that subsequently become problems for the police. Law enforcement needs to speak out
forcefully and tell other stakeholders how to become advocates for preventive actions that
reduce crime.

Dr. Kelling said that one of the reassuring things that we have learned is that the police
alone cannot and do not own society’s [Link] the extent that police own a societal
problem, they will [Link] police, responding to community-based problems, adopted a
strategy that basically sent citizens the message:“go back to the porch—we can handle it.”
That attitude and strategy is a deadly trap. Rather, we should have been, and should be,
asking the question, what have our community institutions done, rather than simply what
have the police done?

He discussed how the 1970s Kansas City Experiment (deploying officers in community
teams to prevent crime, giving rise to the “team policing” concept) produced changes in
policing when Chief Clarence Kelley sought input from line officers on the best use of
new officers being hired. About half of the officers recommended using the officers for
preventive patrol. One key lesson learned from that experiment was to pay attention to line
officers because they, not supervisors or administrators, came up with the idea of preventive

— 35 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

patrols.

The Kansas City Experiment also suggested a new paradigm of policing. At the time, team
policing and preventive patrol could be seen as comparable to community policing, but team
policing could not be molded into the framework of the “professional policing” model. The
complexity of the business, as well as the wisdom associated with what police officers do,
was starting to emerge and laid the groundwork for the emergence of five “big ideas” that
had an impact on community policing.

Different actions may be required when line officers respond to complex community
problems that may have escalated to a more serious point by the time they arrive at the scene.
Recognition of this brought up questions about how those different actions should look.
The concept of “problem solving” became the first big idea and the “broken windows” or
“quality-of-life” movement became the second big idea, with both operating “on the line.”
Problem solving provided the language for what police officers do under these circumstances.

As the demand for order encroached on police officers, a third big idea was born—“police
can’t do it alone”—which recognized the need for partnerships and collaboration because
those who can do the most are not the police. The fourth big idea has been CompStat,
which deals with organizational accountability and analytical capability and uses data to
hold police accountable for reducing crime problems. Finally, Dr. Kelling said that David
Kennedy’s approach—recognizing that a relatively small number of offenders commit a
large number of crimes—needs to be considered. Reaching out to the “hangers on” or
noncriminal associates and influencers of offenders and encouraging them to persuade
offenders to change behavior has been shown to reduce crime, especially interactions with
youth who are at risk.

According to Kelling, the bottom line is that every big idea has come from local law
enforcement rather than the federal agencies or state police agencies. Consequently, the local
police organization can be seen as the “hotbed of thought.”

Supervising the complex police role. The discussion moved to questioning whether traditional
styles of supervision and leadership have been keeping pace with innovations and making
problem solving effective. Is there a disconnect between the reality of police work and
current systems of accountability? And, if so, what are the implications for liability?

In Professor Goldstein’s view, supervision has not measured up to empowering officers to

apply problem-solving strategies to solve problems. In organizations where administrators have
given them a license to be creative, however, rank-and-file officers have done great things.

While line officers are the heroes in problem solving, sergeants are critically important
because without their support, officers will be discouraged from engaging in problem
solving. In many departments, management has not supported the advances made by
officers who are committed to problem solving. Conversely, progressive law enforcement
administrators who support them function in a complex system of liability. Police chiefs can
lose their jobs for a host of reasons, including a bad decision by a single 911 operator or a

— 36 —
PRaCtitioNeR PeRsPeCtives—Community Policing and the CoPs office: today and tomorrow

rookie officer on the street. How do we balance liability to the organization and the chief
executive while empowering officers to take action?

Dr. Kelling sees much of the work in law enforcement agencies as focused on avoiding
liability. Police departments are still organized as they were in 1905 and he questions
whether they actually reflect what officers really do in their communities. Creative officers
are out there on their own, with very little guidance, supervision, and support.

He also said that, given the complexity of the police roles and responsibilities, traditional
styles of supervision cannot work in a way that can make problem solving effective.

Telling police officers to “use common sense” in their actions is interpreted as “personal
determination” rather than a “value-driven” organizational mandate. Police departments and
police labor unions are run by rules and regulations and a factory mentality has developed.
There appears to be little focus on “service” in the field and this produces a disconnect
between policing practices and police organizations with an over-emphasis on rules and
[Link] can turn police officers into “dirty” workers where the typical response is
to cover up not only bad work but good work, as well.

The discussion also focused on how an array of police policies have been developed to
address every possible [Link] has nothing to do with the quality of service in
the field, but instead with trying to maintain control over officers. If something became a
subject of challenge,“we have a policy” was the response. Professor Goldstein pointed out
that although other professions have an allowance for risk, no risk is allowed in policing.

To develop and build the kind of relationships that police and communities need, we
need to systemize the knowledge that we already have to inform the community about
the decisions and strategies of the police. Although citizen police academies were a start,
they cannot reach all citizens. It is important to take every opportunity to educate the
community about what the police [Link] includes educating the media about the complex
issues facing police organizations as well as marketing the police to the community. Building
and sustaining community relationships and partnership needs to become an everyday
occurrence because a democracy assumes that people can govern and police themselves. An
important goal of policing, therefore, involves invigorating the community to do what it
should be doing all along—policing itself.

Professor Goldstein added that as a society, we have developed social norms that allow us
to function [Link] things go wrong, what is or should be the police posture? The
police should help the community identify the community networks that can be mobilized
to solve the [Link] role of the police is to build the capacity of the community
to respond to the problem. It takes the total community—including corporations and
businesses—to solve the [Link] makes the police role more achievable rather than
expecting the police to solve everything.

Professor Goldstein and Dr. Kelling agreed that the community policing paradigm stems

— 37 —
NatioNal CommuNity PoliCiNg RouNdtables

from democratic policing—citizens policing themselves. Problem-oriented policing is the

language of community policing as well as a significant tactic. Both redefine the role of
police and shift ownership of the problem to the larger community.

Society has punted problems to the police and many communities have a little community
capacity to solve [Link] question becomes, how do we (the police) not own the
problem?

In Dr. Kelling’s view, it is possible to reach a tipping point without the direct help of other
agencies by encouraging other agencies to pursue their own self-interests, particularly their
economic self-interests. Police agencies may need to educate the community about issues
related to self-interest. In that respect, Professor Goldstein sees information as one of the
most powerful tools that police can use to convince community organizations to take action.

Roundtable participants questioned whether we are setting up contradictions. If we make

crime totally the responsibility of the police without the community partnership, then
police are being set up to fail. As the police profession, we create policing innovations to
address crime [Link] should we share the ownership of the crime problem or be
reluctant to own the crime problems? As the professionals, we need to drive the train.

Professor Goldstein responded by saying that perhaps we have lost sight of the institutions
that have an interest in solving crimes. Rather than having as many community partners as
possible, it may be wiser to look critically at those institutions or agencies that have a vested
interest in solving crime [Link] ability for police to conduct analysis becomes critical
and there is a need for more social science techniques to help with data analysis and using
analysis to guide police response.

Dr. Kelling applied the medical analogy of “informed decision-making” to engaging the
community. In medicine, physicians engage the patient to make their own decisions in
partnership with [Link] police need to consider providing better information to
the community about what the problems are and then give the community options for
responding to the problems.

Professor Goldstein agreed that the medical analogy may be valid but we need to recognize
that medicine is much more knowledge-driven than policing, which means that medical
specialists can convey that knowledge to the consumer. Policing is at a much more primitive
[Link] need to get to the point of how to deal with specific [Link] are chiefs
who know how to deal with problem X, but there is the concern about how to harness and
disseminate that knowledge to our peers.

— 38 —
 Practitioner PersPectives: community Policing in a Democracy
is the result of a partnership effort by the Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services (the COPS Office) and the Leadership Academy of the John Jay College of
Criminal Justice. In order to keep a finger on the pulse of community policing in
law enforcement, the COPS Office convened four Roundtables around the country—
bringing together a mix of law enforcement practitioners and thought leaders, criminal
justice academics, and policymakers. Participants worked together to identify emerging
issues that need to be addressed from a community policing perspective, while also
making several recommendations for action at the federal, state, and local levels. State
governments and local police departments have responsibilities for supporting other
agencies in their efforts to institutionalize community policing, and Roundtable
participants reaffirmed the basic realization that drives the development of community
policing reform—that crime is not just a police issue and that police cannot control
crime by themselves.

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services
Two Constitution Square
145 N Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20530

To obtain details about COPS Office programs, call

the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770.
December 2010
Visit COPS Online at [Link] e12102322