NCJ Number
26163
Date Published
1974
Length
40 pages
Annotation
A NARRATIVE AND STATISTICAL REPORT OF THIS STUDY WHICH COMPARED THE TEAM POLICING, DECENTRALIZED DISTRICT, AND CENTRALIZED METHODS OF INVESTIGATION, USING DEPARTMENTAL STATISTICS AND INTERVIEWS OF OFFICERS AS DATA SOURCES.
Abstract
IN THE FIRST DISTRICT, OFFICERS WITH INVESTIGATIVE SKILLS WERE ASSIGNED TO EACH SECTOR 'TEAM'. THE DECENTRALIZED METHOD INVOLVED THE ASSIGNMENT OF OFFICERS WITH INVESTIGATIVE SKILLS TO A DISTRICT, IN WHICH THEY OPERATED AS A SPECIALIZED UNIT. IN THIS SYSTEM, THE INVESTIGATIVE FUNCTION WAS ORGANIZED BY THE NATURE OF THE CRIME. THE CENTRALIZED METHOD CONSISTED OF SPECIALIZED SUB-UNITS ASSIGNED TO A CENTRAL SECTION. STATISTICS ON CLEARANCES, REPORTED CRIMES, OFFICER'S REPORTED EFFECTIVENESS, AND ARRESTED RATES ARE INCLUDED. ALSO REPORTED ARE THE RESULTS OF INTERVIEWS WITH 47 OFFICERS. THE RESULTS SHOWED THAT THE TEAM POLICING MODEL PRODUCED THE BEST OVERALL LEVEL OF EFFECTIVENESS. HOWEVER, WHEN ONLY INVESTIGATE FUNCTIONS ARE CONSIDERED, THE DECENTRALIZED MODEL SHOWED THE HIGHEST CLEARANCE RATE FOR CASES REQUIRING INVESTIGATIVE FOLLOW-UP. THE IDEAL INVESTIGATIVE MODEL, AS PICTURED BY THE OFFICERS INTERVIEWED, WOULD INVOLVE A DISTRICT ASSIGNMENT FOR MOST INVESTIGATORS, WITH A TEAM-POLICING SET-UP FOR PATROL FUNCTIONS AND A CENTRAL COORDINATING AGENCY FOR HANDLING SPECIALIZED CASES. A CRITIQUE OF THE EXPERIMENT AND NUMEROUS DATA CHARTS ARE INCLUDED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)