Introduction
The community landscape is fast changing. Emerging crimes (e.g. human trafficking, child sex exploitation, cybercrimes) have gone beyond the traditional geographical borders, presenting the police with challenges that they may not be well-equipped to handle. Increasing transiency, diversity, and fragmentation within communities added to the challenge of police resources (Longstaff, et al., 2015). In addition, budget cuts had strained departmental resources. Despite these challenges, community policing may open unexpected opportunities to maximize resources with desirable efficiency. It is proposed that a community policing unit be activated to sustain community engage while keeping workforce costs within budgetary limits.
General information
Purpose: The proposed community policing unit will have the following purposes: (1) Proactively reduce crime, disorder, violence, and fear of crime in the community (Blackwell, 2015); (2) Improve public safety, quality of life, and collective efficacy within the community where inclusive engagement, mutual trust and respect between its members and the police is enriched (Schanzer, et al., 2016; Blackwell, 2015; Longstaff, et al., 2015); (3) Deliver equitable services to the community across racial and ethnic lines with fairness and courtesy (Blackwell, 2015); (4) Improve community-police relationships characterized by mutual respect, authentic collaboration, support, and trust (Schanzer, et al., 2016; Blackwell, 2015; Longstaff, et al., 2015).
Specific responsibilities: The community policing unit will have the following responsibilities: (1) prioritize and proactively participate with community members and local government agencies as partners in community problem solving and in the reduction of risk, harm, and threat (Schanzer, et al., 2016; Blackwell, 2015; Longstaff, et al., 2015); (2) Educate the community on police policies, procedures, and recognition of exceptional service (Schanzer, et al., 2016; Blackwell, 2015); (3) Promote a department-wide adoption of the philosophy of community policing into the department’s culture (Scrivner & Stephens, 2015) and of public transparency to increase community access to the police as needs arise (Blackwell, 2015); (4) Establish a routine, daily, and quality engagement with the members of the community, across diverse racial groupings or sub-groupings, either through routine foot patrols or the use of social media or both (Longstaff, et al., 2015); (5) Provide police support to vulnerable groups (e.g. the children, the elderly, or the mentally disadvantaged) while identifying and strengthening the vulnerability areas (Longstaff, et al., 2015); (6) Divert offenders from the criminal justice system (e.g. non-criminal intervention programs; removal of the school to prison pipeline) whenever possible by provision of support either in resources or official assistance (Schanzer, et al., 2016).
Preferred unit membership profile
Types of officers: The police officers must be racially as diverse as the community it is serving, including or hiring +members who are African Americans, Hispanics, Asians (Orientals), Muslim Americans, and other minorities whenever possible and available to reflect the racial, ethnic, and religious mix in the community (Schanzer, et al., 2016). They may either be light duty officers, which are operating from a crime reporting center, or community policing officers, which are specially trained for community policing tasks (Scrivner & Stephens, 2015).
Qualifications: (1) have entered law enforcement for the right reasons (Scrivner & Stephens, 2015); (2) have strong multi-cultural aptitude and adequate exposure (Schanzer, et al., 2016); (3) good facility with minority languages (Schanzer, et al., 2016); (4) good knowledge of laws, policies, and procedures (Scrivner & Stephens, 2015); (5) good tactical and interpersonal skills (Scrivner & Stephens, 2015); and (6) have no history of misdemeanor against any member of the community or incidents of abuse of police power.
Experience: (1) had at least three months of community immersion and submitted an insightful report on immersion findings (Scrivner & Stephens, 2015); (2) adequate experience in race relations (Scrivner & Stephens, 2015); and (3) experienced multiracial communicator.
Scope of operation
Areas of focus: The unit’s focus will be emerging crimes and crimes of community disruption as these crimes tend to undermine police legitimacy in the community.
Performance measurement
Focusing primarily on achieving metrical requirements can risks the emergence of a robotic mentality (Scrivner & Stephens, 2015). Thus, any metrics used to assess the unit’s performance must not be considered more important than community problems and engagement. These metrics may include: annual crime rate (ACR) [significant: >50% reduction]; annual social media engagement rate (ASMER) [significant: >80% of population]; annual citizens watch reporting rate (ACWRR) [significant: >50% of crimes responded]; and annual positive quality of life rate (APQLR) [significant: >90% of population].
Conclusion
A community policing unit is only as cost-efficient as the widespread participation of every police officer to serve in community policing. With wise allocation of human resources, any qualified police officer can work in the community policing unit without additional costs.
References
Longstaff, A., Willer, J., Chapman, J., Czarnomski, S., & Graham, J. (2015, May).
Neighborhood policing: Past, present, and future. London: The Police Foundation.
Schanzer, D., Kurzman, C., Toliver, J., & Miller, E. (2016, January). The challenge and promise
of using community policing strategies to prevent violent extremism. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
Scrivner, E. & Stephens, D.W. (2015). Community policing in the new economy. Washington,
DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
Blackwell, J. (2015). Testimony of Chief Jeffrey Blackwell, Cincinnati Police Chief. In:
PTFFCP, Community policing and crime reduction. Washington, DC: The President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing.
