The Philosophy of Community Oriented Policing: A Method to Spur Civic Engagement in Communities

1

The Philosophy of Community Oriented Policing: A Method to Spur Civic Engagement in Communities

By: Jennifer Kamara

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

II. Review of Literature

III. Methodology

IV. Background: Civic Engagement

V. Background: Community Oriented Policing

VI. Intersection Between Community Oriented Policing and Civic

Engagement

VII. Analysis of Prior Studies

VIII. Comparative Cases

IX. Recommendations

X. Conclusion

XI. References and Works Cited

I would like to acknowledge the following organizations and institutions for providing insight into this work: California Community Foundation, The City of Aurora, Dallas Millennial, The Davenport Institute, The Los Angeles Police Department, The Orchard Community, Pepperdine University Law School, The Santa Monica Police Department, The United States Department of Justice – Community Oriented Policing Program

2

I. Introduction

Community oriented policing is a law enforcement philosophy that encourages

community partnerships for problem-solving and public safety. Collaborative

partnerships between police and community members can help to increase trust in law

enforcement and can aid in the development of solutions to problems plaguing many

communities. Community members can become active participants in the maintenance

of a safe living space.

Within the United States, several police departments have incorporated community

oriented policing tactics with much success. In Hawthorne California, police officers

incorporated “Coffee with a Cop” day every six weeks to address communication issues.

In New Brighton Minnesota, the focus is shifted to Neighborhood Oriented Policing with

patrol officers assigned to clustered areas as individual police liaisons. In Racine,

Washington police officers converted abandoned storefronts to cop houses in troubled

communities. The result of all of these interventions was strengthened communication

between community members and cops and increased trust.

Civic engagement can occur through various avenues but most commonly it is due to an

event or it is focused on a specific policy agenda. The collaborative nature of community

oriented policing encourages community members to work towards solving problems

with law enforcement while also increasing a sense of personal responsibility. Through

this collaborative work, community members become invested in maintaining quality of

life within their community.

3

This paper seeks to investigate whether community oriented policing strategies can be

used to spur more active civic engagement. The basis of the community oriented policing

philosophy is rooted in collaborative problem solving between law enforcement and

members of the community which can concurrently increase member’s sense of

ownership of the success of that community. The heightened sense of responsibility for

public safety and security can transcend to other areas of civic life and result in more

active civic engagement.

II. Review of Literature

The majority of past research related to community oriented policing has focused on the

major benefits that this method has bestowed upon the police department and community

at large. Trojanowicz et al (1998) summarize community oriented policing as a way to

change the way police both think and act. Rather than focusing solely on being reactive

and fighting crimes as they occur, community oriented policing philosophies push police

officers to use innovative approaches and collaborations with the community to solve

problems.

Collaborative partnerships between residents and police are just one feature of

community oriented policing (Skogan, 1997). Residents are asked to be active

participants in “[identifying] and [prioritizing] neighborhood problems for

action…[becoming] involved in problem-solving efforts…and [helping] to shape police

polices and operations” (Skogan, 1997, p.1).

4

Skogan continues by assessing the Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy. In a city

wrought with high crime rates, community oriented policing strategies encourage a new

role for the public in ensuring their public safety (1997). Community investment in

maintaining public safety extends to further investment in the success of the community

as a whole. Sampson et al. (2005) posit that active civic engagement occurs when related

to a specific event that brings the community together. Skogan (1997) found that in

instances where community members had opportunities for engagement, they took those

opportunities and engaged at levels comparable to more affluent neighborhoods.

Contrasting theories point to the fact that even though community oriented policing

strategies have been quickly adopted, actual implementation of these strategies remains

disjointed due to lack of support of the philosophy by officers themselves (Dicker, 1998).

Officer resistance to the philosophy of community oriented policing is an obstacle to

successful implementation across the country however organizational resistance poses an

even bigger problem (Dicker, 1998). Regardless of whether or not community oriented

policing initiatives are mandated from the higher ups, the bureaucracy of the police

department may make it difficult for sustained community oriented policing practices

(Dicker, 1998).

Even so, opposition referenced above has still resulted in reduced crime rates across the

country. In Glendale, Arizona community oriented policing strategies have resulted in a

42 percent decrease in convenience store crime (White, 2013). In 2005, San Bernardino

ranked number 18 on the list of most dangerous cities. After the incorporation of

5

community oriented policing strategies, though there was a slight uptick in violent crime,

the city dropped to number 42 on this same list (Rogers, 2007).1

In some cases, civic engagement precedes effective community oriented policing

strategies. Skogan (2000) noted that civic engagement was largely responsible for how

people heard about community policing initiatives in Chicago. Participation in

community affairs resulted in awareness and a vested interest in the betterment of the

community.

III. Methodology

The research design for this study is primarily qualitative. Data analysis of published,

peer reviewed papers using the Citizen Participation and Community Crime Prevention

Survey, 1979 (Chicago Metropolitan Area Survey) was conducted in addition to

administration of a brief survey. Results were collected from 28 people in 15 cities.2

Interviews of various experts and those familiar to the field of community oriented

policing strategies and civic engagement were also conducted.

Lastly a comparative case study analysis on community oriented policing initiatives in

Garland (TX) and Aurora, (IL) was performed. These cities were selected due to the

following criteria: comparable population size and median income, available evaluation

material, varied and overlapping community oriented policing initiatives, and high crime

rate statistics.

1 Bigger numbers indicate more safety. 2Cities include Aurora, Cambridge, Dallas, Danville, Detroit, Glendale, Houston, Hyattsville, Jersey City, Montgomery, Newport News, New York, Pasadena, Union, Washington.

6

IV. Background: Civic Engagement

Thomas Ehrlich (2000) defined civic engagement as, “promoting the quality of life in a

community, through both political and non-political processes.” Individuals become part

of a collective and work towards affecting change in the civic life of their communities.

Social problems are community problems and community members are dedicated to

finding solutions.

The term civic engagement is all encompassing and includes several distinct activities

that can be measured in an effort to determine levels of vitality in civic life. The major

areas of focus will be service, group participation, connection to information and current

events, social connectedness and political action.

Figure 1: Forms of Civic Engagement

Service

Includes formal and informal volunteering,

informal collaboration with other

community members to solve a problem.

Social Connectedness

Includes the informal ways that community

members interact with each other.

Group Participation

Includes official membership in

associations or community organizations.

Political Action

Includes registering to vote, voting,

participating in local government.

Connecting to Information and Current

Events

Includes accessing news stories and current

events

Source: Summary of Civic Life in America Key Findings (2010)

7

Overall, a national study found several indicators that point to the strength of civic

engagement across the country such as people collaborating together to solve problems,

volunteers involvement in other areas of civic life, the positive correlation of the use of

the Internet to civic engagement and increased involvement from Veterans.

Service

In 2009 the nation saw it’s highest volunteer rate since 2005, with a total of 63.4 million

adults (25.5%) age 16 and older working with at least one or more volunteer

organizations. Roughly 7.9% of the population worked with a neighbor to fix a

community problem and 9.3% attended a public meeting. Regarding specific types of

volunteer organizations, about 35% were religious, 26% were related to education and

youth and 13% were related to social or community service.

Group Participation

According to the 2010 Civic Life study, 35% of adults ages 18 and above are a member

of an association or organization. The most common are religious associations or church

groups (18%) however school groups and sports association are also popular at about

10% each. These voluntary associations are instrumental in bridging the gap between

local communities and government.3

Connecting to Information and Current Events

Before people can be civically engaged, the need to know what is going on in their

community, city, state and nation. Knowing where people get information from and how

often, can provide good insight into how they determine when and if they want to become

3 Alex de Tocqueville

8

involved. The 2010 study found that people overwhelming get their information from

television (86%). The next source were newspapers followed by radio at 54%. Overall,

access to this information is imperative to helping communities learn about what is

occurring within their community. Poorer communities may not have the same access to

these forms of information which can limit their ability to stay informed.

Social Connectedness

Social Connectedness relates to the connection among peers, friends, and/or family and is

important in generating a base level of boundaries, trust, and values. These activities

aren’t formally held, rather community members actively choose to work together which

is an “essential ingredient” for civic health.4 Informal gatherings can also be the starting

point for more formal civic engagement activities such as group membership and political

action.5 Roughly 45% of Americans indicated that they frequently talk to neighbors

while 41% indicated that they occasionally exchange favors with neighbors.

Political Action

Political action is the most common form of civic engagement and also the easy form to

measure. This form of civic engagement relates to the use of elections and non-electoral

methods to influence local and national events resulting in broader political outcomes.

About 64% of Americans were registered to vote in the 2008 election however 57%

actually voted. Roughly 10% contacted a public official to express an opinion and the

same number attended a meeting where political issues were discussed.

4 Civic Life in America: Key Findings on the Civic Health of the Nation (2010) 5 Civic Life in America: Key Findings on the Civic Health of the Nation (2010)

9

Who are the people civically engaged and where are they?

Research points to the correlation between education and voting, with increased voting

behavior as education increases. Millegan et al (2004) found that 84% of college

graduates reported voting. The Civic Life Index found that abut 73% of those who voted

in the 2008 election had a Bachelor’s degree or higher. About 42% participated in one or

more non-political activities and volunteered with an organization while about 14%

worked with neighbors to fix a problem. 6

Regarding working with neighbors to fix a problem, overall the numbers are low, ranging

from 5.5% for high school graduates without any college to the 14.2% mentioned above.

The most civically engaged group are the Baby Boomers.7 In the 2008 election, about

64% of Baby Boomers voted in comparison to the heavily targeted Millennial generation

which peaked at about 35%.8,9 Baby Boomers were also more likely to exchange favors

with a neighbor and to work on a problem with a neighbor though they accounted for just

10.2% of the population.

The 2010 Civic Health study found that those who lived in cities were overall less likely

to be civically engaged in non-electoral civic life than those who lived in rural or

suburban locations.10 Participation for rural and suburban residents were comparable

6 Civic Life in America: Key Findings on the Civic Health of the Nation (2010) 7 The Baby Boomers generation refers to those born in 1946 to 1964. 8 The Millennial generation refers to those born in 1982 and after. 9 Civic Life in America: Key Findings on the Civic Health of the Nation (2010) 10City is defined as, Rural, Suburban

10

with rural residents having a slight lead in the category related to fixing a community

problem with a neighbor (about 8%).

Statewide Civic Engagement (Illinois and Texas)

Illinois is ranked fifth among all states based on population and very low in regards to

civic health. The Civic Health Index of 2010 determined that overall the citizenry lacked

the ability or interest to participate in civic life fully.11 In the 2008 election in regards to

voter registration, the state ranked 33rd even though there was a candidate from the state

of Illinois. As far as social connectedness, the state ranked 46th regarding the rate at

which people exchange favors with neighbors.

Texas is ranked second in the nation based on population and in 2010, ranked last in

regards to voter turnout.12 Rates of civic engagement are also extremely low with Texas

ranked above 40 for most activities. The state is ranked 37th in group membership and

16th for helping neighbors by exchanging favors however, overall, the state is ranked 47th

in neighborhood trust.13

V. Background: Community Oriented Policing Strategies

Community oriented policing is a collaborative community strategy that was created

roughly 40 years ago as Problem-Oriented Policing. Together, researchers, police

11http://www.ncoc.net/IL_Executive_Summary 12http://www.ncoc.net/TexasCHI 13http://moody.utexas.edu/sites/communication.utexas.edu/files/attachments/strauss/13-‐00395%20NCC%20CHI%20TX%20FINAL_web.pdf

11

officers and policymakers collaborated to determine the best way to improve the

effectiveness of policing.14 Findings from their research indicated the following:

• Police deal with a wide array of community issues that aren’t solely criminal

• Arrest and prosecution are not the most effective way to resolve issues

• Various methods can be used by police to solve problems

• Community members value police involvement, especially in non-criminal

problems and recognize that police can help to address these issues15

Experiments with problem-oriented policing methods occurred across the country and

have evolved over time. In the mid 1990’s, the federal Community Oriented Policing

Services (COPS) program was created by Title I of the Violent Control and Law

Enforcement Act of 1994 through the US Department of Justice (DOJ) (Burke, 2010).

The purpose of this program was to increase use of community oriented policing

throughout all jurisdictions on the United States.

Initially the program was a multi grant program wherein, COPS provided grants to state,

local, and tribal law enforcement agencies in the United States to “hire new police, rehire

dislocated police officers and to obtain equipment or support systems and provide

overtime pay” (Burke, 2010). Later the program was expanded to include the training of

law enforcement personnel to participate in community oriented policing initiatives and

crime prevention, developing innovate techniques that emphasized crime prevention,

14http://www.popcenter.org/about/?p=history 15http://www.popcenter.org/about/?p=history

12

collaboration between community organizations, residents and law enforcement, support

the purchase of weapons and facilitate the perpetuation of community oriented policing

as an organizational philosophy.

In 2009, the COPS Improvement Act expanded the scope of the program by establishing

new grant programs and incorporating COPS into a component of the DOJ. In this regard

the DOJ was able to award and evaluate COPS grants in addition to providing training

and technical assistance to further the community oriented policing philosophy.

Today much of the debate with community oriented policing strategies lay in

effectiveness and purpose. As a Federal program, the goal is to cultivate and perpetuate

the philosophy of community oriented policing as the go-to strategy for policing.

Difficulties arise when states and localities do not hire the appropriate staff or create base

level community engagement initiatives in order to meet the “community” requirement.

On an organizational level, some officers see community policing as an extra-added

activity that inhibits policing and reduce the credibility of officers. Some maintain that

they are not “social workers” rather enforcers of law.

In light of many of the recent officer-involved shootings, communities have turned

towards a more proactive method to address the community – law enforcement

relationship. The first step lay in building trust within the community in addition to

embedding law enforcement the fabric of the community.

13

There are many similar programs such as “coffee with a cop,” neighborhood watches,

citizen academies, foot patrols and community based officers, all with the focus on

making police officers accessible in a nonthreatening way. If community members see

police officers as part of their community, they are more likely to want to collaborate

with them in an effort to maintain the highest level of public safety in their community.

Problem-Oriented Policing Model

The model of community oriented-policing incorporates distinct features of problem-

oriented policing but it is important to note that both models are not one in the same.

Problem-oriented policing focuses on a targeted strategy to address a “a persistent

community problem.”16 The focus is on achieving a very specific crime result as

opposed to a shift in the framework of what policing actually is.

It’s very easy to incorporate problem-oriented policing with community policing

strategies since often times the entry point into community policing is through targeting a

persistent community problem.

VI. Community Oriented Policing Positively Affects the Community and Serves as a

Vehicle for Civic Engagement

Studies show that successfully implemented community oriented policing techniques can

have a positive effect on the community. A 2015 comparative study of 65 community

oriented policing programs showed that 27 of the 65 showed reduced crime of 5% or

10% however this finding was not statistically significant. More importantly, analysis of

16http://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg/litreviews/Community_and_Problem_Oriented_Policing.pdf

14

the case studies confirmed that community oriented policing strategies had “positive

effects on citizen satisfaction, perception of disorder, and police legitimacy (Gill, et. Al,

2014).”

The intersection of community oriented policing and civic engagement is found when

looking at community problem solving techniques directly. Police officers, embedded

into the community, working with members of the community transfer a sense of

responsibility to community members. If members feel that they are responsible for the

security of their neighborhood, why not focus that responsibility on the neighborhood’s

economic development and vitality?

With collaborative problem solving and an embedded police force comes great

opportunity to engage those who are willing to act. Overall, civic participation across

the country is low. Voting numbers are down in national elections let alone local

elections where individuals may have the best opportunity to see change. Community

oriented policing provides an entry point for those marginally attached community

members and this entry point can result in sustained activity.

The easiest measurement of civic engagement is voting, however as outlined above, civic

engagement encompasses many avenues for community members to be actively involved

in the civic life of their community. Collaborative community oriented policing

strategies provide the driving force for these other area of involvement. Collaboration of

15

community members with police officers can affect all five areas of measurement for

civic health.

Providing the platform for individuals to become involved in their community through

maintenance and safety is something that can be applicable to everyone. Some people

say they don’t want to be involved because they don’t own property or haven’t put down

roots, however everyone wants a safe community. Approachable law enforcement

personnel embedded in the community who go the extra step of challenging community

members to be the change they want to see, can help motivate community members to be

involved in civic life.

VII. Analysis of Prior Studies

Previous research using the Citizen Participation and Community Crime Prevention

Survey data set focused primarily on the role of citizen involvement in an effort to reduce

crime in the neighborhood. A 1981 study using the Chicago Citizens Participation and

Community Involvement survey found that roughly 58% of respondents indicated

membership in a voluntary organization (Lavrakas, 1981). Problem solving motives

were also a key part of membership in a neighborhood group as opposed to group

membership for distinction (Lavrakas, 1981).

Leaders felt that commitment towards solving group problems was the major impotence

for neighborhood participation however few saw success in actually solving local

problems (Lavrakas, 1981). This realization provided more insight into the mindset of

public-minded motives. Citizens wanted to become part of community organizations

16

with problem-solving motives when they found that they could not solve these problems

on their own.

Though these results deal mostly with citizen’s reactions to personal safety, the major

takeaway is the role that community organizations play in providing a conduit for

problem solving. Citizens turn to these types of organizations when they are unable to

affect change on their own. Crime and nefarious behavior by neighborhood members

may “provide the contextual cues for the need of such measures” and community

oriented policing provides the “opportunity” to be involved (Lavrakas, 1981).

A more recent 2014 study investigated whether attachment to one’s neighborhood

influenced their perception of public safety. Results indicated that those who were

unattached perceived their neighborhood to be less safe (DeLisi and Regoli, 2014). The

importance of these findings on this research is the implication that individual-level

characteristics can have some influence on perceptions of neighborhood safety (DeLisi

and Regoli, 2014).

The introduction of attachment variables showed that persons who tended not to socialize

with neighbors and those who rented had more negative perceptions of neighborhood

quality of life (DeLisi and Regoli, 2014). The most startling claim from DeLisi and

Regoli (2014), suggested that people allowed their neighborhood structure to manipulate

their perspectives. The importance of this notion in current research is that these findings

suggest that since neighborhood structure frames perception, this can also frame

17

perspectives on whether or not to engage within the community. Perception of

neighborhood quality of life and a desire to act could be closely linked with the

demographic makeup of each city or locality.

Qualitative Survey Results and Discussion

A short survey was conducted for qualitative purposes and though results cannot be

aggregated or applied to the greater community, provide some insight into the

intersection of community oriented policing and civic engagement in the community.

Overall 28 respondents replied to a survey discussing community oriented policing

strategies and civic engagement. When asked about whether or not community oriented

policing strategies exist in their communities respondents were split between a definitive

“yes” and “I don’t know.”

Specifically asking about types of community oriented policing strategies, respondents

indicated meet and greets (42%), community based police officers (35%), and

neighborhood watches (39%) as sample activities in their neighborhood. A smaller

percentage (25%) also indicated that they didn’t know what activities existed.17

Using the definition of civic engagement as “promoting the quality of life through both

political and nonpolitical processes,” 70% of respondents referred to themselves as being

engaged within their community. 40% described themselves as being active while 35%

described themselves as being not active but participating in national or local elections.

17 Respondents were allowed to choose more than one activity.

18

Personal responsibility ranked among the top two reasons for civic engagement for

respondents with family and peers taking a close second. Other categories were feelings

related to community longevity and a specific incident or event.

An overwhelming 65% of respondents indicated that they did not become civically

engaged due to an incident or event however of the 35% who indicated yes, officer-

involved killing of black men was cited as the main reason for a few respondents, while

others indicated a shooting in the neighborhood, and a recent election for City Council

and Mayer were cited as alternate reasons for involvement.18

Respondents indicated that community oriented policing techniques were “very helpful”

in getting them involved civically but needed various things in order to get involved.

Overall they needed to see how getting involved would affect the community and they

needed an issue that directly affected them. They wanted to see the ways in which the

community wanted to grow in addition to feeling as though they had been heard in the

past.

On a very basic level these results tell us that it is possible for a link to exist between

community oriented policing and civic engagement even if community members don’t

know what community oriented policing looks like. Many respondents indicated that

they did not know if these strategies existed in their communities but when asked about

18Respondents indicated Ferguson, Michael Brown, Eric Garner and the overall killing of Black men by police as a specific event.

19

specific types of programs, they were able to more easily describe the specific type of

program. Roughly 30% indicated that community oriented policing strategies have been

very helpful in increasing civic engagement while the same percentage indicated that they

had not been exposed to COP strategies.

About 45% of respondents indicated that civic engagement is extremely important while

35% and 20% felt it was very and somewhat important. Though these results can only

provide anecdotal examples of the intersection between community oriented policing

strategies and civic engagement, it is important to note the respondents were not unified

in depicting civic engagement as a necessary practice. No one indicated that it was “not

important” but the margin between very important and somewhat important was slim.19

VIII. Comparative Cases

Community oriented policing practices are in use across the country and several

programs have received accolades for reducing crime while also engaging the public.

Programs in Garland, Texas and Aurora, Illinois were chosen due to comparable

demographics community oriented policing initiatives used. Offers were extended to

both localities for interview and have not been accepted at this time.

Garland. Texas

Garland is a large city located northeast of Dallas Texas. Population estimates from the

2010 Census show a population of 226,876. The racial breakdown in the city includes

57.5% white, 14.5% African American, .8% Native American, .04% Asian, and 37.8%

19Only three votes separated these two categories.

20

who identified as Hispanic or Latino of any race. Roughly 9.2% of the population are

above 65 years of age and about 63% of residents own their housing units.

The median household income is about $52,000 and 14.5% of the population live below

the poverty line. The top two employers in Garland Texas are Raytheon E-Systems

(3,500) and Walmart (1500). As of December 2014, Garland had an unemployment rate

of 4.1% lower than the national average of 5.4%.20

Roughly 38% of Garland’s population was registered voters. 21In the last four elections,

the state has voted for the Republican candidate in state and national elections. About

76% are high school graduates or higher while roughly 17% have a Bachelor’s degree or

higher.

Overview of Crime

In 2000, City data reported the crime rate for Garland as 301.1, the same as the national

average.22 Figure 2 shows the overall crime rate trend from 2000 to 2012. Overall we

see an increase in crime with a spike at 2003 followed by a continued decrease of crime

until another spike in 2009 followed by another decline in crime.23 In comparison to

nearby cities, the overall crime index for Garland exceeds every city, with the exception

of Mesquite, by 70 points or more.

20 BLS data December 2014 21http://censusviewer.com/city/TX/Garland 22 http://www.city-‐data.com/crime/crime-‐Garland-‐Texas.html 23 City data accounts violent and serious crime more heavily and adjusts for commuters and visitors.

21

Figure 2: Garland (TX) – Crime Rate

Source: Censusviewer

Violent crime and property crime in Garland have been relatively low in comparison to

that of the national average. In every year since 2000, Garland has had crime levels

below the national average and declining. Figure 3 and 4 display comparison crime

levels.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

22

Figure 3: Violent Crime – Garland and the United States


Figure 4: Property Crime in Garland and the United States


A 2012 survey of the safest cities in America ranked Garland as #9 due to a commitment

to revitalization, public safety and a stable economy. Especially helpful in keeping crime

levels low is a “community oriented population” dedicated to ensuring public safety for

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Violent Crime Garland Violent Crime US

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Property Crime Garland Property Crime US

23

the city’s residents.24 Currently Garland’s public safety approach focuses on an initiative

called Living Safe. The components of this initiative include a Neighborhood Police

Officer Program, Crime Watch, Crime Stoppers, Citizens Academies, Community

Programs and Streets and Neighborhood Lighting.

Development of Community Oriented Policing

In the early 1990’s Garland Texas was wrought with run down houses, violent behavior

and a crack cocaine epidemic. City residents were afraid to leave their homes and even

while at home, homes were terrorized on an almost daily basis.25 Even more troubling, a

study in 1992 identified Garland as a city with the second lowest number of sworn

persons which combined with budget cuts reduced their ability to act.

Officers researched community and problem oriented policing strategies and decided that

a strategy based upon those principles would offer the best chance for success for

Garland. The Neighborhood Service Team (NST) was created as a partnership which

combined the resources of the police department with other municipal agencies and the

assistance of community residents.26

Initially the police officers that were part of the NST separated their community oriented

policing duties with the regular patrol duties. Later department administrators decided to

24http://lawstreetmedia.com/crime-‐in-‐america-‐top-‐10-‐safest-‐cities-‐over-‐200000/ 25http://www2.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1996/jan965.txt 26 http://www2.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1996/jan965.txt

24

hire full time NST officers who could “focus on identifying problems in the target area

and [coordinate] the multiagency response to those problems.”27

Today the Neighborhood Police Officer (NPO) Unit expanded the NST to include street-

level narcotic activity and gang activity. The NPO unit consists of 26 officers, three

Lieutenants and one Captain. Each officer is assigned to a specific geographic area and

work together with various community members to identify and assist with solving

ongoing problems within the community.28

Intersection between Community Oriented Policing and Civic Engagement

The Garland Gang Unit created a youth boxing program for at-risk children in 1995 that

focused on instilling self-discipline and self-esteem, not present in other areas of their

life.29 To address the problem with gangs, the department shifted from strict enforcement

towards providing a constructive outlet for these youth.

Collaborators in the program include the Municipal Court, which offers opportunities for

community service at the gym for at risk youth and the Independent School District

which offers tutoring and referrals to the program.30

This program offers an opportunity for community members and police to tap into

service, social connectedness, group membership and sharing of current events and

27http://www2.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1996/jan965.txt 28http://www.garlandtx.gov/gov/lq/safety/police/unit/npo.asp 29http://www.usmayors.org/bestpractices/community_policing_2006/gangbp_2006.pdf 30http://www.usmayors.org/bestpractices/community_policing_2006/gangbp_2006.pdf

25

information. The volunteers and workers are pivotal to the success of the program but the

sense of responsibility to refer youth to the program is instrumental to its continued

success.

An article in the Dallas News recounts an Administrative Assistant asking twin boys to

join the program after watching them sneak into the building to steal soda.31 That

individual felt a personal sense of responsibility to help those young members of the

community. The act of committing to a program increases social connectedness.

Students, staff and volunteers can feel as though they are part of something. This regular

interaction also serves as a platform to talk and discuss current events.

This initiative represents a problem-oriented community policing technique that has been

enveloped into the community oriented policing model for Garland. Originally created to

target a very specific problem, it is now one tool that is used by the city in order to

address the pervasive issue of gang activity. Those responsible for redeveloping the

police department in the early 90’s recognized that “successful implementation of a

community-wide response to the city’s crime problems required nothing less than a

restructuring of the institutions that provided law enforcement and other city services.”32

Aurora, Illinois

Aurora is located in the Greater Chicago area of Illinois. The 2010 census reported a

population of about 200,000 people. The racial breakdown in the city includes 68%

31http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-‐news/garland-‐mesquite/headlines/20140328-‐garland-‐isd-‐after-‐school-‐program-‐instills-‐discipline-‐education-‐motivation.ece 32http://www2.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1996/jan965.txt

26

white, 11% African American, .36% Native American, 3.06% Asian American and

32.6% who identified as Hispanic or Latino of any race. Roughly 6.5% of the

population are over the age of 65 and 69% own their home.

The largest employers are Caterpiller, Rush-Copley Medical Center and the Aurora

School District. The median household income was $54,861 and the per capita income

was $22,131. Roughly 8.5% of the population was listed as below the poverty line. As of

December 2014 the unemployment rate in Aurora was 5.2%, slightly less than the

unemployment rate for the state of Illinois (6.4%).

Roughly 37% of the population are registered voters.33 About 76% of the population have

a high school diploma or higher and 31% have a Bachelor’s degree or higher.

Overview of Crime

From 2000 to 2012, Aurora has shown a downward trend in crime averaging at 179.3 in

2012. In relation to neighboring cities, Aurora does not fair as well with a crime rate

index much higher than seven of the neighboring cities. Only North Aurora has a crime

rate index that exceeds that of Aurora. Even so, the crime rate index for Aurora is well

below the national average of 301.34

33http://censusviewer.com/city/IL/Aurora# 34http://www.city-‐data.com/crime/crime-‐Aurora-‐Illinois.html

27

Figure 5: Crime Rate - Aurora


Violent crime over the years has exceeded that of the national average with the exception

of 2011 and 2012. Aurora did show a downward trend up until 2008 when violent crime

peaked then was drastically reduced.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

28

Figure 6: Violent Crime - Aurora


Figure 7: Property Crime Aurora


Development of Community Oriented Policing Strategies

Community oriented policing strategies have been implemented in Aurora since 1995.

The Aurora Police Department’s mission statement reads, “We will enhance the quality

of life in Aurora through innovation, partnerships and dedicated service to our

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Violent Crime Aurora Violent Crime US

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Property Crime Aurora Property Crime US

29

community.”35 Through their motto of P.R.I.D.E. (Public Service Respect Integrity

Dedication and Empowerment), the Aurora Police Department has crafted a message

dedicated to advancing the philosophy of collaboration and empowerment. Aurora has a

Neighborhood Policing Bureau of roughly 160 officers.

Aurora’s move towards the community oriented policing model began with a problem-

oriented policing approach. In 1995, the Kane Street area in Aurora was the most

dangerous and dejected. “Open-air drug markets” were rampant and officers came to

expect that responding to a call would end in a fight.36

Police officers began collecting information to determine the extent of the problem while

also mapping out a plan to address it. They focused on banning those responsible for

causing harm to the neighborhood, reaching out to the youth as mentors and engaging

with the community face to face.

Proactive methods to work with the community initially to address the dangerous

neighborhood around Kane Street developed into partnerships with community

organizations and individual community members. After seeing positive results, Kane

Street residents formed the “Inner Circle” neighborhood group in an effort to “reclaim

their neighborhood.”37

Intersection between Community/Problem Oriented Policing and Civic Engagement 35https://www.aurora-‐il.org/apd/index.php 36http://www.popcenter.org/library/awards/goldstein/1995/95-‐07.pdf 37http://www.popcenter.org/library/awards/goldstein/1995/95-‐07.pdf

30

The Kane Street area initiative evolved from a problem-oriented approach to a vehicle for

more civic engagement. After seeing results, community members formed a

neighborhood group with a purpose. As of 2009, 16 neighborhood groups exist in the

city.

Between 1994-95, City Youth officials started to recruit Kane Street youths for city jobs.

Citizens were also nominated for Citizen Involvement awards based on their newfound

participation in ensuring the vitality of their community. Today there is a Neighborhood

Liaison program that connects residents with information and valuable services. This

program works with over 38038 registered neighborhood organizations to help build

capacity and keep people engaged.39

IX. Recommendations

Based on present research, one can say that community oriented policing strategies can

initiate civic engagement predominately for non-political processes such as service,

social connectedness, group membership, and exchange of information. The weakness in

community oriented policing strategies as a vehicle for active and sustained civic

engagement lay in the area of stimulating involvement in political processes. Since

proactive initiatives to build relationships between the community and law enforcement

can help generate an overall sense of responsibility in community members, adjustments

to implementation can be made to target active participation in the political realm.

38These organizations include neighborhood community groups, homeowners associations, and business associations. 39https://www.auroragov.org/cs/groups/public/documents/document/017539.pdf

31

The following recommendations can help community oriented policing increase

effectiveness and reach while also increasing active civic engagement:

• Rebranding of the national COPS program as a philosophy

• Encouraged community-based principles in policing

• Incentives for political participation

Rebranding as a philosophy

Official literature refers to the philosophy of community oriented policing however

locally it referred to as an initiative, strategy or program. Institutional change is slow but

it’s even slower without a clear accordance on what actions are necessary. Is Community

Oriented Policing a local initiative or national? A search will take you to the Department

of Justice’s (DOJ) Community Oriented Policing Services (COP) Hiring Program (CHP).

Further research will show grant programs maintained by this office such as:

• CHP, COPS Hiring Recovery Program (CHRP), COPS Universal Hiring

Program (UHP)

• Technology programs

• Tribal resources grant program

• Secure our schools

• Child sexual predator program

• Community policing development

• Tribal methamphetamine enforcement program

• Safe schools initiative

32

Even more research will detail the grant application process and lack of clarity regarding

use of COP grant funds.40 At first glance it seems as if community oriented policing

strategies are centralized within the DOJ, however even though this department provides

technical assistance and support, the branding of the program through the DOJ is as a

grant assistance program.

The primary function of the DOJ may be to provide grant assistance and evaluation,

however there are many community resources, training and technical assistance that they

offer that are unfortunately not utilized until an issue occurs. Literature from DOJ refers

to the philosophy of community oriented policing, however it is difficult to impart a

philosophy on those who have not bought into the system.

Encouraged Use of Community-Based Principles in Policing

Many of the most successful community oriented policing programs are those that have

originated organically through a mutual need from law enforcement and the community.

Though there are many benefits to COP, mandating an organizational shift could result in

more of what is already occurring now; police departments using COP for funding

purposes without any real shift in the approach to policing.

In order for a program to succeed and result in an actively engaged community, a

standardized philosophy regarding the shift towards the community oriented policing

approach needs to trickle down and communities who are already using this approach

40GAO-‐13-‐521 Community Policing Hiring Grants

33

need to buy in to a bigger system. Restructuring the mission and vision for the police

department in an effort to shift the focus towards continued community collaboration is

the first step. Buying into the national system of community oriented policing is the next

step.

Police academies operate autonomously, with a program designed to best suit the needs

of their jurisdiction. In 2000, the DOJ, COPS office and the Police Executive Research

Firm (PERF), collaborated with Reno, Nevada police department to create a post-

academy training program. The Police Training Officer (PTO) program focused on

inclusion of community-based practices in policing. The model was expanded to include

six more cities across the country.41

Police departments should be mandated to include at least one main method to engage

the community through use of community oriented policing strategies. They should also

be encouraged to adopt and use a derivative of the PTO program though budgetary

constraints may not make this the best solution for all jurisdictions. Federal grant

funding should also be tied to the institution of and regular completion of PTO programs

as an extra incentive for departments to use the program.

Incentives for Political Participation

In an effort to get community members involved in the political processes within their

community incentives should be used for both community members and law enforcement

41http://cops.usdoj.gov/html/dispatch/October_2010/a-‐look-‐at-‐pto.asp

34

and requirements should be added in other areas where community oriented policing

strategies influence civic engagement.

Performance metrics are used to evaluate law enforcement but why not include metrics

related to activities that are directly related to increasing involvement in political

processes in the community. Sample activities and initiatives could include:

• Registering people to vote | How many forms were given out vs. how many

registered

• Recruiting people to attend local government meetings during foot patrol | How

many people actually attended based on a referral by law enforcement

• Collaboration with local government for “Coffee with a Cop and Council

Member” days | How many people attended the event

• Invitation to local government for community activities | How many local

government representatives attended and how many community members

Activities wouldn’t be done in addition to regular community-based police work rather it

would be a part of the community-based policing philosophy that would already be in

use.

Next, incentives should be given to community members in the form of recognition for

active participation. Police officers who are trusted and respected members of the

community acknowledging the dedication of community members can go a long way to

help people see the value and impact of their participation.

35

Lastly, adding participation requirements can help initiate participation in political

processes. Community oriented policing strategies that target service, social

connectedness or group membership could ask people to be involved politically in many

ways by requiring they have at least one of the following:

• Registered to vote

• Voted in last local, state or national election

• Attended city council, neighborhood council meeting or committee meeting

• Show awareness of proposed initiatives within their community

This is not an exhaustive list and much time and effort would be invested in ensuring that

requirements selected are attainable by all members of the community regardless of their

citizenship status. The major focus would be on requiring community members to

participate in some activity that engages them in the political processes of their

community.

X. Conclusion

Community-oriented policing strategies offers the best opportunity to get people engaged

within their communities in non-political processes and can be adapted to influence

participation in political processes as well. For some, the decision not to be involved

politically is due to feeling disconnected and disinvested. People may feel as if they

won’t stay long so there’s no need to be involved. They may also feel as though someone

else will handle the responsibility of being civically engaged in the political realm.

36

Community-oriented policing strategies offer an opportunity to reach everyone since

every person will always be concerned about their safety.

Using community-oriented policing as a conduit to increase a sense of personal

responsibility, commitment to the community and also awareness that engagement isn’t

only necessary when something is wrong, can help initiate more sustained participation.

Law enforcement investing in community members and showing them that their voice

matters can also inspire them to use this voice in other areas of their civic life.

X.II References and Works Cited Abbott, J. (2013). Sharing the City: Community Participation in Urban Management.

Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Ackerman, J. M., Coogan, D., & Hauser, G. A. (2010). The public work of rhetoric:

Citizen-scholars and civic engagement. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.

Bada, X. (2014). Mexican Hometown Associations in Chicagoacán: From Local to

Transnational Civic Engagement. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press. Benneworth, P. (2013). University engagement with socially excluded communities.

Dordrecht: Springer. Berman, S. (April 01, 1997). Civil Society and the Collapse of the Weimar

Republic.World Politics, 49, 3, 401-429. Burke, J. V. (2010). Community oriented policing: Background and issues. New York:

Nova Science Publishers. Crabill, S. L., & Butin, D. W. (2014). Community engagement 2.0?: Dialogues on the

future of the civic in the disrupted university. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Cordner, G. W. (1997). Community policing: Elements and effects. Critical issues in

policing: Contemporary readings, 5, 401-418.

37

Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2003). The new public service: Serving, not steering. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe.

DeLisi, M., & Regoli, B. (January 01, 2000). Individual Neighborhood Attachment and

Perceptions of Neighborhood Safety. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 24, 181-188.

Dicker, T. J. (September 01, 1998). Tension on the thin blue line: Police officer

resistance to community-oriented policing. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 23, 1, 59-82.

Farkas, M. A., & Jones, R. S. (September 01, 2007). Community Partners: ‘Doing Doors’

as a Community Crime Prevention Strategy. Criminal Justice Studies, 20, 3, 295-312. Fitzgerald, H. E., & Primavera, J. (2013). Going public: Civic and community

engagement. Friedmann, R. R. (1992). Community policing: Comparative perspectives and prospects. Gill, C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Vitter, Z., & Bennett, T. (December 01, 2014).

Community-oriented policing to reduce crime, disorder and fear and increase satisfaction and legitimacy among citizens: a systematic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10, 4, 399-428.

Grinc, R. M. (1994). “Angels in marble”: Problems in stimulating community

involvement in community policing. Crime & Delinquency, 40(3), 437-468. Gutierrez, R. S. (2003). Social equity and the funding of community policing. New York:

LFB Scholarly Pub. LLC. Koritz, A., & Sanchez, G. J. (2009). Civic engagement in the wake of Katrina. Ann

Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Milligan, K., Moretti, E., & Oreopoulos, P. (January 01, 2004). Does education improve

citizenship? Evidence from the United States and the United Kingdom. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1667-1695.

Lavrakas, P. J., Normoyle, J., Skogan, W. G., Herz, E. J., Salem, G., Lewis, D. A., &

Northwestern University Evanston IL 60201. (1981). Factors Related to Anti-Crime Involvement in Personal, Household, and Neighborhood Anti-crime Measures - An Executive Summary. United States.

Oliver, P. (October 01, 1984). "IF YOU DON'T DO IT, NOBODY ELSE WILL":

ACTIVE AND TOKEN CONTRIBUTORS TO LOCAL COLLECTIVE ACTION. American Sociological Review, 49, 5.)

38

Packham, C. (2010). Active citizenship and community learning. Exeter: Learning Matters Ltd.

Parsons, M. H. (1996). Promoting community renewal through civic literacy and service

learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Putnam, R. D., Feldstein, L. M., & Cohen, D. (2003). Better together: Restoring the

American community. New York: Simon & Schuster. Rice, C. (2012). Power concedes nothing: One woman's quest for social justice in

America from the courtrooms to the kill zones. New York: Scribner. Rogers, Robert. (December 8, 2007). Violent crime up 6%. The Sun. San Bernandino

Rosenbaum, D. P. (1994). The Challenge of community policing: Testing the promises.

Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Sampson, R. J., McAdam, D., MacIndoe, H., & Weffer-Elizondo, S. (January 01, 2005). Civil Society Reconsidered: The Durable Nature and Community Structure of Collective Civic Action. The American Journal of Sociology, 111, 3, 673.

Schneider, A., Kimerer, C., Seaman, S., Sweeney, J., & United States. (2003).Community

policing in action!: A practitioner's eye view of organizational change. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

Sharp, E. B. (2012). Does local government matter?: How urban policies shape civic

engagement. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Skogan, W. G., & Hartnett, S. M. (1997). Community policing, Chicago style. New York:

Oxford University Press. Skogan, W. G., & National Institute of Justice (U.S.). (2000). Public involvement:

Community policing in Chicago. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Soska, T., & Butterfield, A. K. J. (2012). University-Community Partnerships:

Universities in Civic Engagement. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Sosnik, D., Dowd, M. J., & Fournier, R. (2006). Applebee's America: How successful

political, business, and religious leaders connect with the new American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Toch, H., & Grant, J. D. (2005). Police as problem solvers: How frontline workers can

promote organizational and community change. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

39

Trojanowicz, R., & Bucqueroux, B. (1990). Community policing. A contemporary

perspectiva (Cincinnati, Anderson Publishing Co., 1998). Verma, A., Das, D. K., & Abraham, M. (2013). Global community policing: Problems

and challenges. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. White, M. D., & Katz, C. M. (September 01, 2013). Policing Convenience Store Crime:

Lessons from the Glendale, Arizona Smart Policing Initiative. Police Quarterly, 16, 3.)

.

The Philosophy of Community Oriented Policing: A Method to Spur Civic Engagement in Communities

Documents

Transcript of The Philosophy of Community Oriented Policing: A Method to Spur Civic Engagement in Communities