ClickCease

Category: Community Engagement

Adopting an Early Intervention System: A Blueprint for Success

Posted on by Nicholas Frankel

EIS Blueprint for Success

An Early Intervention System (EIS) can be a crucial asset for law enforcement agencies interested in managing their risk, in part by identifying officers who need assistance or support. The right system should monitor officer behavior and performance data to identify potential issues early, enabling focused interventions to minimize misconduct. However, the successful adoption of an EIS involves nuanced considerations in change management, data utilization, stakeholder engagement, implementation, and outcome measurement. This blueprint outlines essential factors in each area and serves as a roadmap for those agencies considering an EIS for optimizing officer performance.

Managing Change with Data

Introducing an EIS to an agency constitutes a significant cultural and technological shift that requires meticulous planning. According to an IACP policy document published in May 2020, agencies should consider several essential factors before moving forward with an EIS, such as:

  • The time commitment to administer the program
  • Deciding which agency-specific data points are critical for tracking and identifying performance trends
  • Establishing how that data will be collected, tracked, and used
  • Establishing policy for mapping potential actionable next steps once that data is extrapolated
  • Having alignment on who will be managing the execution and oversight of those next steps

Change management within any organization is never a light undertaking; it requires a strong commitment to achieve the objective at hand. For law enforcement agencies adopting an EIS it can mean the difference between helping struggling officers get back on track to become more productive in a non-punitive way — versus missing the opportunity to give them the incremental attention they need.

Using Data Effectively

The effectiveness of an EIS hinges on the quality of its data. Best practices for data application are:

  • Indicator selection: Prioritize in-depth data points that correlate closely with risk, such as arrest history, use of force incidents, internal affairs complaints, and missed court appearances. As stated in PERF’s 2015 article, Managing the Risks of Officer Misconduct and Failure through Early Intervention Systems: “Careful selection of data indicators based on those most predictive of risk is crucial for an EIS to flag situations accurately.”
  • Context analysis: Understanding the situations surrounding data points is critical for distinguishing meaningful trends — driven by complex, nuanced factors, such as adverse incidents, sequence of events, patterns of behavior and peer comparisons.
  • Ongoing indicator updates: Regular evaluations can guide adjustments for iterative learning, so that your EIS gets smarter and more efficient over time.
  • Data system integration: an EIS should be built on a modern suite of software with structured and accessible data — so that it’s easily integrated with incident data-capture systems, including computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems and record management systems (RMS) — as well as any existing personnel management systems in place, for a holistic ‘data in’ view that connects disparate information.

Measuring Outcomes

Quantifiable metrics are vital for realizing the impact of an EIS. Best-practice performance indicators include:

  • A predictive model that identifies patterns of problematic behavior and patterns of exceptional conduct
  • Understanding context of activity to distinguish between Quality and Quantity of activity to eliminate excessive flags and investigations
  • Account for detailed officer activity relative to immediate peer groups to determine risk levels
  • Provide explainable, actionable alerts with non-punitive, non-disciplinary interventions
  • Transform risk management by significantly reducing exposure to rising liability costs

By consistently tracking such metrics, police departments can validate the advantages of an EIS for officers, departments as a whole, as well as the communities they serve.

Grounded in Research

It is critical that any data analysis is informed by research focused on utilizing performance data of officers so that the EIS can identify officers needing incremental support. First Sign® Early Intervention is the only EIS that uses national research combined with the patterns of data generated within an individual agency over several years to identify those law enforcement personnel with the greatest need for intervention.

Data scientists, who are experts in the field, developed First Sign based on a holistic view of available information that is indicative of risk. Drawing from multiple indicator categories, the First Sign system calculates overall activity and behavior, as well as trends compared to peer groups based on rank, nature of assignment, geography, and deployment time.

Because of this expertise, First Sign is a proven, predictive, and preventative system unlike any other to identify officers at risk for problematic behavior:

  • First Sign has seen an average model precision of 85%. For comparison, traditional early warning systems have a model precision of roughly 30%.
  • With a great degree of confidence, First Sign can identify an average of 5% of officers at risk within an agency.
  • Additionally, that 5% is responsible for 66% of injuries (both officer and citizens) and disproportionate use of force incidents.

Assessing Levels of Risk and Courses of Action

The effectiveness of any EIS largely depends on a department’s ability to manage a systematic set of actions to assist officers displaying at-risk behaviors. Upon identifying such behavior, it is advisable for agencies to have a process for assessing the officer’s level of risk. Subsequently, a specific, monitored plan that is non-punitive and non-disciplinary should be developed and implemented to provide the officer with the necessary support.

To facilitate this crucial phase, Benchmark offers a platform known as C.A.R.E. (Case Action Response Engine®). This course-of-action platform aids law enforcement agencies in managing officers identified as at-risk with First Sign, by featuring research-based case management modules. These modules are tailored for officer-specific interventions and include benchmarks for best practices at various levels of intervention. The goal of C.A.R.E. is to assist departments in ensuring that no officers displaying at-risk behavior go unattended.

A Skilled Implementation Team is Key

Getting to go-live in order to harness the full power of an EIS requires a seasoned implementation team — preferably one comprised of people who have either served in government roles or have substantial work experience serving complex municipal and government customers specifically. Certainly, all team members should have deep experience deploying configurable off-the-shelf software to customers.

Ideally, you should anticipate ongoing investment and research that constantly increases functionality, provides guidance on best practices, and allows access to research on personnel development.

Finally, the team should consist of a strategic mix of implementers, data scientists, and engineers to ensure an effective and efficient implementation.

The Path Forward: Navigating the Road to Early Intervention Success

Adopting an effective early intervention system requires a collective dedication to change, while the rewards to agencies can be substantial — from improved officer performance to enhanced community relations.

If your department is considering implementing an EIS — or you believe you can do better than your current system, contact Benchmark Analytics to speak with a solutions expert about First Sign® Early Intervention System. As the only data-driven, research-based EIS available today, First Sign empowers law enforcement agencies to harness their data for exceptional personnel management.

 

Early Alerts, Timely Action: The Impact of a Research-Based EIS

Posted on by Nicholas Frankel

In an ever-evolving society, the roles and expectations placed on law enforcement officers – including how they engage and interact with the communities they serve – are continually changing. The same is true for how they are managed and supported for optimal on-the-job performance. As part of that infrastructure, the right early intervention system can become an indispensable tool for agency leaders aiming to discern and act on any potentially problematic patterns in officer behavior.

Such a system would be designed to identify and address these patterns before they develop into major incidents, ensuring the public’s safety and the officer’s well-being. Yet, the thoughtful implementation of a successful EIS requires careful consideration, adept change management, and a comprehensive understanding of an agency’s culture.

This summer, Benchmark Analytics presented the second installation of their Data Dialogue webinar series, led by CEO Ron Huberman, titled “Navigating EIS Alerts: Mastering the Right Approach for Your Agency.” Among the panel of participants were Benchmark’s Chief Research Officer, Nick Montgomery, Vice President of Data Science, Dr. Ugochi Jones, and Director of Data and Enterprise Analytics, Riley Maloney.

Four Approaches to EIS Alerts

Riley Maloney kicked off the discussion by outlining the four prevalent strategies that agencies employ in response to EIS alerts, signaling that an officer might need intervention. These strategies included:

  1. Centralized: A chosen group of department leaders addresses each alert. Although efficient, this method can seem detached in larger agencies.
  2. Centralized Review: Here, a dedicated risk management team supervises all alerts. While this approach leverages specialized knowledge, it can inadvertently create a divide between the unit and the broader group of officers, possibly engendering an “us vs. them” attitude.
  3. Decentralized: Here, front-line supervisors are responsible for responding to their officers’ alerts. While fostering close bonds, this might result in inconsistencies due to diverse supervisory styles.
  4. Capacity Building: This is a combined effort where the risk management team collaborates with supervisors to provide training and expertise in deciphering alerts. It promises consistency and local responsibility, connecting various stakeholders and fostering trust.

Riley observed that the efficacy of each model is contingent on the agency’s internal intervention mechanisms. More and more agencies are turning to Benchmark – with its First Sign® Early Intervention and C.A.R.E. platforms – and as a result, these agencies can discern the most fitting approach for their organizational design.

“In each of these systems, it’s vital to remember that an early intervention system’s strength lies in the interventions allocated in response to an alert. If an alert arises but is not acted upon, it’s futile. Benchmark dedicates significant time collaborating with agencies during the rollout phase to identify which of the four methods, or perhaps a new one, is most suited for their specific context. The aim is to determine how an agency can respond most effectively to an EIS alert.”

The Importance of Documentation

Often, in decentralized models, sergeants – due to their close ties with officers – are the first responders to EIS alerts. Yet, some supervisors might hesitate in documenting interventions, choosing instead to address matters informally. Despite good intentions, more documentation is needed to ascertain the efficacy of these interventions.

The panel acknowledged the importance of maintaining productive relationships with officers. However, they also emphasized that thorough documentation is indispensable for gauging success.

Challenges and Solutions in EIS Implementation

The discussion evolved toward potential obstacles in implementing an early intervention system. For instance, in larger agencies, supervising officers may become disconnected from frontline officers, complicating meaningful interventions. Additionally, some supervisors might need more training to formally document interventions due to existing cultural norms within the agency or lack of training.

Benchmark’s Chief Research Officer Nick Montgomery championed the capacity-building model, underscoring its balance between immediate alert responses and aiding supervisors in interpreting data and devising meaningful interventions.

“In any department, promotions are inevitable. Officers ascend to the rank of sergeants, and sergeants get promoted to lieutenants, among other shifts. There will be departures and new inductions, signifying change. This capacity-building method isn’t just about managing this flux. It’s centered on empowering individuals with the requisite skills to flourish in this dynamic setting. This isn’t confined to logistical details but extends to enhancing communication with officers, interpreting data accurately, and formulating robust strategies. Ultimately, it prepares the department for sustained improvement.”

Dr. Ugochi Jones delved into the shortcomings of casual interventions and emphasized the need for careful documentation. “In my discussions with supervisors, many who aren’t deeply engaged with the system (First Sign) still favor informal intervention. While they value effective communication when addressing potential issues among officers, they feel documentation makes it overly formal. We must consider this sentiment in our approach.”

Dr. Jones stressed the importance of constructive, data-driven exchanges with officers and the imperative to shift the perception and reality of interventions as a punitive measure to a supportive tool for officers. Meanwhile, Riley Maloney advocated for the inclusion of diverse stakeholders when shaping EIS policies, positing that this broad-based approach bolsters system trust.

The Path Forward

Effective communication and supervisory advancements are crucial. Benchmark’s First Sign is the only peer-to-peer, research-backed early intervention system — and has the potential to become a force multiplier for positive organizational transformation, with its implementation varying from agency to agency. The consensus among the panel was clear: for agencies with over a hundred officers, the capacity-building approach appears to be the most fitting. Meanwhile, smaller agencies benefit from a centralized or centralized review approach. However, the panel emphasized that agencies should not choose an approach based solely on size.

No single method can achieve widespread organizational change. Successful implementation requires a comprehensive strategy, strong stakeholder engagement, and the careful integration of technology.

 

Officer Management in the Digital Age: The Impact of Predictive Early Intervention Systems

Posted on by Nicholas Frankel

predictive early intervention systems

An early intervention system (EIS) can be an instrumental tool for law enforcement agencies looking to track and address problematic patterns in officer behavior. The ideal EIS should be proactive in nature by enabling leadership to identify off-track behavior before it becomes a real problem — and should work seamlessly within the agency’s unique organizational needs and culture. Conversely, an EIS should also be able to identify positive patterns of behavior in officers exhibiting exemplary performance.

This spring, Benchmark Analytics conducted a webinar delving deep into this subject as part of our ongoing Data Dialogue series. Panelists included Ron Huberman, CEO of Benchmark Analytics and Nick Montgomery, Chief Research Officer at Benchmark. The dialogue centered around four principal areas concerning EIS: its evolution, data significance, its departmental adaptation, and perceptions towards its daily use by agencies and officers.

Evolution of Early Intervention Systems

Huberman, who rose through the ranks of the Chicago Police Department to serve as Assistant Deputy Superintendent, shed light on the progression of EIS within police departments — tracing its origins from the 1970s up to the recent advancements of today. Initially, departments utilized rudimentary “trigger-based” systems. However, these systems often produced “false positives” and “false negatives.”

As Huberman explained, “The University of Chicago published a lot of compelling research that showed trigger-based systems typically had a 70% false positive problem, which means 70% of the time it was flagging officers that were doing their job as they should. Furthermore, they had about a 40% false negative problem, meaning they were actually missing officers who were really struggling out there.”

While policing continued to evolve around more data-centric solutions, early intervention systems failed to keep up — until the introduction of First Sign® by Benchmark. First Sign offers a research-driven early intervention system that utilizes various data sources, including arrest records and use-of-force reports, with machine learning to identify predictive patterns. The digital transformation of departmental records and advanced algorithms provide a level of accuracy that trigger-based systems lacked at the time and still do to this day.

The Power of Integrated Datasets

Benchmark’s Chief Research Officer Nick Montgomery emphasized the power of converging various departmental datasets. An amalgamation of data, including over twenty event markers, can lead to over ninety predictive variables for each officer. This holistic approach greatly enhances the understanding of officer behavior compared to analyzing singular incidents. As he so powerfully stated, “…a research-based early warning system takes all of the data inside a police department looking back over five, ten, fifteen years and uses those various patterns of behavior to create a system that is far more predictive and can accurately identify officers likely to have an adverse event based on past events.”

Proactive Prevention of Harm

Early intervention systems can offer valuable insights by identifying officers exhibiting at-risk behavior, allowing for prompt intervention through training or counseling before problems escalate. Research conducted with the University of Chicago demonstrates that traditional EIS platforms using threshold-based triggers have a 70% fallacy rate for flagging at-risk officers. In contrast, First Sign boasts an 85% efficacy rate. Furthermore, our findings suggest that no more than 5% of officers contribute to over 60% of excessive force incidents.

Addressing the challenges with this specific group can significantly enhance community trust. Constructive, non-punitive supervision remains crucial for the efficacy of early intervention systems. In Huberman’s words, a modern research-based system like First Sign enables supervisors to say, “‘Hey, Officer Smith – I know you’re a good guy – and a good officer – but you were flagged in the system, so it’s important I intervene. Let’s talk about next steps to correct your at-risk behavior and how you’re engaging the public.'”

Signs of Impact

Preliminary data suggests that the implementation of an EIS can yield tangible results. Huberman shared data indicating a 50% reduction in the severity of force used by flagged officers post-supervisory intervention. Complaint rates against these officers also saw a significant decrease. Importantly, essential enforcement activities remain largely unaffected. And how do we know this? Benchmark has the world’s largest database on officer performance — and we’ve validated all predictive analytics through a standardized national model developed in partnership with the University of Chicago.

Embracing Modernization: The Future of Policing

In today’s rapidly evolving world, modernization touches every corner of our lives, from how we communicate to how we conduct business. Similarly, the realm of law enforcement isn’t exempt from this wave of change. The adoption of research-based methodologies combined with technological innovation reflects the evolution of policing in line with modern trends.

Historically, police reform efforts have been broad and overarching, often applying wide-reaching solutions like general de-escalation training for entire forces. But as we’ve seen, these blanket approaches might not always address the nuances and individual needs of officers. In many cases, the emphasis is shifting to more tailored tactics and tools, most likely powered by data science and analytics.

By harnessing the capabilities of modern data science, First Sign Early Intervention allows for a more focused course of action, directly targeting officers who genuinely need support. As a result, law enforcement stands at a pivotal moment where trust can be fostered within the communities they serve, internal personnel practices improved, and genuine change affected.

As Ron Huberman eloquently summarized, “There’s a tremendous opportunity before all of us in this profession – who view it as a noble calling and care deeply about policing – to say, ‘Let’s make a difference. Let’s turn this corner now because we have the tools to do so.’ I truly believe this is the moment we’re at.”

Benchmark Analytics® Invited to the White House for Police Accountability Summit

Posted on by Nicholas Frankel

Benchmark Analytics was invited to participate in a roundtable discussion on March 15, 2023, hosted by the White House and the Office of Science and Technology Policy. The topic of conversation was President Biden’s Executive Order from May 2022 on Advancing Effective, Accountable Policing and Criminal Justice Practices to Enhance Public Trust and Public Safety.  Specifically, the gathered team was seeking to assess the current state of data collection, use, and transparency practices in law enforcement agencies across the country.

Denice Ross, the U.S. Chief Data Scientist, opened the session by laying out the key principles of accountable and equitable data, including:

  • Ability to Disaggregate
    Basically, how can you slice and dice data? Can you metaphorically pick up the information, reposition it and look at it from another angle? All while balancing data privacy and transparency, of course.
  • Maximum Utilization
    There is a tremendous amount of underutilized data that exists in the world today. How can we leverage information already being captured to gain new insights?
  • Analytic Capacity
    Is there the ability to dig into the data? That includes data quality, systems/tools for analysis, and the human capital/skill to understand the data and make it actionable.
  • Open and Shared
    Successful data initiatives should be available through diverse partnerships for various perspectives on content, analyses, and outcomes.
  • Accountable and Transparent
    Last, and far from least, the data has to be accountable and transparent. Full stop, period.

From there, the discussion transitioned to law enforcement data transparency and collection. It was a vibrant group dialogue echoing a collective and clear passion for service. The conversation took us through several interesting challenges around data collection. As one example, an agency might have multiple different sets of reporting standards for the exact same data points. Stated differently, use-of-force data reported to the FBI is, in many cases, dramatically different than use-of-force data required by state legislation — which can also be dramatically different from data required by settlement agreements (consent decrees) or civilian oversight. Today, the federal government collects the following data:

  • NIBRS
    • Incidents (arrests)
    • Hate/bias crimes
  • Use of force
  • Law enforcement demographics
  • Law enforcement/workforce characteristics
  • Police-Public Contact Survey
  • National Crime Victimization Survey

This is a good start – but this list lacks so many key elements. Only capturing whether a force incident occurred (or did not occur) misses valuable scenario context:

  • What was the force encountered?
  • Were there any attempts at de-escalation?
  • How did proportionality of force play into the situation?
  • What is the officer’s peer group and the expected force utilization patterns for that peer group?
  • Moreover, how do OTHER parts of that officer’s behavior pattern impact the force utilization and proportionality on any given day?

These are the meaty questions that need to be answered to build truly equitable data and enhance public trust.

Not surprisingly, the federal government is looking to augment current data collection with the following:

  • De-escalation incidents
  • Patrol locations
  • Complaints
  • Officer training
  • Community engagement
  • Vehicle pursuit
  • Other

These data points help tell the full story of an incident and an entire pattern of behavior. Still, software platforms cannot be unduly burdensome. Law enforcement officers are amazing civil servants tasked with protecting and guarding communities, not with building complex data schemas and reports. As a partner and software provider, we are constantly asking ourselves questions – how can we improve design and deployment of data collection tools to make life easier for the officer on the street while still maximizing the value of the resulting data? How can we provide law enforcement agencies with collaboration and education on best practices to simplify data collection and prioritize accountability and transparency?

Ultimately, everyone agreed that data transparency is the key to trust. With the power of analytic platforms, law enforcement agencies can harness the power of data to help tell a full and accurate story of officer behavior.

This session was part of a series of roundtables; OSTP also met with community members, academia, law enforcement agencies, and various other key stakeholders. Ultimately, all their learnings will feed a final report on Equitable Data due to President Biden on May 25. If that date is not immediately familiar to you – it’s the third anniversary of George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis. That significance isn’t lost on the Working Group; they understand the importance of this work and the unique role data plays in identifying, predicting, and ultimately preventing negative incidents.

Only through equitable and actionable data will we begin to bridge the divide and enhance public trust in public safety.

Public Opinion and Policing

Posted on by Nicholas Frankel

Research organizations like the Pew Research Center, Gallup, and the University of Chicago’s NORC public opinion survey have been measuring public perception of policing for, in some cases, more than 40 years. This data gives social scientists, policymakers, and law enforcement leaders valuable insights into how the public feels about policing and their expectations.

These insights are especially valuable now as public confidence in the institution of policing approaches record lows. However, across many research studies, there is little evidence to suggest a majority of Americans hold opinions that are explicitly anti-police. Instead, Americans tend to support policies and initiatives that have been shown to improve policing outcomes in their communities.

What factors can influence the public’s perception of police?

Understanding the factors influencing public opinion is fundamental to crafting policies and strategies to boost public trust in policing. In decades of longitudinal study, academics and researchers have sought to understand the multitudes of experiential and demographic factors that can shed light on a person’s thoughts on policing. As in all research, it is essential to note that correlation is not causation and that establishing a conclusive link between factors is exceptionally difficult. These are a few of the primary factors that influence the public’s thoughts on policing:

  • Trust is declining in all public institutions

Over the last ten years, there has been softening of public trust in most public institutions. The raw data from Gallup presents a mixed bag, with political leaders and governing bodies experiencing some of the most dramatic fluctuations in public opinion. Based on this data, one can note dips in confidence that correspond with especially high-profile incidents of misconduct – events that tend to receive an exceptional amount of media coverage.

  • Fault lines in public perception

Survey after survey indicates that public opinion of policing tends to be reflected along demographic lines. For example, older Americans tend to have a more favorable view of policing policies and outcomes than their younger counterparts. Stated political party affiliation also is a strong, but far from guaranteed, predictor of a respondent’s views on law enforcement.

Research suggests that what a lot of these demographic fault lines in public opinion come down to are rooted in people’s first-hand experience with police. An AP-NORC poll published in 2021 explored this and showed that survey participants’ characterization of their interactions with police seems to influence their overall perception of policing. Perceptions of bias, the severity of the misconduct, and unfair treatment contribute to a lower opinion.

  • Areas of agreement

However, although there may be demographic divergence in the overall opinion of policing, a great deal of nuance makes it difficult to make broad assumptions based on any one demographic indicator. There are even questions related to policing in which wide swaths of the population generally agree.

One such question involves funding priorities for law enforcement. The Pew Research Center found that from mid-2020 to late 2021, a growing share of those asked – across all demographic categories in the survey  – stated a preference for increasing police funding. In the same timeframe, survey respondents also found that even groups with mixed opinions on police were “much less likely than in 2020 to prefer decreased spending on police in their area”.

A Rebound in Public Opinion?

Though recent trends in public opinion concerning policing are troubling to law enforcement leaders, there are reasons for measured optimism. While the public opinion of policing undeniably experienced a decline in 2020, there are signs a rebound is underway.

Though there is no one conclusive reason researchers can point to, recent survey data from Gallup showed an 8% increase in confidence in police among Black respondents. Data from the same survey showed confidence holding steady among White and Hispanic respondents. The survey concludes that it is too early to assess precisely why this is the case. However, it is reasonable to believe that a combination of the passage of time since widely reported misconduct incidents – combined with the success of reform efforts – are likely contributing factors.

Generally, when asked their opinion on policing, most people prefer the strategies and initiatives shown to produce better outcomes for law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. A CBS News survey from August 2022 shows that the public ranks “more funding for police” as the fourth most effective strategy for preventing violent crime, below “more [community] mental health services” and “stricter sentences for violent offenders.” Additionally, the same survey showed that the notion of “defunding police” remains broadly unpopular

Why This Matters

The building blocks of modern policing stress the importance of the community’s relationship with the police – going back some 200 years to the nine principles of policing explained by Sir Robert Peel. “Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police.” Furthermore, it has been shown that community oriented-policing is instrumental in improving the public’s attitude towards police.

Public opinion research that asks questions about law enforcement is, at its most basic, a means of understanding what the public wants out of policing – transparency and accountability. It is vital to crafting policies and strategies that advance policing while strengthening community relationships.

The mission and products of Benchmark Analytics are grounded in extensive, evidence-based research findings. By combining these findings with the latest developments in data science, Benchmark is committed to improving the effectiveness and transparency of law enforcement with our one-of-a-kind officer intervention solution, First Sign® Early Intervention, and holistic personnel management with Benchmark Management System®.

How Reform Efforts are Changing Law Enforcement Training

Posted on by Nicholas Frankel

The more than 2,000 new reform measures that have passed through state legislatures in the last 12 months have created new demands on officers and their leaders. Paired with this movement towards reform is ever-evolving research into the nature and practice of policing. A common theme in both the reform legislation and research is the need to expand and enhance the scope of law enforcement officers’ duties and capabilities – which requires that officers develop skillsets related to recognizing and responding to mental illness, de-escalating conflict, engendering good community relations, and so much more. Just as these officer responsibilities grow, training must evolve with it to suit changing community needs.

In our previous article, we looked at new training methodologies being implemented to respond to these needs. In this article, we will look at how the more established training framework is growing to meet the challenge of new policing reforms. It is important to note while there are many general similarities, training methods and requirements can vary widely from agency to agency and state to state.

Academy

For many (but not all) officers, training begins at the academy. Traditionally these are often bootcamp-style basic training courses not only meant to impart critical skills, but also to enculturate recruits to concepts like chain of command, rank, and an overall organizational style of discipline. Academy training is seen by many to be the first chance departments have to impart a lasting sense of culture and expectation on new recruits that will, ideally, guide them throughout their careers. New officer training costs can be as high as $200,000 so it is critical that initial training be as effective as possible.

For at least the last twenty years and, more recently in response to reform measures, some departments are rethinking the emphasis on the use of bootcamp-style training in their academies.  A recent paper published in Police Chief Magazine suggests that transitioning a portion of the instruction to a more a professionalized “adult-learning” model is worth considering for departments. Some elements of the more intense and traditional style of training are worthwhile and demonstrably effective, such as scenarios designed to induce stress in decision-making, and pushing recruits to the edge of physical limits. Other tactics, like instructors inducing via more aggressive tactics are seen as less effective as they model behavior and a relationship to power that is increasingly seen as counterproductive to the aims of reform measures and good community relations.

Research is providing new evidence as to the effectiveness of a modern style of academy training though. There is also survey data that may confirm that this evidence-based approach is also increasingly aligned with officers’ beliefs about their jobs. According to a 2017 Pew Research Center report, 65% of officers surveyed believe that officers should “show respect, concern, and fairness when they deal with the public”. Training that emphasizes the value of good community relations, especially in initial academy training, is likely to be a key factor in any successful reform effort.

In-Service Training

In-service education is also being thought of in a new light in this era of reform. Much like other elements of police training, reform and a stronger desire for evidence-based training methods is propelling these changes forward. The same Pew Research Center study mentioned above shows that, based on officer responses, that in-service training has typically dealt with tactical or procedural matters – firearms training and certification, nonlethal restraint methods, and other similar training. However, this same study also shows that training designed to expand awareness of mental illness, bias, and general community relations rank just behind these more tactical types of training.

law enforcement training police car

Requirements for new types of training designed to enhance awareness of such issues is a common element of many of the reform measures passed in the previous year. Some of these new requirements are highly targeted in their scope, such as HB162 in Utah which calls specifically for crisis intervention and de-escalation training related to the treatment of subjects experiencing a mental health crisis. Minnesota passed one of the more comprehensive packages of reform legislation that, among many other things, mandates new training to help officers in areas like recognizing individuals with autism and mental health needs. Others, like executive order 2020-11 in New Hampshire call for the establishment of a committee made up of policymakers and law enforcement officials charged with delivering new training recommendations.

Higher-Education

The efficacy of higher education in law enforcement training is something that is fairly well-understood in both the academic and agency leadership worlds. It has been shown that officers with higher educational attainment experience fewer sustained misconduct complaints and are less likely to be involved in use-of-force incidents. A higher level of educational experience often positions an officer on a leadership track within their agency. As in many other aspects of law enforcement, new methods of data analysis are complimenting leadership selection processes that were once driven largely by intuition. Aspects like interaction data, job performance, and education level figure prominently in these new methods of analysis that can determine an officer’s advancement.

The Power of Data Management

 Benchmark Analytics is a leader in research-based early intervention and police force management software systems. As reform measures are driving changes to the way training is conceptualized and executed, agencies are relying on comprehensive solutions that manage and make sense of the data they’re collecting. The Benchmark Management System (BMS) provides leaders a comprehensive view of their agencies incorporating training, community engagement, and educational data. These data points – when collected along with many others – create a holistic view of the performance of both individual officers and their agencies.

Using some of the same data streams, First Sign® Early Intervention system (EIS) goes beyond the limitations of a threshold or trigger-based EIS and is, instead, preventative in its design. Using a research-based approach to analyze officer interaction data, First Sign® is designed to spot off-track behavior early on. This empowers agency leaders to guide an officer towards appropriate in-service training or make other educational opportunities available to them to help get them back on track.

Reform Efforts and Law Enforcement Training

Reform measures coupled with new research are driving much of the rapid change officers and agencies are seeing in the scope of their responsibilities. With these changes in approach to policing as a whole comes a change to the systems and methodologies agencies use to train officers. No longer is relying on traditional concepts and tactics alone adequate to train officers for the ways in which they will serve their communities now and in the future. New data and research-driven approaches are placing an increased emphasis on law enforcement training that promotes a culture of respect and fairness, especially when dealing with the public, but also within departments themselves.

New Research-Based Methods in Law Enforcement Training

Posted on by Nicholas Frankel

Though new tools and tech have continually changed policing there is one tool that has experienced few fundamental changes over the years: the human mind. Law enforcement officers practice their profession in some of the most complex working conditions imaginable. While the value of new, physical tools used by officers is hard to dispute, it is new research into the function of the mind in these demanding working conditions that is producing new thinking in the world of law enforcement. Relatively recent breakthroughs in neuroscience and in the social sciences are contributing to a new understanding of how law enforcement officers use their social skills, emotional intelligence, and empathy to better do their jobs. In this article, we’ll look at a few of the specific ways in which this new understanding is changing law enforcement training.

Research-Based Police Training

There is a long-standing practice in policing of incorporating the latest in philosophy, real-world experience, and social-science research into law enforcement training curriculums. This goes back to the foundation of modern policing in which new ideas and observations around industrialism and urbanism were, in turn, used as arguments for a professionalized approach to law enforcement. Moving into the 20th century, discourse and research emanating from the worlds of psychology, sociology, and criminology led to a deeper examination of the very role of police in society. Out of this grew technologies like COMPSTAT and philosophies like community policing which, respectively, served to better understand the broader societal problems facing communities as well as proposing a remedy for these problems.

law enforcement social science training

As science, technology, and our understanding of human interaction increase at a pace never before seen, these new areas of study are being applied to policing. Over the last 30 years we’ve seen the field of neuroscience emerge as a new tool to better understand how officers process the world around them. Using some of the same techniques and tools high-performance athletes use to evaluate their capabilities, researchers are studying the interplay of cognition, muscle memory, perception, and much more and how they relate to officer performance. These breakthroughs coming from the study of human interaction and cognition are leading to innovations in law enforcement training that will improve the working environment for officers as well as community relations and perceptions of law enforcement.

Countering Implicit Bias

Common in reform dialog are calls for training to address implicit bias. The goal is to counter unconscious biases people hold about others that impact reactions and split-second decision-making. These biases exist throughout different countries and cultures, affecting everyone from doctors and police officers to more common professions like store clerks and restaurant servers. The challenge for educators and law enforcement trainers is finding meaningful ways to counter a bias that for most is, by definition, a product of the unconscious mind.

The prevailing notion is that by being aware of and understanding these biases, people can take the first steps in learning to work to improve reactions based upon them. While there is some research that suggests these trainings can be helpful, there are other studies that indicate these types of training, if executed poorly, can actually have the opposite effect. Research into the efficacy of implicit bias training is ongoing and it is generally agreed that further research is needed to fine-tune learning approaches for maximum benefit.

De-escalation

It has been stated that “with the possible exception of implicit bias training, no other training is more demanded by policymakers, police executives, […and] citizens than de-escalation training”. Often, these two types of training work hand-in-hand as a part of a broader effort for training-led reform efforts. De-escalation is also often seen as an outgrowth of the core values of community policing, another prominent and ongoing reform effort.

Training typically focuses on elements like verbal and non-verbal communication styles (body language, etc.), building rapport with subjects, and, when needed, physical intervention techniques that minimize the risk of harm. As a relatively new type of police training, there is still much to learn about the best practices and methods by which to instruct officers on de-escalation. A primary point of discussion in research as to its efficacy revolves around maintaining officer safety and that of the general public.

Interpersonal skills

 Not so much a defined training curriculum as it is a philosophy, there are many researchers in the field of policing that believe a more holistic and multi-disciplinary approach in policing starts with an emphasis on recruiting and training officers for interpersonal skills. Policing is an extremely complex profession that requires officers to be prepared for a huge variety of interactions at the beginning of each shift. A growing body of research is showing that officers benefit from employing emotional intelligence and empathy much in the same way their other technical training prepares them for the unpredictability of the job.

Much of the fundamental framework of this philosophy relies on research that shows empathy is critical for building public trust on both the micro and macro levels. Using empathy on the job can be a critical factor in many instances; for example, responding to a domestic violence call – where gaining the trust of the victim is crucial. It can also foster growth of compassion and the reduction of compassion fatigue within an agency which tends to promote a culture of peer support that is vital in helping officers deal with the stress of their profession.

Always Improving

The likes of threat assessment techniques, intelligence gathering, and technical expertise will always be major components of law enforcement training. However, as researchers continue to hypothesize and gather evidence, it is the study of the role of the mind and human intelligence that’s arguably growing the quickest in terms of its importance.

While more research is, as always, needed to refine our understanding of the importance of the mind and emotional intelligence in policing one thing is becoming clearer – officers and departments that embrace training focusing on these factors tend to see better outcomes for their officers and the citizens within the communities they serve. Benchmark Analytics supports these departments and their leaders by providing research-based police force management and early intervention systems aimed at elevating the profession of policing.

A Year of Change: A Look at State-Driven Police Reform Efforts

Posted on by Nicholas Frankel

It would be an understatement to say that in the last 12 months the world has changed in ways no one could have predicted. A global pandemic disrupted social norms, healthcare infrastructure and economic stability. Add to that a series of high-profile law enforcement incidents that ultimately resulted in renewed calls for police reform — and it’s easy to see how historians will look back at this year as a pivotal moment for change in the face of challenge and adversity.

One of the outcomes was an unusually active legislative environment, with states from coast to coast focused on enhanced as well as new police reform legislation. During this tenure of rapid change that continues today, it’s important to step back and look at the big picture in state-level policing reforms — to more thoroughly understand them in a broader context. According to a recent analysis by The Washington Post more than 2,000 policing-related bills have been introduced across the country since June of 2020. By unpacking and understanding the broad aims of these bills, departments and their leaders can better anticipate potential reform efforts that affect them and implement more effective change management strategies in response.

state-driven police reformTypically, most states have a pre-determined legislative period, with some not even meeting on an annual basis. In the last 12 months, 23 of them held special legislative sessions outside of their normal legislative periods. While many of these sessions were called to tackle the impacts of the pandemic and provide special funding for first responders, it also gave lawmakers the opportunity to address urgent calls for police reform specific to use of force as well as accountability and transparency.

Newly compiled numbers from the National Conference of State Legislatures show that almost half of the states enacted some form of legislation that changed the way police operate. These reform efforts covered everything from physical interactions during arrests to record-keeping and compliance. In addition to these 24, several more states passed oversight reforms, calling for commissions or other groups to study ways to improve standards and transparency.

Two of the most common types of reform have been those addressing the use of neck-restraints, or chokeholds, and those mandating an officer’s duty to report or intervene. 18 states and the District of Columbia passed laws limiting the use of neck restraints with ten states banning them outright. Other legislation passed in 12 states requires officers to report and, in many cases, attempt to intervene to prevent out-of-policy instances of force by a fellow officer. Further, some states have enacted broader, more comprehensive reform measures — for example:

  • Colorado Governor Polis signed into law a broad accountability bill titled Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity, where agencies will be required – among other things – to report all details of all use of force incidents that result in death or serious bodily injury; track all instances when a peace officer resigned under investigation for violation of policy; and maintain a database on officer de-certifications
  • Governor Sununu of New Hampshire signed an executive order establishing the state’s Commission on Law Enforcement Accountability, Community, and Transparency. Benchmark Analytics was selected to develop and implement a state capture of employment, training, and disciplinary history as well as certification across 200+ statewide law enforcement agencies.
  • Washington state Governor Inslee recently signed a dozen police accountability bills into law, notably including the creation of a statewide database of police use of force incidents, through the Washington State Office of the Attorney General.
  • New York, where Governor Cuomo issued an executive order that every law enforcement agency in the state adopt a reform plan by April 1, 2021. Titled New York State Police Reform and Reinvention Collaborative, the order requires that agencies develop clear policies specific to Use of Force and Early Intervention.
  • In Virginia, Governor Northam signed sweeping legislation comprised of a dozen bills covering everything from use of force and tactics to crisis intervention protocol, all areas requiring additional training and certification for officers.
  • The state of Utah passed several law enforcement bills signed into law by Governor Cox, including requiring Utah agencies to meet the FBI’s standards for reporting use of force — as well as setting up a panel to consider and make recommendations on data collection.
  • After the passage and signing of the Minnesota Police Accountability Act of 2020, Benchmark Analytics partnered with Minnesota POST to implement a statewide portal to capture internal affairs misconduct complaints across 400+ of the state’s law enforcement agencies.

Additionally, some states are mandating the reporting of incident data to both state and federal agencies. These reporting requirements as part of oversight trends are generally aimed at increasing the dataset available to the communities that agencies serve — as well as policymakers, researchers and data scientists. One of the thoughts behind these new requirements is that, with a larger dataset to study, it will better enable evidence-based decision-making at multiple levels of government and law enforcement.

Most observers see these legislative actions as the beginning, rather than conclusion of a process towards meaningful change in the way law enforcement agencies track and manage their forces. Comprehensive personnel management systems can make a substantial difference in the ease of which this data is monitored internally and reported out to various agencies and oversight bodies.

The Benchmark Management System (BMS), for example, features reporting tools designed to simplify data retrieval and review, putting incident-based data for individual officers, comparative stats for units, and a host of other data analysis features in one, simple-to-implement tool. This not only allows leaders to ensure accurate and timely milestone reporting to satisfy the requirements of any new legislation mandates, but day in and day out it empowers them to monitor performance data in real time, giving them an up-to-the-minute picture of the officers under their command. BMS also includes a next-generation Training Management System to help agencies track and manage any additional requirements and certifications as a result of new reform standards.

Law enforcement agencies are experiencing a time of rapid change in the way they do their work. New legislation will undoubtedly continue to shape not only law enforcement practices, but also training and the way data is managed and reported. By having a deeper understanding of not just the mandates of new legislation but the trends they represent, law enforcement agencies and their leaders can better rise to the occasion, ensuring their officers are well-equipped to navigate these changes.

Our next article will be looking at the role that state POST organizations are expected to play in these latest reform efforts.

Investing in a Police Force that’s Poised for Leadership

Posted on by Amy Vracar

The following is part 2 of 2 in our IACP Leadership Series conversation between Benchmark CEO Ron Huberman and the legendary Chuck Ramsey, former Chief of Police, Washington, DC; former Police Commissioner of Philadelphia; and Co-Chair of the Task Force on 21st Century Policing. In this entry, Mr. Ramsey underscores the importance of knowing one’s community as well as the importance of creating a culture that reflects what is expected and will not be tolerated.

RH: Chuck, let’s say you wake up tomorrow, and you look around and you have a uniform on and you’re a chief again in a major city in America. I think certainly from my dialogue with chiefs across the country – and you talk to chiefs every day – it’s probably never been harder to be a police chief — but here you are. You got a large police force. You have all the challenges that every city has, whether it’s Chicago or Baltimore or Philly or DC or you name it. What do you do? How do you start to lead in the current environment? It might be the same playbook, but what is on your list of  ‘I have got to get these things right from the start’?

CR: First of all, let me just say that I think the tougher job than being a police chief in today’s environment is being a police officer in today’s environment. At least as a police chief, you have some way of influencing the current and the future. Whereas as a police officer, you’re at the whim of whatever it is that’s going on. I just want to just say that because it’s tough, very tough for the men and women that are out there trying to do the job the best they can. I think it starts with communication, both internal and external. I think it starts there.

I think it’s important to have those lines of communication with people, even those people whose opinion and whose views may be totally – in fact, it’s even more important – totally opposite from what you believe and what you feel. You have to at least try to establish lines of communication. Take a serious look at where you are and what it is that you’re doing as an agency, and you might need to have someone from the outside come in and take a critical look because when you’re a part of it, you’re so close to it, you don’t always see it. What are we doing? How are we managing our personnel? Do we really know what’s going on out there? Are we really stepping in?

Let’s take early intervention for an example. If an officer has a history of engaging in certain kind of misconduct…and it may not be use of force. Could be verbal. Could be anything, but it’s not consistent with policy. Do we know who they are? I’ve often said the good news is you can identify them; the bad news is you’ve identified them now you’ve got to do something with it. The key is, now that we know, what do we have in place to change the behavior of the individual? Because police agencies are primarily punishment-driven and giving a person three days off doesn’t necessarily change behavior. What is it that we’re going to do if that’s really the goal?

Early intervention, having an information system or personnel management system that will identify individuals at your earliest possible point…put in place those mechanisms to be able to intervene early on and say, ‘Hey, we just don’t do that’. Do it in a way in which it goes beyond just that one officer but the other officers too — because to me, real change in a police department isn’t going to come from whoever’s sitting on top or a software. It’s going to be when the culture of the organization itself will not tolerate certain behaviors that are out of the norm because that’s not what the agency stands for. It’s not what the culture stands for, but you have to use these tools to get you there. That’s the ultimate goal. That’s the kind of thing I’d be focused on right now.

Learn from those that have experience. Learn from Minneapolis. Learn from these other cities. Even back in the days when we were more concerned with terrorist attacks…if it occurred somewhere else, I would ask my people, ‘Okay, if that happened here, how would we handle it? What are our resources? What are our capabilities? What can we do? Do we actually know what we can do, and more importantly, what we’re incapable of doing’? You have to do that sort of thing. If that officer was a problem, how come they didn’t identify him? If he was a member of our department, would we have identified him? If we had identified him, what we would have done with him?

RH: The one thing that just struck me so much when I came back to Benchmark after running the Chicago Public School System…I spent an inordinate amount of time asking the question, “How do we make our teachers more effective?” We had some phenomenal talent, unbelievably great teachers. We had some teachers who struggled. Ultimately, the idea was never let’s be punitive…let’s go be disciplinary with the teachers who are struggling. The collective question of the organization was, ‘How do we invest in these teachers to become effective’? In the world of policing in the year 2020, in the history of humankind, if you were to say show me an evidence base of interventions that help police be better…that enabled them to do what is an incredibly hard job more effectively — it doesn’t exist. I’m excited to say, we’re trying in partnership with our academic partners and others to develop it, but we’ve got a long way to go in the profession in supporting the frontline in that way. These are super important things you’ve always talked about.

Regarding culture — something that I’ve heard you talk about over and over again with tremendous passion is the role of that frontline supervision…your street sergeants and others. Can you talk about what you did and what you would do as a chief to get that supervision? The command staff is easier. You’re not talking about 500 people. You’re talking about folks you can directly talk to. But when you start getting down to lieutenants and sergeants who are ultimately in charge for all practical purposes more than almost anyone else, how do you win over those ranks in terms of your vision, your values, where you want the culture to go?

CR: There are a couple things. You point out a critical rank in the department. That’s that first line supervisor. That’s that sergeant. Because I remember, when I was a young police officer, I cared more about who my sergeant was than I cared about who the district commander was because I had to deal with the sergeant every day. District commander was pretty much a picture on the wall. If I was unlucky, I’d be walking down the hall at the same time he was, and you turn your head so he didn’t pay any attention to you. We’ve got to invest in our people in terms of their training and education, and there’s just not enough of it.

Some departments have pre-service training, let’s say, for sergeants. They put them through all the things — your roles, your responsibilities, and so forth. Some go so far as to even have an FTO system for new sergeants where they match them up with veteran sergeants for a period of time to learn what’s going on. I think all those things are important, but there’s a basic flaw in the system of policing in our promotional system.

The only way you can make more money in the average police agency is through the promotional process, which means that you’ve got people who are smart enough to pass a multiple-choice exam, but they have no interest in leading others. They have no interest in supervising, but they need more money. How do you carve out those folks and have people that truly are committed to leadership, truly are committed to that? You mentioned that at the top it’s easier – maybe in some ways but in other ways not so much – because we don’t do anything in policing to develop the next generation of leaders, or at least not enough. We have 18,000 police departments. Do you honestly think you’ve got 18,000 good police chiefs and sheriffs? I know we don’t. Until we really address the issue of really grooming people and preparing them, not only for the current role that they’re going to be in but get them ready for the next step.

When I went to DC, and I’ve seen it in other agencies, they didn’t even have a good job description for any rank above police officer, entry-level. We had to create one for sergeant, create one for lieutenant, create one for captain. In the Washington DC police department, they did not have it. What was the knowledge, skills, and ability needed for this rank, assuming that you have all that when you make the new rank, but what’s different? What is it that you need? How do we prepare you in advance? Not wait until you get there and then find out you can’t handle it. Now we got to try to bury you somewhere. What do we do in order to try to prepare you? It’s complicated. It’s complex, but it’s fixable. It’s going to really take an effort to really get serious about leadership development in police agencies, and don’t wait until somebody makes sergeant. From the time a person comes in and you know this person has their eye on not staying at that level forever, what are we doing to enhance their abilities?

RH: One of the things I think we make very hard on ourselves is we let the lawyers have too much of a voice because ultimately, what has happened is promotional exams in too many places have been reduced to what you said, which is a multiple-choice exam. A multiple-choice exam doesn’t identify ethics. It doesn’t identify leadership. You can usually answer policy right. You might be able to answer situational awareness questions right, but test taking and leadership are two completely different pieces. If you don’t make sergeant, you’re not going to make chief.

One of the research projects that we have going on at Benchmark with our partners is this — because we have people’s performance data, how do they actually do as the police. Can they navigate with good de-escalation skills? Can they navigate where they have good activity? Do they navigate in a way where there is powerful community engagement and the like? Can we use that data where the baseline for promotion becomes your performance on the job where there’s never a promotional exam? Because we have everything we need to know who’s the leader today, and let’s use that information as a way to understand promotion versus a one-time high stakes exam that ultimately may or may not pay off for folks.

CR: The other thing, if I could just add one thing. Most systems are geared toward identifying people who aren’t doing things right as opposed to identifying people who are doing things right and then going back and digging a little deeper to find out what are those characteristics…what are those traits…what are those things about people who are able to successfully de-escalate situations? People who really show good leadership — what is it about them that distinguishes them from the person who’s one of our frequent fliers, who’s always into something that they got no business being in?

You could say some of this is recruitment and hiring and all that, but it’s more than that once you’re on the job, I think. I think if we focus more on that and at least make that a big part of the picture…because when you really stop and think about it, what would a good 21st-century police officer look like? What are those skills and abilities? What are those talents that they need to bring to the table? We need to be building that image, and I think if we did that and if we had a system that could actually help us do that, that would be absolutely remarkable.

RH: Here’s what I would tell you, Chuck. This is my thesis on it. I can tell you as a research organization – and for those who don’t know, we were born out of research done at the University of Chicago – is I would argue we know that today, meaning we have ways that we can assess what is the community’s perception, community engagement for someone. We know their activity level. We know how they use force. We know whether they get citizen complaints. We know if they’re effective depending on the job they’re in, if they’re effective preliminary investigators. We see it because we can baseline.

We know, here’s what the average officer does. Here’s what someone does, and if they do it in a way where folks don’t get hurt and they’re able to still be an effective police officer, there is a pathway to say we can find the best and brightest among us and find a way that we put them on a trajectory to great leadership. Because ultimately, I’m agreeing with you, Chuck, every time you said it. Today is Chuck Ramsey’s greatest hits that I’ve heard over many, many years of being someone who has followed you, is we can change the equation. Because, as you’ve said, those frontline supervisors, if we pick the right ones, every officer in their command is ultimately going to get to the right place because ultimately, it’s their watch. Everyone else is a picture on the wall.

CR: That opens the door for better education of police chiefs to know what that 21st-century cop should look like. What are the skills and abilities? Because that drives your recruiting…because if you know that, then that’s who you go after. If you look at many police departments, we say we want people who are community-oriented. We want people who have good de-escalation skills. We want diversity. We list all this stuff. Play the recruitment video of that same department. What are they showing? SWAT knocking down the door…helicopters…boats going down the river or lake. It’s all the Type A personality stuff. Who do you think you’re going to get to apply?

It’s not that you don’t need some people who can do that stuff because you do, but is that what an average police officer does on a regular basis? No. We have that information. We know it, but we got to share it and make sure that everybody is aware because that drives so much if we really want to change. Because who you hire today is who you’re stuck with for the next 30 years. You better make a good decision upfront because if all you’re relying on is being able to fire somebody or discipline him for the next 30 years, is that really what you want to do? I don’t think so.

RH: We are grateful for your service to our nation. We’re grateful for what you’ve done for policing. We’re certainly grateful for your role here at Benchmark. We appreciate your time and your ability to share all that great expertise and experience you built over all those years. Thank you, Chuck.

This interview has been edited for clarity.

Answering the Call for Community Policing

Posted on by Amy Vracar

Across the board ‑ from municipal, state and national legislators to law enforcement and community leaders ‑ Community Policing is seen as an integral component for creating and fostering enhanced relationships between police departments and the constituents they serve. The International Association of Chiefs of Police recently shared that, “Community members are not merely the recipients of police services they are essential partners in maintaining public safety.”

It’s that very partnership that’s serving as the foundation for agencies and communities across the US to work cooperatively in developing or enhancing their individualized community policing programs. These initiatives have never been more important – or challenging – than they are today.

By understanding the fundamentals of community policing and engaging in community policing best practices . . . as well has having effective tools in place to implement recommended strategies, law enforcement agencies can answer the call for community policing.

What exactly does community policing mean?
U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (DOJ COPS Office), defines community policing as “a philosophy that promotes organizational strategies that support the systematic use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime.”

Community Policing

The DOJ COPS Office further explains that community policing requires agencies to become an integral part of the community, rather than solely a response force. This includes forming collaborative partnerships between the agency and community organizations, communicating with data that provides accurate and timely information, and engaging in proactive problem-solving together.

According to Police Chief Magazine, “Without a positive relationship with your community, your agency and its officers will not be able to collect valuable intelligence from community members, and it will be difficult to sustain your current policing efforts. Your agency may conduct very successful sweeps and arrests, but you won’t be able to endure this effort if your law enforcement agency does not engage and empower the community, key citizens, faith-based groups, and other active community groups. In addition, as chiefs and leaders, we have all experienced challenges and tough times in our careers. A positive relationship with your community will prevent or lessen those challenges because the community will be a source of support during tough times.”

Research has shown there is robust evidence that community policing increases satisfaction with police, opinions of police legitimacy, and citizen perceptions of disorder. Additionally, some communities have even shared that their approach to community policing has contributed to a decrease in crime. One agency in Virginia said that homicides decreased by 50 percent from 2016 to 2019, and the reduction was due to the community and police working together with a common goal. Another agency in Florida states that creating community outreach initiatives helped reduce crime incidents by over 20 percent from 2016 to 2019.

How do agencies create a community policing plan?
Developing a community policing plan can be a collaborative and valuable strategy for agencies. Effective plans reflect the priorities and perspectives of the community, establish clear implementation activities and designated outcomes, and communicate actions that contribute to the overall mission.

While it is important for agencies to create policies that are unique to the communities they serve, accreditation programs have developed standards that provide best practices for law enforcement — including standards on community policing. For example, the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc (CALEA), has national community policing standards in Chapter 45 which includes standard 45.2.1 regarding partnerships. The standard states “The community involvement function provides the following, at a minimum a) establishing liaisons with existing community organizations or establishing community groups where they are needed; b) assisting in the development of community involvement policies for the agency; c) publicizing agency objectives, community problems, and successes; d) conveying information transmitted from citizens’ organizations to the agency; e) improving agency practices bearing on police community interaction; f) developing problem oriented or community policing strategies.”

The National League of Cities has also shared that there are thematic tenets local elected officials should consider when developing community policing plans. They include: 1) Foster trust; 2) Align policies with community values; 3) Embrace new technologies; 4) Prioritize community engagement; 5) Invest in training; 6) Remember to cultivate the wellbeing of officers.

To achieve the National League of Cities tenets, the association suggests that law enforcement agency training programs should “encompass the core values of the community policing philosophy” and that technology can “offer opportunities to build transparency, trust and legitimacy into day-to-day law enforcement operations.”

A good example of that would be the Benchmark Analytics Training Management System, which can help agencies deliver up-to-date training for every officer, in compliance with accreditation standards or guidelines established by the municipality or state.

What are next steps?
Community policing represents much more than a new future for law enforcement agencies, but the opportunity for communities and police to work hand-in-hand to solve problems, build mutual trust and respect and keep their neighborhoods safe.

Community Engagement Technology

To learn about how technology tools can help your agency with community policing, request to connect with a Benchmark Analytics representative here.