Problem-oriented policing
Encyclopedia
Problem-oriented policing is an approach to policing in which discrete pieces of police business (each consisting of a cluster of similar incidents, whether crime or acts of disorder, that the police are expected to handle) are subject to microscopic examination (drawing on the especially honed skills of crime analysts and the accumulated experience of operating field personnel) in hopes that what is freshly learned about each problem will lead to discovering a new and more effective strategy for dealing with it. Problem-oriented policing places a high value on new responses that are preventive in nature, that are not dependent on the use of the criminal justice system, and that engage other public agencies, the community and the private sector when their involvement has the potential for significantly contributing to the reduction of the problem. Problem-oriented policing carries a commitment to implementing the new strategy, rigorously evaluating its effectiveness, and, subsequently, reporting the results in ways that will benefit other police agencies and that will ultimately contribute to building a body of knowledge that supports the further professionalization of the police.
Herman Goldstein (2001)
History of Problem-Oriented Policing
In the late 1970’s, researchers, police professionals, and policymakers became interested in improving the effectiveness of policing. Research during this period pointed out the limitations of random patrol, rapid response, and follow-up criminal investigations–practices that had been the foundation of policing for many years. These findings laid the groundwork for the emergence of problem-oriented policing. The research yielded important insights:
•Police deal with a range of community problems, many of which are not strictly criminal in nature.
•Arrest and prosecution alone–the traditional functions of the criminal justice system–do not always effectively resolve problems.
•Giving the officers, who have great insight into community problems, the discretion to design solutions is extremely valuable to solving the problems.
•Police can use a variety of methods to redress recurrent problems.
•The community values police involvement in non-criminal problems and recognizes the contribution the police can make to solving these problems.
Early experiments in problem-oriented policing occurred in Madison, Wisconsin; London; and Baltimore County, Maryland in the early 1980’s. The first evaluation of an agency-wide implementation of problem-oriented policing took place in the Newport News, Virginia Police Department by the Police Executive Research Forum in the mid-1980’s. Since then, many police agencies in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Scandinavia, Australia, and New Zealand have continued to experiment with problem-oriented policing, to apply it to a wide range of crime and disorder problems, and to change their organizations to better support problem-oriented policing.
As problem-oriented policing has evolved over the last two decades, researchers and practitioners have focused on the evaluation of problems, the importance of solid analysis, the development of pragmatic responses, and the need to strategically engage other resources–including community members, city departments and government agencies, and local business and service organizations.
Key Elements of POP
Problem-Oriented Policing has several key elements.
• A problem is the basic unit of police work rather than a crime, a case, calls, or incidents.
• A problem is something that concerns or causes harm to citizens, not just the police. Things that concern only police officers are important, but they are not problems in this sense of the term.
• Addressing problems means more than quick fixes: it means dealing with conditions that create problems.
• Police officers must routinely and systematically analyze problems before trying to solve them, just as they routinely and systematically investigate crimes before making an arrest. Individual officers and the department as a whole must develop routines and systems for analyzing problems.
• The analysis of problems must be thorough even though it may not need to be complicated. This principle is as true for problem analysis as it is for criminal investigation.
• Problems must be described precisely and accurately and broken down into specific aspects of the problem. Problems often aren't what they first appear to be.
• Problems must be understood in terms of the various interests at stake. Individuals and groups of people are affected in different ways by a problem and have different ideas about what should be done about the problem.
• The way the problem is currently being handled must be understood and the limits of effectiveness must be openly acknowledged in order to come up with a better response.
• Initially, any and all possible responses to a problem should be considered so as not to cut short potentially effective responses. Suggested responses should follow from what is learned during the analysis. They should not be limited to, nor rule out, the use of arrest.
• The police must pro-actively try to solve problems rather than just react to the harmful consequences of problems.
• The police department must increase police officers' freedom to make or participate in important decisions. At the same time, officers must be accountable for their decision-making.
• The effectiveness of new responses must be evaluated so these results can be shared with other police officers and so the department can systematically learn what does and does not work. (Michael Scott and Herman Goldstein 1988.)
The concept of problem-oriented policing can be illustrated by an example. Suppose police find themselves responding several times a day to calls about drug dealing and vandalism in a neighborhood park. The common approach of dispatching an officer to the scene and repeatedly arresting offenders may do little to resolve the long term crime and disorder problem. If, instead, police were to incorporate problem-oriented policing techniques into their approach, they would examine the conditions underlying the problem. This would likely include collecting additional information—perhaps by surveying neighborhood residents and park users, analyzing the time of day when incidents occur, determining who the offenders are and why they favor the park, and examining the particular areas of the park that are most conducive to the activity and evaluating their environmental design characteristics. The findings could form the basis of a response to the problem behaviors. While enforcement might be a component of the response, it would unlikely be the sole solution because, in this case, analysis would likely indicate the need to involve neighborhood residents, parks and recreation officials and others.
Problem-oriented policing can be applied at various levels of community problems and at various levels in the police organization. It can be applied to problems that affect an entire community, involving the highest level of police agency, government, and community resources. It can be applied at intermediate levels (for example, a neighborhood or a police district), involving an intermediate level of resources. Or it can be applied at a very localized level (for example, a single location or a small group of problem individuals), involving the resources of only a few police officers and other individuals.
SARA Model
A commonly used problem-solving method is the SARA model (Scanning, Analysis, Response and Assessment). The SARA model contains the following elements:
Scanning
•Identifying recurring problems of concern to the public and the police.
•Identifying the consequences of the problem for the community and the police.
•Prioritizing those problems.
•Developing broad goals.
•Confirming that the problems exist.
•Determining how frequently the problem occurs and how long it has been taking place.
•Selecting problems for closer examination.
Analysis
•Identifying and understanding the events and conditions that precede and accompany the problem.
•Identifying relevant data to be collected.
•Researching what is known about the problem type.
•Taking inventory of how the problem is currently addressed and the strengths and limitations of the current response.
•Narrowing the scope of the problem as specifically as possible.
•Identifying a variety of resources that may be of assistance in developing a deeper understanding of the problem.
•Developing a working hypothesis about why the problem is occurring.
Response
•Brainstorming for new interventions.
•Searching for what other communities with similar problems have done.
•Choosing among the alternative interventions.
•Outlining a response plan and identifying responsible parties.
•Stating the specific objectives for the response plan.
•Carrying out the planned activities.
Assessment
•Determining whether the plan was implemented (a process evaluation).
•Collecting pre– and post–response qualitative and quantitative data.
•Determining whether broad goals and specific objectives were attained.
•Identifying any new strategies needed to augment the original plan.
•Conducting ongoing assessment to ensure continued effectiveness.
Herman Goldstein (2001)
History of Problem-Oriented Policing
In the late 1970’s, researchers, police professionals, and policymakers became interested in improving the effectiveness of policing. Research during this period pointed out the limitations of random patrol, rapid response, and follow-up criminal investigations–practices that had been the foundation of policing for many years. These findings laid the groundwork for the emergence of problem-oriented policing. The research yielded important insights:
•Police deal with a range of community problems, many of which are not strictly criminal in nature.
•Arrest and prosecution alone–the traditional functions of the criminal justice system–do not always effectively resolve problems.
•Giving the officers, who have great insight into community problems, the discretion to design solutions is extremely valuable to solving the problems.
•Police can use a variety of methods to redress recurrent problems.
•The community values police involvement in non-criminal problems and recognizes the contribution the police can make to solving these problems.
Early experiments in problem-oriented policing occurred in Madison, Wisconsin; London; and Baltimore County, Maryland in the early 1980’s. The first evaluation of an agency-wide implementation of problem-oriented policing took place in the Newport News, Virginia Police Department by the Police Executive Research Forum in the mid-1980’s. Since then, many police agencies in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Scandinavia, Australia, and New Zealand have continued to experiment with problem-oriented policing, to apply it to a wide range of crime and disorder problems, and to change their organizations to better support problem-oriented policing.
As problem-oriented policing has evolved over the last two decades, researchers and practitioners have focused on the evaluation of problems, the importance of solid analysis, the development of pragmatic responses, and the need to strategically engage other resources–including community members, city departments and government agencies, and local business and service organizations.
Key Elements of POP
Problem-Oriented Policing has several key elements.
• A problem is the basic unit of police work rather than a crime, a case, calls, or incidents.
• A problem is something that concerns or causes harm to citizens, not just the police. Things that concern only police officers are important, but they are not problems in this sense of the term.
• Addressing problems means more than quick fixes: it means dealing with conditions that create problems.
• Police officers must routinely and systematically analyze problems before trying to solve them, just as they routinely and systematically investigate crimes before making an arrest. Individual officers and the department as a whole must develop routines and systems for analyzing problems.
• The analysis of problems must be thorough even though it may not need to be complicated. This principle is as true for problem analysis as it is for criminal investigation.
• Problems must be described precisely and accurately and broken down into specific aspects of the problem. Problems often aren't what they first appear to be.
• Problems must be understood in terms of the various interests at stake. Individuals and groups of people are affected in different ways by a problem and have different ideas about what should be done about the problem.
• The way the problem is currently being handled must be understood and the limits of effectiveness must be openly acknowledged in order to come up with a better response.
• Initially, any and all possible responses to a problem should be considered so as not to cut short potentially effective responses. Suggested responses should follow from what is learned during the analysis. They should not be limited to, nor rule out, the use of arrest.
• The police must pro-actively try to solve problems rather than just react to the harmful consequences of problems.
• The police department must increase police officers' freedom to make or participate in important decisions. At the same time, officers must be accountable for their decision-making.
• The effectiveness of new responses must be evaluated so these results can be shared with other police officers and so the department can systematically learn what does and does not work. (Michael Scott and Herman Goldstein 1988.)
The concept of problem-oriented policing can be illustrated by an example. Suppose police find themselves responding several times a day to calls about drug dealing and vandalism in a neighborhood park. The common approach of dispatching an officer to the scene and repeatedly arresting offenders may do little to resolve the long term crime and disorder problem. If, instead, police were to incorporate problem-oriented policing techniques into their approach, they would examine the conditions underlying the problem. This would likely include collecting additional information—perhaps by surveying neighborhood residents and park users, analyzing the time of day when incidents occur, determining who the offenders are and why they favor the park, and examining the particular areas of the park that are most conducive to the activity and evaluating their environmental design characteristics. The findings could form the basis of a response to the problem behaviors. While enforcement might be a component of the response, it would unlikely be the sole solution because, in this case, analysis would likely indicate the need to involve neighborhood residents, parks and recreation officials and others.
Problem-oriented policing can be applied at various levels of community problems and at various levels in the police organization. It can be applied to problems that affect an entire community, involving the highest level of police agency, government, and community resources. It can be applied at intermediate levels (for example, a neighborhood or a police district), involving an intermediate level of resources. Or it can be applied at a very localized level (for example, a single location or a small group of problem individuals), involving the resources of only a few police officers and other individuals.
SARA Model
A commonly used problem-solving method is the SARA model (Scanning, Analysis, Response and Assessment). The SARA model contains the following elements:
Scanning
•Identifying recurring problems of concern to the public and the police.
•Identifying the consequences of the problem for the community and the police.
•Prioritizing those problems.
•Developing broad goals.
•Confirming that the problems exist.
•Determining how frequently the problem occurs and how long it has been taking place.
•Selecting problems for closer examination.
Analysis
•Identifying and understanding the events and conditions that precede and accompany the problem.
•Identifying relevant data to be collected.
•Researching what is known about the problem type.
•Taking inventory of how the problem is currently addressed and the strengths and limitations of the current response.
•Narrowing the scope of the problem as specifically as possible.
•Identifying a variety of resources that may be of assistance in developing a deeper understanding of the problem.
•Developing a working hypothesis about why the problem is occurring.
Response
•Brainstorming for new interventions.
•Searching for what other communities with similar problems have done.
•Choosing among the alternative interventions.
•Outlining a response plan and identifying responsible parties.
•Stating the specific objectives for the response plan.
•Carrying out the planned activities.
Assessment
•Determining whether the plan was implemented (a process evaluation).
•Collecting pre– and post–response qualitative and quantitative data.
•Determining whether broad goals and specific objectives were attained.
•Identifying any new strategies needed to augment the original plan.
•Conducting ongoing assessment to ensure continued effectiveness.
See also
- Community-Oriented policing
- Fixing Broken WindowsFixing Broken WindowsThe broken windows theory is a criminological theory of the norm setting and signaling effect of urban disorder and vandalism on additional crime and anti-social behavior...
- Intelligence-led policingIntelligence-led policingIntelligence-led policing is a policing model that has emerged in recent years which is “built around risk assessment and risk management.”...
External links
- Center for Problem-Oriented Policing
- Herman Goldstein, Improving Policing: A Problem-Oriented Approach, Crime & Delinquency (April 1979):236-243.