Introduction
CompStat is the oldest and most effective crime mapping computer program operational in the United States today. The acronym for Computer Statistical Analysis, the system came into use by the New York Police Department in 1994. Accredited with reducing crime in several cities across the world, CompStat turned New York into a commercial hub.
Origins
The New York Police Department (NYPD) was reeling with a spate of crime in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Several parts of the city were unsafe for residents with frequent muggings and street gangs. The police were trying out obsolete tactics learned during the crack cocaine epidemic in the previous decade without much success. The most dangerous beat for a NYPD officer was in the Transit division. A lieutenant in the transit division came up with a way to predict specific criminal activity in certain locations and used hundreds of maps on a wall for this purpose. The Transit Police then noticed a twenty-seven percent decline in crime in less than six months. The lieutenant’s name was Jack Maple and his maps nicknamed the “Charts of the future”. This was the first recorded use of CompStat in the NYPD (Destefano, 2014).
Early years
William J. Bratton’s appointment to the NYPD as Commissioner in 1994 brought Jack Maple along as Deputy Commissioner. His appointment was strategic for CompStat induction into the NYPD. Utilizing the computer analysis division of the NYPD, Jack Maple designed the first CompStat program. Once the system had sufficient crime reports, Bartton presented CompStat to a room full of police commanders. Despite skeptics in the ranks, CompStat quickly became popular in police precincts across the NYPD with homicide rates dropping below the four-figure mark for the first time since the early 1960s.
COMPSTAT integration with Community Policing
The NYPD came up with a new approach to combatting criminal activity and reclaiming neighborhoods in the 1980s. This approach was to eliminate minor criminal activity in neighborhoods and discourage residents from indulging in any major crimes. It was the first community policing initiative called “Broken Windows”. Prior to CompStat, the program relied on citizen input until 1996. The NYPD was able to deploy resources based on CompStat which allowed a proactive approach to community policing initiatives. Instead of diminishing 911 response durations, NYPD increased patrols in troubled neighborhoods.
Principles of COMPSTAT
There are four principles for the effective functioning of CompStat. They are accurate and timely intelligence, effective tactics, rapid deployment, and persistent follow up with periodic assessments.
Accurate and timely information
Prior to the implementation of CompStat, information on criminal activity was confidential data. It was not available for commanders to plan deployment of resources. In the 1980s, the perception in the police department was that power depended on the type of information each division had. The bureaucratic approach foiled any chance at crime prevention. The CompStat data is recent; it provides futuristic trends and enables commanders to prevent criminal activity.
Effective Tactics
Police Commanders relied on citizens for intelligence and resorted to reactionary techniques to combat crime. However, CompStat changed all of that by sharing the latest information on criminal activity. Deployment of patrol units in strategic points prevented criminal activity drastically. The stop-question-frisk initiative was a direct resultant of CompStat. This activity dramatically reduced mugging and drug related violence in crime prone neighborhoods.
Rapid Deployment
Crime prevention depends on the criminal’s perception of risk involved. For instance, a purse-snatcher will choose a neighborhood with low lighting, narrow alleys, and a high concentration of senior citizens. These conditions are suitable for evading capture after snatching the purse. The criminal will however, not commit the crime if there is a possibility of bicycle cops or motorcycle cops appearing in the narrow alleys within moments of committing the crime. CompStat allowed police commanders to station officers strategically in neighborhoods to tackle specific criminal activity. In addition, the units could deploy promptly the moment there is a disturbance of the peace.
Persistent follow up and assessment
All police initiatives require follow up and the approach for CompStat is no different. The NYPD Commanders meet every week to compare data on criminal activity with the Police Commissioner. There is discussion of strategy and decide on the future course of action. This type of follow up enables police to keep criminal activity in check using CompStat inputs (Godown, 2009).
COMPSTAT Operations
There are four routine operations that govern effective CompStat operations.
Weekly Crime Reporting
Data input is what powers any computer analysis system and the CompStat system is not immune to this. The NYPD CompStat Unit requires police officers to record all criminal activity from traffic tickets to homicides into their individual user interfaces. The CompStat Unit compiles this data according to the type of crime, neighborhood, historic data comparison, and types of strategies used. This analysis will allow police commanders to observe any emerging trends in criminal behavior, crime displacement, and effectiveness of strategies. The NYPD CompStat report is available on the NYPD website for public access. The report released at the end of each CompStat meeting is a condensed version of the original analysis (Police Executive Research Forum, 2013).
Responsibility
The Weekly CompStat meetings among police commanders is a strategic initiative that not only exerts responsibility of each participating commander, it is also a forum for the police leadership to exchange ideas. Instead of waiting for a convention or training seminar, the police commanders can share best practices to prevent criminal activity and help each other (Police Executive Research Forum, 2013).
Commander Profile Reports
The CompStat system generates reports pertaining to the police commanders on performance management. The system analyses the qualifications of each commander along with the performance parameters of the police personnel deputed to them. This analysis provides information on the strengths and flaws of every commander. This information used for training or restructuring purposes will help the police to organize themselves optimally. For example, Commander A might have excellent strategies for helping police officers to cope with stress and lack knowledge on how to combat street gangs. This data allows the Police leadership to realign or train the commander in the required skills (Police Executive Research Forum, 2013).
Crime Strategy Meetings
The Crime strategy meetings take place twice in a week to discuss performance and chalk out new strategies. These meetings comprise of a wide range of participants including City Officials, District Attorneys, Police Commanders (from all divisions including Internal Affairs), and Campus patrol. The Police Commissioner and the executive board will probe for information pertaining to criminal activity and strategies. The Mayor is not an active participant of these meetings customarily and only views a report the following morning (Police Executive Research Forum, 2013).
Recent controversies
Computer analyses are susceptible to data manipulation. They react to the data fed into their database and do not have the capability to discern fraudulent inputs. CompStat, although used by police officers, faces the same risk. In recent years, disturbing news stories have revealed the vulnerability of this system and over dependence on crime predicting software.
NYPD discrepancies
An academic study among retired NYPD police commanders in 2009 revealed that it was a common practice to declassify crimes. For example, a police officer enters an assault with a weapon case as “assault” and homicide as manslaughter. While the case will still exist on records, it will not have the same impact on CompStat. Almost twenty former commanders admitted to altering CompStat data to avoid pressure from the police executive board (Eterno and Silverman, 2010).
LAPD data manipulation
The LAPD incident turned out to be more serious than the NYPD since the data manipulation occurred for a longer duration. This malpractice by the LAPD discredits the force from any reduction in criminal activity. In addition, there are instances where innocent citizens faced charges to boost the number of cases by certain police precincts (The Times Editorial Board, 2014).
Recommendations
Police budgets often interfere with planning of resources and initiatives. While CompStat reports are useful for crime prevention, they are not tools for determining police budgets. City officials should stop linking the crime rate to the police budget. Moreover, police budgets should not face cuts irrespective of the quality of performance. This will ensure that data on CompStat remains unaltered. Police commanders have additional responsibilities apart from fighting crime. They shoulder the organizational responsibilities of the police department. Any deficient performance in crime fighting should only result in training initiatives and not disciplinary action unless there is evidence of malpractice or corruption. Software programs today are capable of discerning specific behavior. Hence, CompStat should incorporate artificial intelligence to spot deficient data. In addition, CompStat must verify data against court records to authenticate the inputs from police officers.
References
Destefano A. M. (2014). NYC's CompStat crime-tracking system turns 20. Retrieved from: http://www.newsday.com/news/new-york/nyc-s-compstat-crime-tracking-system-turns-20-1.9370820
Eterno, J., and Silverman, E. (2010). The trouble with Compstat: Pressure on NYPD commanders endangered the integrity of crime stats. Retrieved from: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/trouble-compstat-pressure-nypd-commanders-endangered-integrity-crime-stats-article-1.197215
Godown, J. (2009). The CompStat Process: Four Principles for Managing Crime Reduction. Retrieved from: http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&article_id=1859&issue_id=82009
Police Executive Research Forum Staff (2013). Compstat: its origins, evolution, and future in law enforcement agencies. Retrieved from: http://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Free_Online_Documents/Compstat/compstat%20-%20its%20origins%20evolution%20and%20future%20in%20law%20enforcement%20agencies%202013.pdf
The Times Editorial Board Staff (2014). LAPD's faulty crime data. Retrieved from: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-0812-crime-statistics-20140812-story.html
