Case Studies of 19 School Resource Officer (SRO) Programs

• NCJ Number: 209271
• Author(s): Peter Finn; Jack McDevitt; William Lassiter; Michael Shively; Tom Rich
• Date Published: February 2005
• Length: 389 pages
• Grant Number(s): 2000-IJ-CX-K002
• Agencies: NIJ-Sponsored
• Publication Type: Program/Project Description

Annotation

This federally supported report provides an overview and assessment of 19 School Resource Officer (SRO) Programs across the United States ranging from large to small and established to new SRO programs and is a resource tool for those agencies and organizations considering the implementation of a SRO Program.

Abstract

School Resource Officers (SRO's) are seen as a means of improving school safety and improving relations between police officers and youth. There has been a growing interest across the country in placing law enforcement officers in schools. To this end, a national assessment of School Resource Officer (SRO) Programs, supported by the U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) was conducted. This national assessment identifies what program models have been implemented, how the programs have been implemented, and what lessons they may have for future programs. Comprehensive information is presented on 19 SRO programs which forms the basis of this case study report. The programs were selected through a screening process designed to include 4 different types of programs in terms of size (under or over 100 sworn officers and age (those in existence since at least 1995 for established programs) and include: (1) large established programs (5); (2) large new programs (4); (3) small established programs (5); and (4) small new programs (5). The large programs are distributed across the country, however, the five small established programs are all located in North Carolina and the five small new programs are all located in Kentucky. For each SRO program, comprehensive information is provided on program description, site location, program history-origin, budget, planning and implementation, and program coordination, recruitment, training, and turnover of School Resource Officers, program activities, program monitoring and evaluation, and community support. In addition, comparisons are presented among the five small established programs, as well as comparisons among the five small new programs. The comparisons review significant similarities and differences among the programs, specifically in the areas of program planning and implementation, program activities, and monitoring and evaluation. Tables