It is still unclear whether the rapid response can be effective in addressing certain crimes. However, some researchers state that it does not matter since it is effective only in 25% of reported crimes. It has been acknowledged that in most cases immediate response is not required as these are discovery crimes while rapid response may be efficient in some involvement crimes.
Discovery crimes are those reported a certain time after the crime has been committed and involvement crimes are those reported at the time of the crime occurrence. Notably, discovery crimes are reported several minutes (about 10 minutes) after the crime has been committed and this time is usually enough for the offender to escape the scene. The delay is explained by people’s inner conflict as some people tend to call others to get advice, some try to resolve the issue on their own and some think of possible negative outcomes for all stakeholders involved.
Differential police response is the response given by police phone operators who, based on facts provided by the caller, categorize calls and decide whether there is a need in patrol unit dispatch. This strategy is aimed at improving the effectiveness and efficiency of police agencies. At that, effectiveness is the ability to achieve the goal set whereas efficiency is the ability to accomplish certain tasks in the shortest time and with the use of minimum effort, funds, and so on. In theory, effectiveness, as well as efficiency, may be achieved through extensive training and supervision of operators whose major issue is to decide whether the patrol unit is necessary for this or that situation.
In the Kansas City study, the researchers focused on the impact preventive patrolling had on the crime rate. The researchers note that the study was effective as it answered the research question (the answer was negative), but it also raised several other questions. The researchers state that there were certain difficulties as it is not easy to create an experimental atmosphere and they also stress that the presence of researchers does not affect the results of the study.
The researchers emphasize that they proved that experiments could be held and police operations could be estimated. Larson believes that the researchers concentrated on the effect of the distribution of patrolling units. The author also admits that the study has a profound effect on further research as it is proved that experimental conditions can be maintained.
It is still unclear whether a one-officer patrol car is more effective than a two-officer patrol car. However, proponents of dispatch of one-officer cars note that the response time in the former case is shorter. At the same time, supporters of two-officer cars dispatch note that the difference is not significant and the costs are rather considerable. Officers tend to support two-officer car dispatch as in this case they do not have to wait too long for cover.
At the same time, administrators often support the idea of the one-officer car as it is associated with a shorter response time. According to the research, there is quite an insignificant difference between the two options, and more variables, as well as regions, have to be included in the further research. It is also necessary to note that in a one-officer car dispatching a specific relationship occurs between the staffing. Peer pressure may be significant in this case as officers try to get to the necessary place as fast as they can not be blamed for being too late and letting other officers down.
Directed patrol is the strategy based on patrolling, the so-called, hot spots. In other words, patrol cars are present in high-crime districts. Researchers note that directed patrol is more effective than random one as the use of the former strategy leads to lower rates of crime in the districts patrolled. At the same time, the researchers also stress that directed patrolling prevents crime in the controlled area, but it may cause the occurrence of crimes in other districts that are considered safe.
Interestingly, the researchers also mention that this strategy leads to police officers’ dissatisfaction (boredom) as they prefer chasing and stopping a criminal rather than patrolling and preventing crime.
Researchers single out three hypotheses: circumstance-result, effort-result, and triage hypotheses. The circumstance-result hypothesis is based on the assumption that solving cases does not depend solely on the investigator as such conditions as lack of evidence or loss of evidence can prevent officers from solving the case. The effort-result hypothesis implies that the total effort contributed by all officers (patrol officers, detectives, and so on) will help solve the case.
The triage hypothesis is based on the assumption that there are three categories of cases and each case should be treated accordingly (with specific attention to effort or circumstances). Notably, the researchers support some aspects of the triage hypothesis as they take into account such variables as effort and circumstances. However, the researchers note that there is a weak correlation between these variables and the rate of cases solved.
According to the Rand Study, detectives are not as successful as they could be. It is noted that patrol officers could help detectives solve cases as the former could provide valuable information since they are the first ones to come to the crime scene. The findings of Skogan and Antunes suggest that the availability of diverse information is crucial for an effective case solution.
It was suggested that patrol officers should closely collaborate with detectives to make the process of case solving faster and more effective. Thus, detectives have to take into account data obtained from patrol officers, victims, witnesses, and a variety of tools of surveillance. In other words, the more information (from different sources) detectives get, the more effectively they work.
Policy effectiveness is the ability of a policy to achieve certain goals. In other words, the policy is deemed effective if it meets the expectation of the people who launched it. Organizational effectiveness is the ability of an organization to operate effectively as a whole and achieve goals aimed at contributing to the organization’s development. These two concepts may be quite close as people in organizations often develop policies to achieve certain goals set to contribute to organizational development.
However, they differ greatly as organizational effectiveness is seen as the ability to gain benefits for the organization while policy effectiveness is directed on the environment (people in the community benefit). Therefore, the auto theft sting is associated with organizational effectiveness as police (as an organization) managed to achieve certain goals (to return properties). At the same time, it was not associated with policy effectiveness as the method proved to be ineffective in terms of the rate of crime. The community did not benefit significantly as the rate of auto theft did not decrease.
Problem-oriented policing is a strategy that focuses on preventing crime and/or developing an effective method of solving certain cases by implementing research and involving possible stakeholders. The traditional incident-based approach focuses on solving each issue rather separately while the problem-oriented method is associated with an attempt to identify similar cases and come up with possible solutions or even preventive measures. Admittedly, the problem-oriented policy needs more effort and time.
It will require a significant change in management and even the structure of police. At the same time, it is also more effective as there is no need in addressing each case (which requires a lot of time and some cases may not be solved) but it is possible to develop a strategy to address numerous similar cases and even prevent certain crimes.
It has been acknowledged that it is rather difficult to measure the effectiveness of community policing due to three reasons. First, there is confusion about major terms used while evaluating community policing. These terms are effectiveness, equity, and efficiency. Thus, it is important to develop universal definitions for the concepts to make it easier to measure community policing effectiveness. Besides, different researchers prioritize differently and pay more attention to one concept ignoring the other two.
Admittedly, each dimension needs similar attention as they are three facets that help measure the effectiveness of community policing. Finally, it is crucial to develop proper performance measures to evaluate the effectiveness of community policing. These measures should be developed concerning the universal definitions and proper attention to the three aspects mentioned above.
Reference List
Antunes, G., & Scott, E.J. (1981). Calling the cops: Police telephone operators and citizen calls for service. Journal of Criminal Justice, 9(1), 165-179.
Eck, J.E., & Spelman, W. (1987). Who ya gonna call? The police as problem-busters. Crime & Delinquency, 33(1), 31-52.
Goldstein, H. (1979). Improving policing: A problem-oriented approach. Crime & Delinquency, 25(1), 236-258.
Kelling, G.L., Pate, T., Dieckman, D., & Brown, C.E. (1974). The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment: A summary report. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
Kessler, D.A. (1985). One- or two-officer cars? A perspective from Kansas City. Journal of Criminal Justice, 13(1), 49-64.
Langworthy, R.H. (1989). Do stings control crime? An evaluation of a police fencing operation. Justice Quarterly, 6(1), 27-45.
Larson, R.C. (1975). What happened to patrol operations in Kansa City? A review of the Kansas City preventive patrol experiment. Journal of Criminal Justice, 3(1), 267-297.
Sherman, L.W., & Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime “hot spots”: A randomized, controlled trial. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 625-648.
Skogan, W.G., & Antunes, G. (1979). Information, apprehension, and deterrence: Exploring the limits of police productivity. Journal of Criminal Justice, 7(1), 217-241.
Spelman, W., & Brown, D.K. (1984). Calling the police: Citizen reporting of serious crime. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.