AJS 270 Wk 2 Community Based Policing Paper 64 Pages

Community based policing is more than a model for police departments to follow; it has become a necessity.. Our department to identify, attack and solve problems within the communities w

Jeffeory G Hynes

(2005)

I Preface Page 3

II Introduction Page 4

A Definition of Community Oriented Policing

III Chapter 1 - Community Oriented Policing: An Overview Page 6

IV Chapter 2 - Community Oriented Policing: Problem Solving Page 19

V Chapter 3 - Community Oriented Policing: Case Studies Page 30

VI Conclusion Page 55

A Historical Overview

References Page 62

In 1990 my police department implemented community based policing Community based policing is more than a model for police departments to follow; it has become a necessity The law enforcement community has come to realize that it cannot survive without the helpand support of the community and population it serves It is also come to understand that law enforcement in America has truly become a business and as a business, we have customers – national, state and local customers These customers are the people who live

in the communities that we serve The heart and soul of community based policing is a total involvement and interaction between the police organization and the community it serves

During the course of the research, I examined the use of the S.A.R.A model of problem solving Our department to identify, attack and solve problems within the communities we serve through our community based policing policies and programs utilizes the S.A.R.A method, Scanning, Analysis, Response and Assessment

Through this research project, I will examine and illustrate theory, concepts and application

of community based policing through the case of the S.A.R.A model

The research and documentation reviewed and used for this paper will be referred to as Community Oriented Policing There are many like name terms that are synonymous and may be used as indicated by a specific source Listed below are:

As the goals, philosophy and practice of Community Oriented Policing have evolved over the last 15 years of its commonly recognized existence, police agencies and the communityhave reaped a host of benefits such as quality of life improvements Most agencies in yearspast, which were once, centralized bureaucracies, aloof and distant from their communities have discovered the benefits of enhanced interaction with neighborhoods and local

businesses I will attempt to illustrate those benefits

The evolution and refinement of Community Oriented Policing philosophy and practice havehad a significant impact on the attitudes and behaviors of officers at every level of every organization The concept was initially known as being “soft on crime” or a “warm and fuzzy” social work approach to police work Those of us in the profession know that

Community Oriented Policing is neither It is an effective and efficient means of fighting crime by correcting long-standing neighborhood problems It is a methodology that

empowers the police and citizens to work together to identify and resolve problems, by identifying and utilizing available resources useful in the resolution of those problems

A core concept in the philosophy, which will be expressed in further detail, is allowing the community a voice into solving the problems in their own neighborhoods By working

together, officers, neighborhoods, and the actual police agencies, have successfully

challenged the incorrect assumption that police activities have little impact on crime rates Agencies and their communities have learned that working together can make a difference,and can reduce crime and improve quality of life Not only is the quality of life for the citizens residing in the impacted areas improved, but also the working environment for the affected police personnel improves Greater levels of trust are developed between the officers and the residents of the communities, which they serve

Policing in Today’s Communities;

An Overview

Chapter 1

Chapter 1Community oriented policing; an overviewCommunity Oriented Policing or Community Policing is defined as any method of policing that includes a police officer assigned to the same area, meeting and working with the residents and business people who live and work in the beat area The citizens and police work together to identify the problems of the area and to collaborate in workable

resolutions of the problems The police officer is a “catalyst,” moving neighborhoods and communities toward solving their problems and encouraging citizens to help and look out for each other Resources are identified and used to solve problems

To be successful, community policing requires the total commitment of the five major groups: police; citizens and subgroups like business; media; political leaders; and social service agencies and other institutions of the community It is proactive, decentralized, andpersonalized; it is full-service and works toward the goal of removing predators from the streets and providing long-term solutions to problems by dealing with the causes, not just reacting to the symptoms

Community policing is based on the joint effort of citizens and police working together towards solving neighborhood problems, which in turn satisfies the expressed needs of citizens and enhances the residents’ quality of life The role of the community police officer

is equivalent to the role of the critical social scientist, the facilitator and catalyst of solving activities Through self-education and educating the residents, the officer plays both the expert and educator role without forcing the expert opinion upon the residents The community-policing officer assists the residents by meeting with them individually and

problem-in groups problem-in hopes that communication will lead to some consensus of accepted action that will be agreed upon and implemented by the residents and police The major

considerations in community policing are: citizen input into defining problems to be solved; citizen involvement in planning and implementing problem-solving activities; and citizen

determination of whether their felt needs have been met Community policing is critical social science in action and is based on the assumptions of normative sponsorship theory

(listed below).

The academic question often arises whether community policing is based on accepted

theory Current Research (Trojanowicz, 1992) proposes that community policing is based on

two social science theories, normative sponsorship theory and the critical social theory Brief definitions are as follows;

Normative Sponsorship Theory - Normative sponsorship theory postulates that

most people are of good will and that they will cooperate with others to facilitate the

building of consensus (Sower, 1957) The more that various groups share common

values, norms, and beliefs, the more they will support efforts that are directed as improving their neighborhoods

Critical Social Theory - Critical social theory focuses on how and why people

coalesce to correct and overcome the socioeconomic and political obstacles that

prevent them from having their needs met (Fry, 1984) The three core ideas of

critical social theory are as follows:

Enlightenment - People must become educated about their circumstances

before they can lobby for change

Empowerment - People must take action to improve their condition.

Emancipation - People can achieve social change through reflection and social

action

In addition to the above two accepted academic theories, police officers and their

administrators need a more simplistic and practical base to proceed from such as using the

“Nine P’s” concept that is as follows:

Community policing is a philosophy of full-service, personalized policing where the same officer patrols and works in the same area on a permanent basis, from a

decentralized place, working in a proactive partnership with citizens to identify and solve problems (Trojanowicz, 1992)

Philosophy The Community policing philosophy rests on the belief that

contemporary challenges require the police to provide full-service policing, proactiveand reactive, by involving the community directly as partners in the process of nominating, prioritizing, and solving problems including crime, fear of crime, illicit drugs, social and physical disorder, and neighborhood decay A department-wide commitment implies change in policies and procedures

Personalized By providing the community its own Community Police Officers

(CPOs), community policing breaks down the anonymity on both sides - CPOs and community residents know each other on a first-name basis

Policing Community policing maintains a strong law enforcement focus; CPOs

answer calls and makes arrests like any other officer, but they also focus on

proactive problem solving

Patrols CPOs work and patrol in defined beat areas in their communities The goal

is to free them from the isolation of the patrol car, often by having them walk the beat or rely on other modes of transportation, such as bicycles, scooters, or horses

Permanent Community policing requires assigning CPOs permanently (at least 18

months) to defined beats so that they have the time, opportunity, and continuity to develop the new partnership Permanency means that CPOs should not be rotated inand out of their beats, and they should not be used as “fill-ins” for special

assignments and absences of other personnel

Place All jurisdictions, no matter how large, ultimately break down into distinct

neighborhoods Community policing decentralizes police officers, often including investigators, so that CPOs can benefit from “owning” their neighborhood beats, in which they act as a “mini-chief,” tailoring the response to the needs and resources ofthe beat area Moreover, community policing decentralizes decision making, not only by allowing community-policing officers the autonomy and freedom to act, but also by empowering all officers to participate in community-based problem-solving

Proactive As part of providing full-service policing, community policing balances

reactive responses to crime incidents and emergencies with a proactive focus on preventing problems before they occur or escalate

Partnership Community policing encourages a new partnership between people

and their police that rests on mutual respect, civility, and support

Problem Solving Community policing redefines the mission of the police to focus

on solving problems, so that success or failure depends on qualitative outcomes (problems solved) rather than just on quantitative results (arrests made, citations issued-so-called “numbers policing”) Both quantitative and qualitative measures are necessary

All employees of the department, both sworn and non-sworn, need to reflect the philosophy

in their attitude and behavior and support its implementation Even employees who do not have face-to-face contact with the public can still be supportive of the philosophy in their telephone contacts By understanding the philosophy, they can explain it to friends,

relatives, and neighbors In addition, they can provide support and encouragement to the officers responding directly to the complaints Community based policing is a total team effort affecting all personnel levels

Another noteworthy example of the concept is from the author of Problem-Oriented

Policing, Herman Goldstein.

Since 1979, when Herman Goldstein first proposed a problem-oriented approach to policing,the concept and its community-focused counterpart have gained nearly universal backing

as the preferred means of policing for the future Variations on these themes have been tried in locales as diverse as Madison, Wisconsin, Baltimore County, and Newport News, Virginia, where project evaluators have each found their programs to be successful In eachcase, those involved noted that specific community concerns had been addressed, overall reductions in crime had occurred, or community members had become less fearful as a result of the police program interventions In response to these apparent successes, the problem-focused approach has now been aggressively spread to focus on a diverse array ofproblems such as gangs, drugs, school crime, and the management of police calls for service in urban, suburban, and even rural communities Despite the promise offered by these methods, however, many agencies are now discovering the application far more difficult than the concept, as frustration among officers and the potential for needless

failure mounts (Goldstein, H 1990)

According to Goldstein, the concept of problem-oriented policing is the result of several decades of research into crime and the police response While much of the body of work that has contributed to the approach resulted from very different focuses, three basic findings have been especially important:

to have little real impact

underlying problems, which means that many will recur predictably

* Since they are rooted to other issues, the most effective responses should be those that coordinate police, government, and private citizens and business.

As a result, theorists and practitioners alike are now focusing aggressively on programs that involve citizens and the police in cooperative efforts at problem identification and solution Though it often goes unrecognized, as the focus is fixed on “quality of life”

concerns, the overriding goal of the problem-focused approached is to produce better

results against crime, fear and disorder in our neighborhoods (Goldstein, H 1982)

Goldstein asks a number of challenging questions to community policing in support of his position, such as;

What is community policing and what, if anything, is so special about it? Community policing is a very trendy term with numerous definitions The popularity and ambiguity of the concept is both a blessing and a curse On the positive side, everyone can identify with the term The indistinct nature of the concept allows people to read into it favorable

attributes and unlimited possibilities for changes and reforms On the negative side, police chiefs who use it to justify their pet programs have abused the concept; the mark of

community policing can produce a “halo effect” around such programs and prevent outsideobservers from distinguishing true police innovation from traditional policing In addition, the popularity of community policing concept raises public expectations and “create(s)” theimpression that, somehow, on implementation, community policing will provide a panacea for not only crime, disorder, and racial tensions, but also many of the other acute problems

that plague our urban areas (Goldstein, 1993).

Another academic concept of problem solving is the Problem Analysis Triangle, which

relates that there are three key elements needed for a problem to occur The three

elements are the offender, the victim and a location The Problem Analysis Triangle helps

officers visualize the problem and understand the relationship among the three elements

It helps officers analyze problems, suggests where more information is needed, and points

to possible solutions (Peak, Glensor 1996)

An examination of their cited concept reveals that the relationship among these three elements can be explained as follows:

but there are no offenders no crime occurs

is nothing or no one to be victimized, then no crime will occur

crime

Part of the analysis phase involves finding out as much as possible about the victims, offenders, and locations where problems exist in order to understand what is prompting the problem and what to do about it The three elements must be present for a crime or

harmful behaviors can occur

There seems to be those in the academic community along with those from the police profession that tout their own program ideas, with each relating that their ideas are the

“better plan or program.” The nuts and bolts part of the concept is the utilization of a problem-solving model to work through large communities and small communities

problems

Another academic concept that has been cited by many in the problem solving profession isthat of “Broken Windows.” A review of research and the writings of George Kelling and Catherine Coles indicate that once the first window is broken in a neighborhood or

community, and if it is ignored, then the downward trend of the second, third and so on accelerates into deterioration They illustrate their belief by examining past trends and

research, specifically citing a report prepared for the President’s Commission on Law

Enforcement And Crime in 1967.

One of the main authors of the mentioned report, Albert Biderman and his Social Science colleagues, presented findings from surveys of citizens; fear of crime was strongly related

to the existence of disorderly conditions in neighborhoods and communities (Kelling, Coles 1996) Kelling and Coles call this condition the “Broken Window Concept.” Some of the

officers have actually seen this occur in areas of the city of Phoenix

Next we will examine the problem solving models that are utilized One final example of community policing principles and element offered by Gary Cordner from Eastern Kentucky University will be presented

Cordner suggests that Community Oriented Policing (COP) has its roots in such earlier developments as policy-community relations, team policing, crime prevention, and the rediscovery of foot patrol In the 1990’s, community based policing has expanded to

become the dominant strategy of policing - so much so that the 100,000 new police officers funded by the 1994 Crime Bill must engage in community policing

In order to describe the full breadth of community policing, it is helpful to identify four major dimensions of COP and the most common elements occurring within each The four dimensions are:

The Philosophical Dimension - Many of its most thoughtful and forceful advocates

emphasize that community policing is a new philosophy of policing, perhaps

constituting even a paradigm shift away from professional model policing, and not just a particular program or specialized activity The philosophical dimension

includes the central ideas and benefits underlying community policing Three of the most important of these are citizen input, broad function, and personal service.

The Strategic Dimension - The strategic dimension of community policing

includes the key operational concepts that translate philosophy into action These strategic concepts are the links between the broad ideas and beliefs that underlie community policing and the specific programs and practices by which it is

implemented They assure that agency policies, priorities, and resource allocation are consistent with the COP philosophy Three important strategic elements are re-oriented operations, prevention emphasis, and geographic focus

The Tactical Dimension - The tactical dimension of community policing ultimately

translates ideas, philosophies, and strategies into concrete programs, tactics, and behaviors Even those who insist that “community policing is a philosophy, not a program” must concede that unless community policing eventually leads to some action, some new or different behavior, it is all rhetoric and not reality Indeed, many commentators have taken the view that community policing is little more than

a new police marketing strategy that has left the core elements of the police role untouched Three of the most important tactical elements of community policing arepositive interaction, partnerships, and problem solving

The Organizational Dimension - It is important to recognize an organizational

dimension that surrounds community policing and greatly affects its

implementation In order to support and facilitate community policing, police

departments often consider a variety of changes in organization, administration, management, and supervision The elements of the organizational dimension are not a real part of community policing per se, but they are frequently crucial to its

successful implementation (Cordner, G 1994)

Community policing is often seen by many rank and file officers as a passing fad which will

go away once newfound money ceases to exist and a new experimental concept for

addressing law enforcement issues becomes fashionable Seasoned veterans remember when team policing in the seventies provided the new panacea for all issues When it didn’taccomplish everything it was designed to do, cynical officers quickly attributed failures to poor management despite many successful programs

Officers commonly complain that their efforts to control criminal behavior and make their jurisdictions safe are community policing without the moniker “I thought I was doing community policing all along,” is a statement often uttered by officers who are not

impressed with the current concept Officers know they are an integral part of

implementing a local community policing initiative; however, many feel their views are overlooked or not taken seriously Reportedly, successful initiatives often engage officers from all ranks in the initial planning process, and their views are seriously taken into

consideration The total department must be part of the program

The generalist vs specialist approach to policing continues to be debated Generalists do well in departments where manpower is abundant Departments with over-specialization create unnecessary stresses on patrol officers Specialization is necessary; however, if done

to the detriment of “patrol” and answering public calls for service, it reduces overall

department effectiveness Over-specialization or generalization reduces department

effectiveness The key to success is developing a balanced approach ensuring there is

sufficient expertise in all levels of the department (Gallegos, 1998)

A final thought, Chapter 1 discussed community based policing from a national, state and local perceptive Not mentioned was the global viewpoint Developing a global connection has a number of concerns but using the concepts mentioned, in comparison to and other national agencies, one can find a connection to their own communities Partnerships must exist between the police departments and the communities they serve to solve long term

problems The partnership between the police and community must occur for success in crime fighting The global issues of constitutional rights or lack of them have little bearing

on problem solving There is no world police agency or court to respond to transnational

crime, (McDonald, 1997) Problem solving techniques mentioned in community oriented

policing can cross international boundaries International agencies can use the concepts exposed in community oriented policing and flex their guidelines and objects to meet their own needs The next chapter will discuss the suggested model further

Policing in Today’s Communities;

Problem Solving

Chapter 2

Chapter 2Community oriented policing; problem solvingThe area of problem solving or the actual resolution of the problem stage has numerous models to select from The most widely used model and the most simplistic one is known

as S.A.R.A The model involves four steps: scanning, analysis, response and assessment Much has been written concerning its utilization To illustrate the model, this section will present information gathered from a number of separate sources

The four components with descriptions follows;

During the initial Scanning, or problem identification stage, officers are asked to identify

various community concerns – determining which are to be considered problems

appropriate for further work

community, but will also typically include discussions with residents or workers who belong there This input is then coupled with crime analysis and other forms of official data

lighting, loitering youths, or damaged playgrounds or property

problems

In the Analysis stage, officers set out to collect more detailed information about the

problems they have identified As proponents often note, officers should obtain information not only from official police records but also from other sources such as interviews, surveys,presentations, and outside opinions The goal here is to gain an understanding of the scope

and nature of the problem, which means that careful and in-depth analysis of the factors contributing to the underlying conditions is especially important The analysis stage actually consists of four steps:

Clearly, the analysis stage is when most decisions are made regarding action In addition, during this stage of the process it is important that sufficient information be collected so that realistic goals can be established for subsequent efforts during the response stage From the data collected, the problem-solver should be able to determine what would be required to:

During the Response stage, officers have three objectives: to develop a set of response

options that are consistent with the information gathered, to select a response(s), and to implement it The response stage also has multiple steps:

the preferred options; and

In this stage, officers may call upon businesses, other government agencies, or local

residents for assistance In short, instead of relying on traditional responses alone, officers should ask anyone who can help to do so In each case, the response options should be wide-ranging, with no approach overlooked Some of the possible options include the following:

problem A relatively small number of individuals usually account for a

disproportionate share of practically any problem, either by causing it,

facilitating it, or suffering from it

it may be among the most effective options available Conveying information can (1) reduce anxiety and fear; (2) enable those impacted to solve their own problems; (3) elicit conformity with rules not known or understood; (4) warn others about vulnerability and suggest protective steps; (5) demonstrate to others how they unwittingly contribute to problems; (6) develop support for solutions; and (7) acquaint all involved with the outcomes they can realistically expect

problem

Whatever the approach taken, problem-solvers are encouraged to remember that their solution focus can be on the problem itself, the offender, the victim, or all three

problem-solving group toward manageable goals Psychologist Karl Weick (1984), who

problems, they often do so on a massive scale For example, they may look at eliminating all unemployment, homelessness, or crime In doing so, they define these problems in such a way that they overpower all possible solutions that might be employed The problem-solvers then experience frustration, dashed excitement, and helplessness.

them into smaller ones, doing so allows for the development of specific

responses to manageable problems These smaller wins may seem less

important individually; however, when taken together, they set an example that attracts support while reducing resistance to future efforts

During the Assessment, or plan evaluation stage, the officers again collect data and

evaluate the effectiveness of their responses Officers and observers can compare the data

on the problem before and during their interventions Based on this evaluation, the

problem-solving officer can decide if his or her plan is working (based on the general goal statement made during scanning and the more specific goals resulting from analysis) and make plans to solve other problems If the plan is ineffective, the officers involved are expected to review the problem-solving steps, beginning with scanning, to determine

whether the problem was identified correctly (Arizona Post 1997)

This four-stage model is fast becoming a cornerstone for innovation in many police

agencies (even the U.S Customs, OSHA, and the EPA have begun developing solving components for their officers’ work) since it not only guides tactical development but also is a process that officers can use to guide their collaborative efforts with citizens From problem identification, to analysis, to response formulation, to evaluation of

problem-effectiveness, officers and citizens can share in the responsibility for performing each step Thus, the police officer, although an expert in certain aspects of crime intervention, must

learn to tap the knowledge and resources available in every community in order to make problem solving maximally effective.

Although the four-stage model makes a great deal of sense conceptually and has been shown to be effective in guiding successful problem-solving efforts, there are a number of factors that prevent the patrol officer from implementing the concept as it was intended The first difficulty lies in the seemingly linear nature of the problem-solving process

Although the four-stage model was never meant to be linear, it has been described that way and often implemented as such as well Effective problem-solving should be seen as a dynamic process that allows the problem-solver to move back and forth between the stagesbased on information that may be collected at subsequent steps in the process During thistraining, it will be seen that there are numerous opportunities at each step of problem-solving that allow the officer to evaluate his or her efforts to that point and, if necessary, to return to previous steps

One other issue with problem-solving implementation is the lack of appropriate training afforded police officers in actually conducting problem solving Effective problem-solving training contains several additive and interrelated components:

With the above model being the problem solving model of choice throughout the nation, theNational Institute of Justice sponsored the problem-oriented policing project, using the S.A.R.A model in the Newport News (Virginia) Police Department with cooperation from the Police Executive Research Forum in 1979 They published their results in numerous sourcesincluding the U.S Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice Research briefs Their results revealed from the Newport News Police Department the following;

* Downtown robberies were reduced by 39 percent.

The research basis of problem-oriented policing has as its foundation five areas of research conducted during the past two decades

Discretion In the 1960’s, researchers pointed out the great discretion police officers

exercise and concerns about the effects of discretion on the equity and efficiency of police service delivery Although some discretion appeared necessary, research suggested that police could prevent abuses by structuring discretion Through guidelines and policies, police agencies guided their officers on the best means of handling sensitive incidents.But where should the policies come from? In 1979 Herman Goldstein described what he

called the “problem-oriented approach” as a means of developing such guidelines for a more effective and efficient method of policing (Goldstein, 1979)

Problem Studies A number of studies over the past 20 years aimed at developing a

deeper understanding of the nature and causes of crime and disorder problems in order to lead to better police responses

Research of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s focused on burglary, robbery, and other street crimes In the later 1970’s and 1980’s, research turned to other problems not earlier considered central to police work: domestic violence, drunk driving, mental illness, and the fear of crime, for example Researchers and practitioners learned through these studies that they would have to collect more information to understand problems, and involve otherorganizations if responses were to be effective Police needed to consider seriously many

issues besides crime alone (Sherman, 1984)

Management Meanwhile the characteristics of American police officers were changing

More were getting college degrees and thinking of themselves as professionals Like

industrial workers, officers began to demand a greater role in decision-making Many policemanagers, recognizing that job satisfaction and participation in decisions influence job performance, made better use of officers’ skills and talents Managers made the work moreinteresting through job enrichment and they made working conditions more flexible Many departments established task forces, quality circles, or management-by-objectives

programs (Carvalho, 1975)

Community Relations The riots of the 1960’s made police aware of their strained

relations with minority communities Community relations units, stringent restrictions

on shooting and civilian review boards attempted to reduce dissatisfaction with police among minorities By the mid-1970’s, departments provided storefront police stations and foot patrols to improve public attitudes through increased personal contact

between the police and citizens As the police began to recognize how vital citizen action is to crime control, some agencies began to work closely with citizens to reduce

crime and fear (Brown, 1980)

Dr James L Robinson, Phd in his book Racism or Attitude, cites a prime example of conflict

between the police and community The black community sees itself as being a

victim of white police Ironically, the police who work in those areas also see

themselves as victims They see themselves as under siege in a hostile

environment, with no friends The relationship between police and the community is

a love-hate one, in which the police are dammed if they do and dammed if they

don’t (Robinson, 1995).

Community based policing resolved many of these types of conventional conflicts, which

can exist between various groups, communities and the police that serve them

Effectiveness An important impetus toward problem-oriented policing came finally when

research on preventive patrol, response time, and investigations showed that merelyreacting to incidents had, at best, limited effects on crime and public satisfaction Rapid response and lengthy follow-up investigations were not needed for many incidents, suggesting that police managers could deploy their officers more flexibly without reducing effectiveness Experiments in flexible deployment such as split force, investigative case screening, and differential response to calls confirmed that time could be freed for other activities Managers turned to crime analysis to use this time, focusing on groups of events rather than isolated incidents By identifying crime-prone locations, crime analysis hoped to use patrol and detective time more effectively Although crime analysis was restricted to crime problems, traditional police data sources, and criminal justice responses, it marked the first attempt at

problem-oriented policing (Reiner, 1984).

To illustrate why Goldstein’s Model of Problem-Oriented Policing has such an impact on problem solving using the S.A.R.A model one should re-examine the present system still used by approximately 50% of the law enforcement agencies, which is incident-driven policing

* Reacting to individual events reported by citizens;

No department operates solely in this reactive fashion, but all do it to some extent almost all the time The way that Newport News tackled prostitution-related robbery illustrates how problem-oriented policing minimizes the limitations of traditional concepts and

conducts of police work The focus on underlying causes – problems – is not new Many police officers do it from time to time The new approach, however, requires all officers to implement problem-solving techniques on a routine basis

Problem-oriented policing pushes beyond the limits of the usual police methods The

keystone of the approach is the “crime analysis model.” This checklist includes many of the

usual factors familiar to police investigators – actors, locations, and motives But it goes further, prompting officers to ask far more questions than usual and in a more logical sequence The results give a more comprehensive picture of a problem The process also requires officers to collect information from a wide variety of sources beyond the police department and enlist support from public and private organizations and groups – initially

to describe the problem and later to fashion solutions that meet public needs as well as

those of the criminal justice system (Goldstein, 1979)

Policing in Today’s Communities;

Case Studies

Chapter 3

Chapter 3Community oriented policing; case studiesChapter 3 consists of two case studies, both case studies are based on the S.A.R.A model orproblem solving Each case study was an actual program implemented by police personnel

in the Central City Precinct of the Patrol Division of the Phoenix Police Department

Case study #1 was an East Van Buren Prostitution Reduction Program The program was developed and implemented by myself, Sergeants Lowell, Spalla, Donald Cunningham and Kyran Brennan

East Van Buren Street in Phoenix, Arizona is known for prostitution Not only is prostitution

a major problem in the area, but also the residual crimes that relate to the prostitution such

as robberies, drug abuse, assaults and homicides are a major problem Case study #1 uses the S.A.R.A model to establish and implement a community based policing project that impacts the problem of prostitution

Background

There are many problems associated with prostitution along East Van Buren There has been an increase in calls for service along East Van Buren Most notably, an increase in robberies, thefts, trespassing, unwanted guests and indecent exposure Other problems include an increase in vehicular and pedestrian traffic, resulting in traffic congestion and loitering Historically East Van Buren has been known as the “Red Light District” of Phoenix with high visibility, aggressive prostitutes Businesses and residents of the area have constantly filed complaints with the police and city governments with regards to the

prostitution activity Numerous programs have been implemented in the past to deal with the prostitution issue along East Van Buren The results were temporary and had no lastingimpact With the implementation of the S.A.R.A model and a maintenance program, the

Case Study #1