2 criminal justice forum responses

Alexis Doss

The text describes four different operational strategies; problem-oriented policing, “broken windows” thesis, Compstat, and intelligence-led policing. Compare and contrast them, giving reasons why some aspects should be retained and other discarded as policing evolves during the 21st century.

Problem-oriented policing is essentially designed to look for the problems that generate calls for service, therefore shifting the focus from simply responding to calls as they come in. “POP represents a change from traditional ‘incident-driven policing’, with its reactive posture that places a high value on getting in and getting out of calls for service as quickly as possible” (Fritsch, Liederbach, Taylor, p.100). In “problem-solving”, officers need to identify the problem, utilize analysis and information that relates to the problem, search for a solution even if it lies outside of the criminal justice system, and finally use an ad-hoc evaluation of each approach toward solving the problem.

Similar to the POP model, the “broken windows” thesis is geared towards a need to enact proactive patrol tactics. Wilson and Kelling believed that small crimes led to larger crimes in a domino effect or downward spiral. “In essence, crime is contagious and can spread to an entire community via environmental features. Relatively minor problems such as aggressive panhandling and graffiti serve as an invitation to an array of would-be offenders that particular neighborhoods are good locations to commit more serious crime” (Welsh, Braga, Bruinsma, p.449). The “broken windows” thesis shifts patrol towards more aggressive and proactive tactics in order to keep communities from falling victim to more serious crimes.

Compstat stands for “COMPuter STATisitcs”. This particular model is fueled by utilizing a computerized information system. “The primary objective is to increase organizational accountability for addressing crime and disorder problems by facilitating the flow of information from police administrators to command-level personnel” (Fritsch, Liederbach, Taylor, p.103). The Compstat model is structured around timely and accurate information, ongoing assessments of effectiveness, the rapid deployment of resources, and implementing effective tactics.

Intelligence-led policing is more “goal-driven” and focused on incorporating evaluation components that are designed to determine what’s working for a department and what isn’t. In doing this administrators are able to tailor both tactics and strategies depending on what problems police in a certain jurisdiction encounter. Through history intelligence operations have been hindered due to lack of formal training, policies, and procedures. An intelligence-led policing approach is meant to improve the capabilities of local police. In doing so officers are able to handle both terrorist type threats as well as traditional crime.

In determining what aspects should be retained and what efforts should be discarded, I believe that it comes down to what’s needed for a community and what it is that departments are able to supply due to both manpower and budget restraints. While a Compstat model enables departments to utilize a computerized information system, it doesn’t incorporate indicators in regards to the fear of crime. Moreover, Compstat needs a department to have field resources such as a tactical team, crime response team, or patrol reserve that has the ability to respond immediately to particular locations that are experiencing problems. So while Compstat is useful and some major agencies have implemented it, a small department might not be able to implement it due to lack of manpower.

Problem-oriented policing lacks both the research and statistical evaluations that shows long-term effects, and poses practical concerns such as time management. Still, the little information that is available shows that POP impacted crime in the communities it was implemented in. Because of this the POP model could possibly be implemented over short terms like that of hot-spot policing. Two models that I believe should be retained are the “broken windows” thesis and intelligence-led policing. I say this because the “broken windows” thesis is universal in that it doesn’t matter what size department is using it. Both the community and police administrators are able to implement it. Being that the risk of a terrorist attack is always a possibility, intelligence-led policing can always be utilized.

If you were in charge of a mid-city police department, what would your priorities be and why? Keep in mind the reality of shrinking budgets and fewer resources are available than in the last decade so cuts have to be made. What areas would receive 10% to 20% less funding next year in your department?

If I were in charge of a mid-city police department, my priorities would be establishing an effective patrol allocation and schedule so that I would have the available manpower without my officers becoming fatigued, and structuring a policing strategy that is both effective and flexible to the needs of the community. When it comes to thinking of shrinking budgets and fewer resources, I would first remember that the majority of an agency’s budget is dedicated to patrol. An area that would receive less funding the next year would be in equipment. This could mean the locker room, the department gym facility, desks and chairs within the department, or even new computer systems. These are things that I imagine wouldn’t need to be constantly upgraded every year and would more or less require maintenance until it’s time to upgrade and improve on them.

Alexis

Works Citied:

Fritsch, Eric J., Liederbach, John., Taylor, Robert W.

Police Patrol Allocation and Deployment. 2008.

Welsh, Brandon C., Braga, Anthony A., Bruinsma, Gerben J. N.

Reimagining Broken Windows: From Theory to Policy. 2015.