community oriented policing - st. petersburg...

http://cop.spcollege.edu

Community Oriented PolicingProblem Solving

With Funding from: Department of Justice, COPS Office

Presented by the Florida Presented by the Florida Regional Community Regional Community Policing Institute Policing Institute


Purpose of Course

• Historical development of COP• POP and COP• Problems are part of Policing• A Problem Solving Model• SARA and how it works• Practical application of SARA


Characteristics of Traditional Policing

• Police are reactive to incidents– Driven by calls for service– 911

• Limited information from community



• Leadership is focused on internal operations:– Budget– Staffing– Internal Affairs complaints– Policies and procedures



• Patrol officers follow orders - have little encouragement to be innovative in solving community problems

• Evaluations based on numbers:– Arrests– Tickets



• The police have few external partnerships

• Police view themselves and are viewed as quasi-military


The Effectiveness of Traditional Policing

• Saturation patrol did not reduce crime - displaced it

• Routine patrol rarely encounters the crimes that terrifies people

• Response time to calls has little effect on catching criminals

• Most crime not solved through criminal investigations


Problem Oriented Policing

• P.O.P


Herman Goldstein - a Problem Oriented Approach to Policing

• Responding to calls is only the 1st step in a policing strategy

• Find permanent solutions to problems that lead to calls for service


Goldstein Theorized:

• Underlying conditions create problems

• Problems in turn lead to incidents• Many incidents lead to police calls • Incidents appear to be isolated


Incidents

• They can arise from a single common source

• Police usually only deal with the symptom of the problems:– Gangs– Vandalism– Street terrorism– Burglaries, robberies, etc.


Problem Oriented Policing

• A routine method for:– Identification of problems– Analysis of problems– A response to problems– An evaluation of effectiveness


Limitations of POP

• All community policing involves problem solving…..but………………

• Not all Problem Oriented Policing is Community Policing


Limitations of POP

• Problem Oriented Policing does not always:– Seek input from the community – Include permanent patrol assignments– Utilize decentralized stations– Evaluate effectiveness of problems addressed


The Preference for POP over COP

• There is a difference between POP and COP

• POP is the safer of the two to implement:– Less risk by not involving community in decision

making and setting priorities– It offers the ability to solve problems and move

on


Community Oriented Policing


Defining COP

• Not easily defined:– Not one size fits all– “Authorities” have many different ideas as to its

definition


Herman Goldstein(Father of COP) Observed:

• “Indeed the popularity of the term has resulted in its being used to encompass practically all innovations in policing—

• From the most ambitious to the most mundane: from the most carefully thought through to the most casual.”


Community Oriented Policing

• The popularity of the term forces a need to find a definition for Community Oriented Policing


Community Policing Defined:

• Community Policing is a philosophy and an organizational strategy that promotes a new partnership between people and their police. It is based on the premise that both the police and the community must work together to identify, prioritize, and solve contemporary problems such as—


Community Policing Defined:

• —crime, drugs, fear of crime, social and physical disorder, and overall neighborhood decay, with a goal of improving the overall quality of life in the area.”


—and

• Community policing is a collaborative effort between law enforcement and the community that identifies problems of concern to communities and works to solve them.


The Two Key Elements of Community Policing:

• Partnership– Partnership between the police and community

• Problem Solving– Working to solve the problems identified by the

partnership


Goals of Community Policing

• A decentralized and personalized police service to the community

• Police do not impose order from the outside

• Police are a resource to solve problems identified by the community

• Implement organizational philosophy and strategy that is flexible and meet the needs of the community


What's Needed to Achieve Community Policing

• Obtain and analyze information internally and externally

• Continually create mechanisms for direct community involvement to set police objectives and establish priorities

• Management empowers decision making by people closest to problem


What's Needed to Achieve Community Policing

• Ensure that evaluations of police officers are directly linked to the skills needed for community policing

• Constantly evaluate results and strategies for effectiveness and make the necessary adjustments to meet community needs


The Nature of Problems

• Upstream / Downstream

• page 13 of text


Problem Solving

• Problems– A problem is a basic unit of police work

• Problem Solving– The process of devising and implementing a

strategy for finding a solution or for transforming a less desirable condition into a more desirable one.


COP Definition of a Problem

• Any condition that alarms, harms, threatens, or has potential for disorder in the community, particularly incidents that may appear as isolated, but—

• ...Share certain characteristics such as common pattern, victim or geographic location.


How incidents are related

• The police look for common elements that link this particular crime to other crimes.


The Crime Triangle

Victim Perpetrator

Location


Seeking the Underlying Conditions

• Police often deal with symptoms of a problem when answering calls for service

• Characteristics of people who live or enter into a neighborhood

• How people feel about where they live

• The condition of the neighborhood


Expected Outcomes of Problem Solving:

• Eliminate the problem entirely• Reduce the number of occurrences of the

problem• To reduce the degree of harm caused by

the problem• To improve the way the problem is being

dealt with. • Change the environment (CPTED)


SARASARA Problem Solving Model

Scanning

AssessmentResponse

Analysis


Problem Solving Involves

S A R AScanning

Identify neighborhood crimeand disorder problems



S A R AScanning

Identify neighborhood crime& disorder problems

Analysis

Understand conditionsthat cause problemsto occur



S A R AScanning


Analysis

Understand conditionsthat cause problems tooccur

Response

Develop & Implement Solutions



S A R AScanning


Analysis

Understand conditionsthat cause problems tooccur

Response

Develop & ImplementSolutions

Assessment

Determinethe Impact


Conceptualization:Problem-Solving Process

S A R A

S ARA


Summary of Scanning

• First– Laundry List of Potential Problems

• Second– Problems Identified

• Third– Problems Prioritized


Summary of Scanning

• Fourth– State the Specific Problem– Examples of Where the Problem Occurs– Which Setting is Causing the Most Difficulty


First Second Third Fourth

Summary of Scanning

• General Goal Statement• How Will Data be Gathered and Reported• When Will Data Collection Begin


First

Summary of Analysis (Part I)

• What Conditions or Events Precede the Problem?

• What Conditions or Events Accompany the Problem?

• What Are the Problem’s Consequences?

• What Harm Results from the Problem?


Second

Summary of Analysis (Part I)

• How Often Does the Problem Occur?

• How Long Has this Been a Problem?

• What is the Duration of Each Occurrence of the Problem?


Third

Summary of Analysis (Part II)

• Define a Tentative Goal• Identify Resources that May Assist

in Solving the Problem• What Procedures, Policies, or

Rules Have Already Been Established to Address the Problem?


First

Summary of Response

• Brainstorm Possible Interventions


Second

Summary of Response

• Consider Feasibility and Choose Among Alternatives

• What Needs to be Done Before the Plan is Implemented?

• Who Will be Responsible for Preliminary Actions?


Third

Summary of Response

• Outline the Plan and Who Might Be Responsible for Each Part

• Will This Plan Accomplish All or Part of the Goal?

• State the Specific Goals This Plan Will Accomplish

• What are Some of the Ways Data Might Be Collected?


Fourth

Summary of Response

• Realistically, What Are the Most Likely Problems With Implementing the Plan?

• What are Some Possible Procedures to Follow When the Plan is Not Working or When It is Not Being Implemented Correctly?


FirstSecondThird

Fourth

Summary of Response

• Implement the Plan


First

Summary of Assessment

• Was the Plan Implemented?• What Was the Goal as Specified in

Response?• Was the Goal Attained?• How Do You Know if the Goal Was

Attained?


• What is Likely to Happen if the Plan is Removed?

• What is Likely to Happen if the Plan Remains in Place?

• Identify New Strategies to Increase the Effectiveness of the Plan

• How Can the Plan be Monitored in the Future? Second



Third


• Post-Implementation Planning• Plan Modification• Follow-Up Assessment


Principles of Problem Solving

• Don’t take anything for granted.• Old patterns may hinder solutions.• Trial and error may work as well as

logic.• Pay attention to the way the group

works.


Principles of Problem Solving

• Look at problems from different angles.

• Anticipate obstacles to problem solving.

• Take the emotion out of problems.• Learn from losing.


Common Errors in Problem Solving

• The problem is not clearly defined and or the group does not have enough information to understand the problem.

• The problem is stated too narrowly. Real problem will not be resolved. Only a symptom is affected.



• Tentative solutions are chosen too early in the process (before the problem is understood).

• The range of information gathered is too narrow.

• Some major constraints to solving the problem are ignored.



• Traditional solutions are preferred despite lack of effectiveness.

• Priorities among problems are not established.

• A plan stating who will do what when, is not developed or is not well thought out.



• Resources needed to carry out a solution are not clearly specified or obtained early enough in the process.

• The costs of a solution is not weighed against the potential benefits.



• Feedback and evaluation procedures are not built into the solution, therefore, no mechanism exists to monitor progress and determine effectiveness.

community oriented policing - st. petersburg...

Documents