- - ED 143 722 . UT HD R- 4- TITLE INSTITUTION 1 PUB DATE NOTE AVAILABLE FROM EDRS PRICE DESCRIPTORS ABSTRACT DOCUMENT RESUME QStrom, Elinor; And Otheri Policing Metre'po itan America., National Science outdation, Washington, D.C. RANN Program. 77. 59p: 4, Superintendent of Documents, U/ S. Govt. Pr inting Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 (Stock No. . 038-000-'003)-7-8) MF-$0.83 HC -$3.50 Plus:Postage. Agency Role; .*Comm.unity services; *Delivery systeits; *InteragencyCooperation; Metropolitan Areas; *Police; *Police Community Relationship; *Social 4ID 017 278 . Services; 'Welfare SerVices This study concerns police services delivery in small-to-medium sized metropolitan areas. It addresses three broad issues: the producers of police' services, agency_ cooperation: and service delivery, and agency size and service delivery. Each' issue is treated in a Separate chapter and' ifncludes, a discussion of severaY relAted questions. The 80 geographic areas studied varied in size, pogulation density, and types. of Communities. The reports findings "challenge several assumptions which have been the basis of many proposals for police reorganizatibtf: The findings show ,that. policing metropolitan area can be divided/among separately organized agenCies as well as among 'the. personnel of a -single police department. It is Concluded that the diversity in .size of agencies and thedifferent. combinations of _services they produce are not necessarily -'wasteful or confusing. There appeaisto be little duplication by Small-tO-medium 'sized police agencies. Most 'police departments :seem_ to _know what services they .p.reretpofigible'for and where to deliver them. 'Indtances of Zuplibation, of confusion and of noncooperation are . a found, but they are not found to be the cotillion pattern. It is sugskested that reorganization of metropolieWn policing needs to be baseq, on a realistic assessment of theresources and needs of each . Tertictar etropolitat area. (Author/AM) . "r- 1 1 *****.**.*********************it**************************************** * Documents acquired by ERIC include many igormall unpublrShed qN * *'materialS not available from other source's. 0SRIC makes every effort,, e * to- obtain the best .topy available. Neiertheles, items of 'marginal *- * reprodudihility-are' often encountered and this affects the Oality, * * of .the microfiche, and hardcopy reproductions ERIC makes av'ailable. * .via the-ERIC Document Belitoduction Service .(EDRS)_. EDRS is Rot * responsible -for the,quality of the original document. Reproductions * * supplied by EDRS are the best that can be_ made from- the original. .*********************************;N* ********************************4!***
59p: 4,Superintendent of Documents, U/ S. Govt. Pr intingOffice, Washington, D.C. 20402 (Stock No. .
038-000-'003)-7-8)
MF-$0.83 HC -$3.50 Plus:Postage.Agency Role; .*Comm.unity services; *Delivery systeits;*InteragencyCooperation; Metropolitan Areas;*Police; *Police Community Relationship; *Social
4ID 017 278 .
Services; 'Welfare SerVices
This study concerns police services delivery insmall-to-medium sized metropolitan areas. It addresses three broadissues: the producers of police' services, agency_ cooperation: andservice delivery, and agency size and service delivery. Each' issue istreated in a Separate chapter and' ifncludes, a discussion of severaY
relAted questions. The 80 geographic areas studied varied in size,pogulation density, and types. of Communities. The reports findings"challenge several assumptions which have been the basis of manyproposals for police reorganizatibtf: The findings show ,that. policingmetropolitan area can be divided/among separately organized agenCiesas well as among 'the. personnel of a -single police department. It isConcluded that the diversity in .size of agencies and thedifferent.combinations of _services they produce are not necessarily -'wasteful orconfusing. There appeaisto be little duplication by Small-tO-medium'sized police agencies. Most 'police departments :seem_ to _know whatservices they .p.reretpofigible'for and where to deliver them.'Indtances of Zuplibation, of confusion and of noncooperation are .
a found, but they are not found to be the cotillion pattern. It issugskested that reorganization of metropolieWn policing needs to bebaseq, on a realistic assessment of theresources and needs of each .
Tertictar etropolitat area. (Author/AM).
"r-
11
*****.**.*********************it***************************************** Documents acquired by ERIC include many igormall unpublrShed qN *
*'materialS not available from other source's. 0SRIC makes every effort,,e * to- obtain the best .topy available. Neiertheles, items of 'marginal *-
* reprodudihility-are' often encountered and this affects the Oality, ** of .the microfiche, and hardcopy reproductions ERIC makes av'ailable.* .via the-ERIC Document Belitoduction Service .(EDRS)_. EDRS is Rot* responsible -for the,quality of the original document. Reproductions ** supplied by EDRS are the best that can be_ made from- the original..*********************************;N* ********************************4!***
.,
"'
ON
I
\l
444
4
p.-e4 a 0W
4W1.161.1-
0 w0
lAizZ
y4O
113°w0
/
".."
I
,I
6i
'''' a.0.-u, 0 A
. 0. a,.., ,w
.iiz....ty 0
.006:....,--Li
t 22,,g;j4.1111:
c,z 0 >. ;:.-
i >_.; c. r - 2 T
'C
C "
j
<'
CD
LL
Im
;
cl if; m i.7 - 2'
I,L
L1 C
now
--caC
C &
LI
.'i . . (3 -I 4:
';''
5U
.I.,..U
JC'
.'1
.e
,
Z I
Z< ft
""
at#
77Lcilia
,^
r047e4t7ft,,,,
,'01
ft
4
if A
'
POLICINGAA TROPOLITAN
MERICA
by
Elinor Ostrom.
Roger B. Parks
and
Gordon P. Whitaker
4 -
4
4
ti*
For sale by.the Superinbmileot of Documents. U.S. qgyernment;Frinting OfficeWashington, D.C. 20402 T
Stock No. 038-Q00-00317.8
40TINmannogIi:
V
MAJOR FINDINGS
This report challenges several essumptionswhich have been the bases of many proposalsforpolice reorganization'. The findings show thatpolicing metropolitan areas ....can be divided-among separately organized agiencies as well as.among the personnel of a_single police depart-ment. The division can bf ittier geographic orfunctional; that is, each agency may serve its ownseparate jurisdiction, or each agency may supplyonly one or a few related services. Whether or notdepartments should decentralize, consolidate, orremain the same will depend upon the serviceneeds and the resources of each particular
.metrop6litan area.
The data on which these conclusions arebased were collected in 80 metropolitan areas.All agencies. conducting general area patrol,traffic patrol, traffic accident investigation, rest;dential burglary investigation, or homicide in-vestigation for - reisidents of each StandardMetropolitan StatiSfical Area were included. Morethan two thirds of these 1,454 producers aremunicipal police departments. Other types ofagencies alto conduct one or more of these serv-ices. These include county sheriffs, police, andprosecutors; State police, highway patrol's, andbureaus of investigation; campus, park, housingauthority, hospital, and other "special district"police; and Federal law enforcement officersserving both military and civilian Federal reserva-tions. Data were also bbtained on the agenciessupplying radio communications, entry-leveltraining, chemical analysis of evidence, and adultpre =trial detention to the more than 1;400-directservice producers. Data were obtained frompolice agencies through personal intervieVo andinspection of documents supplemented bytelephone and mail communication.
The reetropolitan, areas- studied -ranged inpopulation size from fewer than 60,000 to morethan ,300,0b0 residents, and from two directservice police, agenclet to 91 per metropolitanarea., .
The erroneous, but' common, picture ofmetropolitan police agenties is that they are too
; numerous and diverse to work together. Sincemunicipal departments are most numerous in pro-
, clueing direct services, they are especially underfire. The many separate agencies are seen as iso-
lated from each other, as acting indejSendently,and as limiting the opportunities for pursuit ofsuspects and for mobilizing large numbers ofofficers in response to crises7.-"Vhat picture is
' largely inaccurate.
Duplication "in' police services 'delivery istnot common. Few police' agencies serving fhesame community act in isolation from eacti other.Instead, agencies patiolling the same areausually alternate their patrols by time of .day, typeof thoroughfare or public place, or type of clien-tele. Agencies investigating crimes within thesame jurisidiction also rarely act in isolation fromeach other. Rather they, coordinate their investigations.'Polieeencies alsp interact in thpsupply and use of auxiliary services. Most policeagencies serving metropolitan areas obtain en-try;level training, chemical analysis of evidence,and pre-trial detention of suspects from other.agencies. This accounts for the great diversity in
orgailizational, arrangements within police.departments.:. .
The existence of numerous jurisdictionalboundaries in a metropolitan area need not limitfresh pursuit of suspects or inter-agency assis-tance in a crisis. Forty-one of the 50 States have /legislation explicitly authorizing inter-State freshpursuit. Intra-qtate fresh pursuit is explicitauthorized in 30 States and practiced under theinter-State authorization in others. Mutual aid iscommon. Apprtdmately nine out of ten- patroll-ing agencies ih metropolitan areas give or
'receive emergency assistance outside their owl'ijurisdictions, and almost two out of five localpatrol agencies use some type of deputizationarrangement. This does not imply that moreeffective working 'relationships -cannot bedeveloped. But sAt do find much more coopera-tion and much less isolation than has been often ,assumed. .
Some common assumptions -aboLif depart-ment size are. also erroneous. Smell departmentsare Thought to dominate service delivery, to ,"waste" resources by duplicating administrative
tPersonnel and to fail to provide complete serviceto the communities they serve. .r
The data reported in this study indicatli thatsmall departments are indeed numerous, but, infact, they supply only 10 percent of the 10 P.M.
on- street patrol force. -It is the large departmentswhich employ most of the police officers andserve most Of the "bsidents of metropblitan areas.
It departments seem to be less "wasteful."They generally get a hig4er 'proportion of theirOfficers "out.on the street" than do.the largerdepartments. We find that the median citizen-to-patrol officer ratio at 10 P.M. is less than 2,400 to1 for municipal departmenta-with-5 to 10 officers,
_ and more than 4,200 to 1 for muriTalrial depart,mentsjwith moreihan 150 officers. It is the largedepartments which are likely t6 have a higher
_t,Prdportlop of personnel in administrativ,e posi-tIonetWhile small departments in many oases donot themselyes supply all police services to the
co'mmunities they serve, a full rangof services isavailable almost without exception. Specialistagencies, Or larger full-service police depart-
- ments with overlapping jurisdictions,supply theservices whiCh are not supplied by small, localagencies. We can consider the small departmentsas "patrol specialists." They may be a usefulorganizational altern tive in some metropolitanareas.
These findings should not be interpreted asdemonstrating that small departments are more
41111
effective at protecting the pedple they serve. The-consequenc,es of increased numbers of -officerson patrol remain to be demonstrated. ,
The police services discussed inthisteportare organized in many different ways in this_sam-ple ot small- osmediuffl-sized rhetropdliten areas.All generalizations about police service delivery ,
in these areas have their e4ceptions. But thegeneral patterns run -contrary to most commonassumptions about police in metropolitan areas."Coordination and cooperation are common .-among diverse departments. Small 'departmentsconstitute a small proportion of the total patrolforce SMSAs, but, most dui)* moreofficers" on patrol per capita' than their larger
. counterparts. Citizens in all parts of each -metrop9litan area were supplied witkeach of theservices wistudied.
°Police work can be divided either among thepersonnel of a single agency_ or among sepa-rately organized agenciesor in bath Ways. Coor-dination of policing occurs between agencies, aswell as within them: The appropriateness of anyparticular mode of organization depends on thedistributi n of needs and resources within a par-ticular.m tropolitan area. ,t -
v .
NO,
i(CKNOWLEDGMENTS'
. The authors owe an enormous debt.of gra:titude to many, people. All over thecountry, busypublic officials have taken time from their
"'schedules to meet with us, tp provide us withdata-,--Jincl to re kd our preliminary reports. Wehope that report provides them wit Ei com-posite. overview of s delivery
.
Dr. John AngellCriminal Justice Center
'University of AlaskaAnchorage, Alaska
Dennis L. Bliss' -Deputy Attorney GeneralState df New JerseyTrenton, New Jersey
Col. James P. DamosChief of Police °University City, MissoUri
Paul F. Dunn, DirectorLaw Enforcement CouncilNational Council on-Crimeand Delinquency",
HackenOck, New.JerseyDr. Jon A. tardiner
'Department of Political ScienCeUniversity of Illinois-Chicago Circle'
Chicago, IllinoisLt. Col. Adolphe C. JacobsmeyerAssistAnt Chief of PoliceSt. Lotkis Metropolitarriplice Dept.St. Louis, Missouri -
The Board has met six hales since the pro-ject began. 'At each meeting, the members haveactively reviewed our plans and ipade many im-portant contrit2utioni to the profeat. -
, .
The three principal investigators are alsodeeply appreciative of the contributions of staffmembers at the Workshop in Political ThearyandPolicy Analysis, Indiana University, and, at the
`Frank Anechlarico`0istula Baker ,
ThOin As BenetMike BinfordFiances 131ShKen CahiliL.
11"
r
.which adds to the knowledge that each lies 'sogenerously contributed to this study. We wish tothank all of these individuals for their help'andkindness. °
We have also-been helped by the *ark of Avery active, enthusiastic, incisive, and erticurateNational Board of Consultants:
Joseph H. LewisDirector of Evaluation
'Police Foundatio'nWashington, D.C.
Edgari Likins, Associate DirectorCenter for Criminal JusticeTraining
"Indiana UniversityBloomington,.lndiana
J. P. Moi'gAn, PresidentPublio-Sfely Consultants.St. Petersburg, Flotilla
Robert P..0wens',Chief of PoliceOxnard, California
Dr. Dennis C. SmithGraduate School of PublicAdministration -
New York University L\-NeviYorIct New York
°,-
Center for Urban and Regiortal Studies,,Unimereityof North Ctirolina The research stafkhas con-1tributed actively to all stages of th-eresearchdesign; development of research instruments andfield procedures, and to the actual field work it-self. Many of hie innovative aspects of this studyresult from the valuable contributions of this verycapable group:
Donald Coles John McIverGary Gray - Gary MillerVicki Greene Marc Mishkin '
Phillip Gregg Darwin MorganThomas Kramer Nandy M. NeubertStephen Mastrofski Stephen Percy
Barry PriceMarlene RodenbeckEric ScottElaine SharpWilliamTabor'Ronald Tedrow
.Fred ToweLarry Wagner_
',Dan Wilson. Carl Young
Wiry Zielinski, Marsha Brown, Mary Wagner,-Mary.Turk, PhylIis.McNiemara, and Sally Bernardhave typed and retyped the various drafts of thisvolume with skill, good wilt, and concern. MaryRoserison has edited this"report. Stephen Percy'and Spenser Ballard have run and rerun the table'sfor this report. Vincent Ostrom ha; reed and coin-
,
merited on each draft of this repott. .Readers interested in a more detailed report
from this project should refer to, P terns ofMetropolitan Policinglby Elinor.,Ostrom, Roger B.Parks, and Gordon, P. Whitaker (with aptertcontributt by Frances MO, Stephen Ma rofski,John M6I ,er, Elaine Sharp, and- Larry, agner)iPattern_ s of Metropolitan Policing will e pub-lished in 1977 by Ballinger Publishing Company
,
This report iWas prepared with the support ofNational Science Foundation Grant GI 43949.Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or reborn:-mendations expressed in it are those of theauthors -and do not necessarily reflect the viewsof NSF. , .
The research project was One of fOttr fundedbt. the Research Applied to National Needs
;
-,
(RANN) Division of the,National Science Founda- rtion under,Prograp Solicitation 73-28 td studythe organizetion of service delivery Anmetropolitan, areas tos these servioes7police,fire, public health, air solid waste Publications r
from the other studied funded under this solicita-tion may be obtained from:
,
Fire: - Dr. Lois MacGillivrayCenter for PopulationiResearchand Service
Research Triangle InitituteBox 12194
.Research Triangle Pirk,North Carolina 27709 ,
Public Health: Dr. Patrick O'Donoght*,' F/fesi2dent
Spedtrum Research, Inc.789 Sherman,Suite 500
*Denver, Colorado 80203Solid Waste: Dr. E. S.-Savas
Graduate School of ,BusinessColumbia UniversityNew York, New York 10027
4
r
.
CONTgNT4
,/__
CHAPTER I WHAT THIS REPORT IS ABOUT
Why This Report? . ' i ,.
Traditional Approach to Police OrganizatianThe Approa&& This Report . ,
0 Two Views of FrganizationHow-This Rep is OrganizedWhat Did We slow
, The Police Services Studied ,-The Metropolitan ,Areas Studied'
4
.
Page
... , ,..1
. ' 1.
, 74.
77 ,.
12k 14 ,
,. --1.5
1505
rro. 17
P .19
192020202222
'1
22
35
P .
----
s 2424242525
4 26
291 .29-
3232
'-
34
Data Colleption
CHAPTER II PROO,UCERS OF POLICE SERVICES' 7,. Agencies Producing Direct Services, . fDirect Service Producers in Each SMSA -i---_.;
AgehOies Producing Auxiliary Services'''. Auxiliary Service Producers in Each SMSA -, .
, -CHAP-MR*411 AGENCy'COOPrEFATION AND SERVICE DELIVERY
w 16Duplication of SerliceeAlternation of.Direct ServicesCoordination of Direct ServicesDuplication of Direct Services
, Intra-State Fresh PursuitStandards of KnowledgeInter-State Fresh Pursuit
Emergency Assistance, Mutual Aid Agreements,and Deputization
Patterns of Inter-Agency AssistanceMutual Aid AgreementsPatterns of Deputization
,, Participation in Emergency Assistance ;Cooperation, Not Isolation.,.
CHAPTER IV AGENCY SIZEAND SERVICE DELIVERYAgency Size and Servicesroduced '
Agency Size and Personnel Deployment-Agency*Ize and Patrol Density
Do Small Police-Agencies Dominate ServiceDe hiery3 ,Lc
1 Agen y Sae.Reconsidered t436,
CHAPTER V ipipflOt1S-OR ORGANIZING METROPOLITAN POLICING 39
APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF.TERMS -;_ ti
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
THE 86 METROPOLITAN AREA SAMPLE. r 4 .;14,
OTHR REPORTS OP3H-E POLICE StRVICES SfUDY. 48
yii 9, .
I_: -- Maps . ,
.
Number '''-' i Page, . . .
1. 1 The 80 Metrbpolitan Areas and,the II/ Federal Regions 44 .
'x'3.1 Distribution of Intra-State Pres), Pursuit Legislation , 21, r
.. 3.2 DistriOution of Inter - ,State Fresh Pukiit..60giat,n fi 23-
'
Number
Figure'S'
I
2.1 .1Distribution of Direct Services in 80 SMSAs by Type of Agency..
Distribution of Aindliary Services in 80 SMSAs-by Type of Agency
Alternation of Traffic Patrol in 80 SMSAsCoordination of Homicide InVestigation in 80 SMSAs3.2
3.3
4.1.
Number
Duplication of Patrol in 80 SMSAs
AverageVercent of Sworn Officers Aices, Auxiliary Services, ana'Adminiof DifferentSizes
signeclto Patrol, gterDirect./Serv,.
tration by Municipal Police Agencies
Tables.4\
Page
33
.
Page.
.2:11 Numbers and Types of Producers SialyitickDirect Police Services in the,80 Metropolitan Areas , .A,
.-..... 9
Numberof Direct SerVice Producer's in an buSvA Who Produ.ce Ech &theDirect services by Region 11, ,
2.3 -Number of Direct service Producers in an SMSA Who Produce Each otthe ..t.,:... ,
Difect Services by Siie of SMSA * ...11. i 11-. .
2.4 Auxiliary Services Supc,Ited by Direct Service Proddcere..6 ..... .. . 12i 1
2.5 Number of Auxiliary Service Producers in an SMSA Who PrZtiuce Each of.,--: the Auxiliary Services by Size. of SMSA.. ,. :. 14
3.1 Iternation, Coordination, -and DupticatiOn of Direct Rolice Service Delhi- .
y in 80 SMSAs 10 - -,-- c-. :. 17
3.2 . :A emetjon, 400rdfnatibn, and 'Duplication cif Athcitiary Police ServiceDe 'very in 80 SMSAs' , '20
3.3 Per8ent of Local Patrol PrOduCers Who Give.or Receive Assistance. and .WhoVve Members of Formal Mutual Aid Agreements .24
2.2
.- 3.4** :Assistrce by Size of P'roduder.
f ,26
4.1 Production ofAdditional Servides by LOcai Patrol PrpOucers .30
4.2 Oatro19eployment and Deositybi Loop) Patrol Producers 34
4.3A
Size of LOcalPatrolPracicicets by Region 35 -
4.4 Municipal t'olice Departments By Size and-Prrortion of On-Stredt Patrol, - Force (10 P.M) . 40. I. . ' 36
,
0
_Chapter_
WHAT THIS REPORTABOUT I
WAY THIS REPQRT?
Supp se you' are a pOlice chief; a countysheriff, or.a campus security director
Suppose you area city manager, a city-plan:. ner, a Member of a city council; or A.;_ji county or regional cOUnCil
Suppode you are a Statepdlibe administra-. for or woriadr the Statecriminal justice,
planning agency , ,
Suppose you are a citizens' grougiiepresen-. slatiVe dr a state legislator
,..
The Approach of TNA.f!spori
When, you -read glis ook. you will see that'We viewinetropolitarfpol cing in America as an'industry with ,agencies_d littering a variety ofpolice,earvices directly to.oitizens. In producingthose direct services, police agenbles -use- avariety of auxiliary services
obtainthey _either
prodilde for tthemselves or obtain from otheragencies, We find that police agencies and
,citizens .already have available to them most of/he services deemed essential to etfeahoe policeactivity, We will point out'that whilg many polleedepartents do- not .themselves gtipply all of
-
:. And suppose ybur mayor or your governdr 'floes. We will see that men9 'kinds of org_aniza-estakishes' an executive conimission on, they tional 'structures have- developed,' both ----.reorlenization of the criminal' justice system.-Thie geographically and functionally, to supply the es-job: of this commission ia to recommendorganiza- -sential services. .2'; 'iionalthanges. Youare toldrthat the city councils
or the State legia.latu're waittso implement these
--these t ervices, the- polic'e-induatfy as a whole,
So you coil pose die tiuestion,to thes
com-mission in this Iv*: Which organiiational and in-
".reform Asa participant in such a commission,,
ter-organizatitmal forms'. are More effective inhat approadi canyou take to examine the'rodiems of police services delivery? supplying essential police services to citizens?
.you produce a practical list of organizational When tine Commission finds answers to this ques-'changes,f
the particular police' agency.or agenyou can expect to irtarease,the --tion,*then you can recommend improvementsin
'stvetass,o organization- by finding gut how you can reorgan-t.
cies with which you are concer ed?
;Traditional Appioach-to P011oe Organiza
lie the existing police induitry to, capture the. benefits df the _more. effecthTe organizational and
n inter-oftlanizational forms. -
In the past, most commissions have looked - Two Vidws ofReorganizatiOn'at-the, American police system as a collection of .
fragmented jt&ladictiorrel ,They haVe seen that Posing the problem in these different- Ways.many of She departments serving those jurisdic- leads youlto consider different solutions. The first ,
tiOne did not supply all of the services which are wayShe traditional apprciach:inVolves applica-I to effective policing. They also tion of a common prescription to all types dfse departments whictylid sup- police services' delivery. The second way Of pot--,
,ithin their own organizational " wing theaprobiemand seeking solutions alerts youto be much larger then thciee to the-possibility thaT -various meinspanlae usedply Alt police, services, Most 'to actilelt effective Police-services. The eetondesented the commission with approach to organIzationali change is supportede: NOV/ can weieordanize ex- byitheindings containeirin this book.
.(5Wlid departments so that eigh 7
,' 4
mustust:n that igu? alternative Nvay orpplying alinecessary police looking at police 'Services delivery does not.im-:I prescriptl,ori is, Conlon& ply, that "What is" is "what oughtg bell When we
say that a greatdeal Of -oigarilzational diversity, 0,
4
k*****"'..
thought-esseqtiObserved that thply,Such servicestructure-tendedwhibff did-not sunave, therefore, pthiiProl5lefn eoljisting jurlialatiorte
be 'Capable citeserVices? The Op
{1/4
\t,c/..5-,
exists: and- that : there are now' regula.sVaternatic relatiohships between, police agen-
-Gies, we arenot saying that this diversity chi in -,ter-agency cooperation are necessarily as efiRc_five as possible. 'However, any attempt atposeful -change must start with aselatively accutt,.ate picture of how things are. Only then can yodtdeal with how to change the system to makebetter. There they be too much fragmentation
: the organization orsotne.seFvices. There may be t.too much consolidation in the organization ofother services. Changes in both directions maybe helpful. Organization appropriate for one areamay be infeasible .or ineffective in a pleice withdifferent resources and different service needs.We can only find out which types of changes willimprove police services after: we understand theway.things are now and "the range of alternativesthat may be available :, .
L
HOW THIS REPORT IS ORGANIZED ,
We , addres,s three broad issues in thisreport. Each is treated in a separate chapter andincludes` discussion of several related questionThe three issues and major questions are these:
-.* ' Producers of POlice Services
4 What types of agendies produce policeservices directly for citizens ofmetropolitan areas?How many'producereere there for eachdirect cervide.?What type:IC*9f agencies produce auxiliary
What Kinds of agencies receive mutual.assistance? .1 ,A ency Size and (Service PeliVelY
Ho ',common are local "full-service",poll, e deParttnetits in 'metropolitanareas 1.
What's its of specialized police serviceproduce re Terei
-4 -How.are a II range of services suppliedin areas n t served by "full-services'departments /
.:
----19_ ' How is themsi 9f a local po lice agency' 'related,to its ut fizatiod of personnel?
,'What shire of:rneropolitan policing is theresponsibility of small,' local depart- -
- 5 ments? - 1 ..
.
On the basis of our. 'ens brs;tolheseques-lions, we conclude that the iversity in size c, j,_,--agencies and the different coin initions of de-R-ices they produce/are not neces arili wasteful or
. confusing. There ,appears to b ttie duplication ./.
.;-by small- to medium-sized po ice gencies. Most -police departments seem to know what servicesthey are responsible for and wheret to deliverthem. Jurisdictional boundaries at generally
/ ,open fr. free pursuit and for mutual a sistance in -shemergencies. Instances of duplicatig of confulion, and .of noncooperation are found, 'of cdurse,but they are not the Comnibeoattern.ReOrganiza-tion of metropolitan poljoirige-needsfto be based .on a 'realistic assessment of the resources and -,
needs of each particular metropolitan area,cervices for police agencies servingmetropolitan areas?
,
-Howminy prodUcers are there for eacheery -ice?
Agency Cooperation and Service DeliveryHow much duplication ofervide delivery '
* 'is there in metropolitan areas?What-kinds,, of arran_gements _haves been'developed to reduceduplicatirktfserv-ice delivery?What legal authority is there for fresh put-suit beyon urisdictional boundaries?
How in It mutual assistance do localpolio agencies give and receive in
metropolitan yeas? -
How. common 'are mutual ais-aiceplientsand ,cross-deputization?What kinds of agencies 'give mutual'iisistance?
n
/WHAT DID WE STUDY?'
- Many service activities are assigned to lawenforcement agencies in' the, Unite,cf _States Wechose /several services to study because wecould pot afford to obtain Information all the
,prbdubers df all of them. Similarly, we couTti not;collebt the, kind of information necessary for thisstudy for all of the metropolitanaread In the coun
itry4We selected for study 80 metropolitan areas*7...which include a Variety of kcOnorniC-3activities,
residence patterns,and police abencies. Theyare representative of all bUt the largest metro-
; Olken areas and include portions of:the NevirYork, Chicago-, and Los Angelei megalopolises.
So that you can evaluate the information weCollected and where and how it was obtained, vie'review the deflnitione of the serviceewe studied,the Scholl of metropolitan areas we studied, and
ai
the'proculures we used to gather and verify in-formation on tlie delivery of our.seiected services
.-in,those metropolitan areas...You will find a glossary of terms used in this
study in Appendix A.
,The Police Services Studied
I
Police perform a` variety of tasks, some of;Which are direct -services to citizens. We ex--aMined the' delivery of three direct services: I,
. Patri:il
Traffic Qontrol;.- Criminal Investigation
Theis:), three services include'sorfe of the moretime consuming and/or higher- priority policeservices to citizens. For our purposes, delivery ofthese services involves actiVity by officers' whohaVe extreordiner povVeriof arreStin the 'conductof the service, thus excluding priyete watchm'en,.guards, and private investigators. We define thethree direct services as folloya:
Patrol is organiied `'surveillance of publicplaces within a specified territory and responseto reports ofeuspected criminal activities for thdpurpose of preventing crime, apprehendingdffenzders, or maintaining public ,order. Officers ,assigned' to patrol also typically respond to
_emergencies and other types of noncriminal calls,
. .
Criminal investigation is activity undertaken_to identify the persbne suspected of alleged pri-
,minal `acts, to gather evidence ,for criminal prp-ceepings, or to recover stolen goods. Because
the_agencies and the'methods of investigation-differ with different crimes, depending on theirdegree of, seriousness, we specifically focused
--"--dur attention on investigatidn of reeklearial bur-, glary and investigation of Vpicide. Residential
.burglar' is an OftenAncountered felony, In con-trast, .nornicidel ,opefirs .less -frequently, but isgenerally regarded as kmbleterious offense.
Entry-Level Training
Crime LabolatorySome of the policeAgencies whicti produce
direct services'also prellfuce some of their ownauxiliary serviceuEome do not produce auxiliaryservices for thelrelves; but obtain them from
-other direct service police agencies. Still otherdirect service agencies receive auxiliary serv-ices from specializedegencies,which do not pro-
_duce direct services (erg., community collegesand technical institutes, hospital laboratories,answering services, and fire departments).
The 1Cur auxiliary :'services studied aredefined as follows:'
Radio communication is the relaying of re-. quests for- police assistance to officers in the
field and the receipt of radioed requests for infor-mation of assistance fromfficers In the, field.
AdtiltPre=trial detention ia,the holding of anpadousifttiaftonebr.faarraaaigsnem. Oenntlybuatgperniocrietso efimnaplocyloeurret"cclii
hold ind Is in their facilities for more than 24'lours ay luded We did not consider agencies,that hed temporary "lock-ups" es,droducers ofadult pre-trial,detention _services.
Entry -level _training is the department.re-gutted training of tecruits for a direct service'police agency. We do not disregard State re-quirements for entry-level training. ForAinany
departments, the State minimum is the depart-mental requirement-oFOr some, the departmentalrequirement greatly exceeds the State min irnutn..
Traffic- control 'Includes 'the monitoring ofvehiciiier traffic and the investigatidn of traffidac.:,-cidenti.-Because traffic'patrol assignments may
iffer_ from traffic accident ingestigatiortassignments, We examined the delivery of etch.,
Auxiliary services are used police agen-cies in their; production, of diredt'services. They,are services used by the producers of policing"rather than direct services to citizens, Wegathered data on' these'four:
Radio goitimUnicationAdult Pre,Trial Detention .
Crime laboratory analysis is the procestingof evidence by persons whose testimony is ac-cedted for presentation in court. Many kinds oflaboratory analyses are required in criminal andaccident investigation. We have limited oUratten-tion to the identification of narootidi and thechemical analysts of such substances\ as bloodand hair.
The Metropcilitan Areas Studied -
This study concerns police services deliv-ery in small- to medium-sized metropolitan areas.In 1970 -the U.S. Census Bureau identified 200
'single -State Standard' Metropolitan StatisticalAreas (SMSAs) withpopulations of less than 1.5
"million., More-than 67' million *Americans, one -'third of the U.S. population, lived in these 200metropolitan areas. We selected 80. df theseSMSAs rando'mMetropolitan areas in ,3f States were includediinthe sample.- Map 1.1 indicates the State and
4J /t&
MAP '1.1 .
The 80 Metropolitan Areas bnd the 16eile'ral Regioni.
. ,
Feder admIn1Strative region in Which each ofthese metropolitan spas is located:,
-- The 80 SIAM include Eilwide variety ofwriletrOPiblitan area sizesipop&tionllensities, and
types or communities. Thrfttthtm have morethan one million residents.-ten haVe-fewer than100,0001 residents. Population densities rangefrom' 32 persons per square mile to more than3,000. persons per_square mjie.3 A list of the 80
'.SMSAs and their Pppulations is included as Ap-pendix B df this report.
, Majortcities are included in our sample 01060SMSAs. Two cities.have more than 500,000 Riskdents.within effriltnits and another nine have be-ti.v'eerl 250,000And '500,000 within city limits .%Twenty-three pities have between 100,000 and250,000 residents.
This study also includes the full range ofother types of areas which police agencies serve,including smaller central and subufban cities'andtowns (abolit 90 percent of the municipal policeprpducers _in the 80 metropolitan areas serve
',Cities having fewer than 60,000 residents, and... about 68 percent of these producers erve cities
with populations of 5,000 or less), nincorpor-Med county areas near more built-u Cities, andrural areas.
_.The 80 SMSAS include a wide, variety of
' commercial 'and residential areas. Many includelarge agricultural tracts or 'timberlands. Some of-ttie- SMSAe= have major military installations.Others are dominated by major universities. Teninclude the State capital. Together, the 80metropolitan areas represent the many' types ofareas ID whichitkmericans livt, worik,end receivepolice services. .
Data Collection-
Police agencies themselves were the majorsource of data for this report. More than'250 person -days were spent in the 80 SMSAs during the -period of June-11974 to May 1975. Direct,'in-per-son interviews were conducted with members ofabout 600 police producOA:Ciftenseveral mem-bers of a police departidekW4re interviewed toobtain the needed inT6rikia*n. Approximately300 additional producers_- kere contacted byphonet Ow 300 agerked,responcled to .mall
, questionnaires, and many,ciethese agencies werealso telephoned in order, fo verify information..Thus, data concerning 1,200 producers were Col-
rledi3d directly from each,prOducer.
. .Officers of these producers were also able
to provide information about agen'cres serv-ing their areas. Information on..some auxiliaryservice producers came only from agencies_using the service; for example, we learned abouttraining academies located, outside the 80SMSAs from police departments who used theseacademies far recruit training-.-Sheriffs.were oftenvery helpful in providing information,_about per-'sonnel and services performed by_srnaller agen-cies within their Counties. Whenever possible', weobtainechinformation directly from an agency. Buttime limitatiCns and limited resources for fieldwork precluded our obtaining Information directlyin all caseS. v --r--- ,------
. Al ,44.1. __-- 7.
4 ,
We also visited the State capital of each'State,in which one of the 80 SMSAs was located,
- to look for repositories of data'already collected.This minimized the burden-of data Collection on
, locarattfincies. More than -40 person-days werespent in State capitals. We found-Stale planningagencies; State training councils, and Plher State s_
agencies to be very helpful and in,some cases,eery valuable_sources of detailed and current in- iformation.The headquarters of.the State lice orState Highway Patrol frequently provlde full datafor all units serving the metropolitan are s in that
State. The data.reflect police organization andstaffing' fcr 1974.
,-, - .'
Data ori the service areas were-obtainedfrom the 1970' U.S; DeIenial Census and the1973 Census Bureau efillr.riates. Because the
.,census data are generally' aggregated to theboundaries of local governmental, units,- It was
' often necessary for us to calculate the servicp ,area's size by subtracting from the size of a unW'(e.g., a city),the territories-of the, various servicearea enclaves within the city limits. For example,the city, of 'Fayetteville, -Norttl,Cetolina, had a1973 -population of 58,099. :The 'Fayetteville
*State UntversitYampuk(Within the city of Fayet=teville) had 1,643 residents. This latter figure isthe size of the resident population served by the 4,
Fayetteville State University campus police. The..Fayetteville city police patrol a resident popular ,Lion of 58;099 mlnuslig43.or 561456. A similar.
,. "remaindering" process was required for roostcountled and many cities lnthla study.
, .
State taws were researched by law studentsusing the library -.of the Indiana University Schoolof Law. Legal experts In each Statd were thenasked to check the accuracy and currency of thelegal findings. Information was obtained from theState statutes for all 50 States as of a cut-off dateof June 30, 1974. ..
NOTES TO CHAPTER I
1. A Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areais a designation specified by the U.S. Bureau ofthe Ctansus in order ter identify systematicallSjmetropolitan areas in the United States.'An SMSA
-is defineti_lexcept, in_the New England States) asa county or a group of contiguous counties con -_taining at least one central 'city of 50,000 inhaletants or more, or several cities with a combinedpopulation of at least 50,000. Contiguous coun:ties are included in an §MSA if they rneetthe Cen-sus Bureau criteria related to social andeconomic relationships to the central city (e.g.,subutban fesideri:ts commuting to Work in thecentral city). In the New England States, SMSAsconsist of clusters oftcontiguoUs cities and New8nglanicl towns which meet the same SMSA cri-teria as counties, in other parts of the UnitedStates.-Single-State SMSAs are--those which arelocated sorely within the boundaries of one State.They.do not cross.StOte lines.
2. The sample was stratified by the 10regions used for administrative purposes by theU.S. Department ot,Justice and by other Federalagencies. We wanted to be sure to include someSMSAs from each of the 10' different regions inour sample of 80, so that important State and,regional variations might be observed. Stratifida-tion in sampling permits this.
3. The distritrution of populatig, sizes and
-
6
.densities across the"80 SMSAs closely refle'Ctsthe full 200 SMSAs from which we selected Oursample. In the 200 SMSAs, populatiOn rangedfrom 55,959 to 1,421,869. Population densityranged from 19 persons per square mile to12,963 `persons per square mile. The, nedianrsized SMSA,had a 1970 population of 219,743.riffy-five percent had 1970 populations of lessthan 250,000; 20 percent had more than 500,000.Metropolitan areas in the Midwest were generallysmaller in sizee, while those in the West tended tobe larger. Metropolitan areas in the Northeastwere most densely populated, and those in theWest generally had much lower population den-sities. This results-in part from the definition of
,SMSAs. In the-New England portion of the North-east region, the Census Bureau includes a town inan SMSA only if its population density is greaterthan 100 persons per square mile: In other partsof the country, entire counties are included in an
;SMSA if any part' of the county is included.
'4. The two cities witlir"fhOre than 500,000/residents are Pfioenix and San Antonio. The pine-cities with between 250,000 and 500,000 resi-dents are: Akron, Oliip; Austin, Texas; *lir-mingham, Alabama;- El, Paso, Texas; Nashville-Davidson 'County, Tennessee (treated by theCensus.Bureau as a consolidated city- county);Rocheiter, New York; San Jose, California; Tam-pa, Florida; and Tulsa, Oklahoma.
1 '1
Chapter 'II
PRODUCERS OF, POLICESERVICES
1
Several Types of police agencies patrol, agency ldcated outside the metropolitan area itcontrol traffic, and investigate repOrts of residen- serves.
t ' tial burglary andhomitide in metropolitan areas. -Some .-agencie,s conduct, patrol, trafficMany of these agencies are local; serving only patrol, &plc accident investigation, end -in=-jurisdictions within a single SMSA. A few' are vestigaticip of residential burglary and homicide.
'State or Federal agencieb; however,,with person-nel Conducting police services in more than one
-metropolitan area. Each State and Federal agen-cy le coded and counted as a produCer in each ofthe metropolitan areas it serves. There are 1,454prOducers of these...direct services- in thls Eiti"pMSAs westudied. When our interest is in thedelivery of police, services within eachmetropolitan area, this count of prOducers is -more appropriate than a count of separate agen-cies involved in service orodiiction.,We first dis-cuss the agencies supplying police servitts andMen consider the service producers within eachSMSA.
'Whenever direct serviat are produced Syagencies headquartered outside the SMSA, per-
- sonnel from stich agenciei work within themetropolitan area. In many'States, traffic patroland accid4rit investigation on mathiproughfares crossing -metropolitan wits areconducted by a State agency. Some metropolitanareas receive patrol- or criminal" investigationfrom State agencies. Federal agencies also. con--duct patrol, traffic control, and criminal investiga-tion on Federal reservations in some metropolitanareas.. In all these cases, the State or -Federalagency is a producer of metropolitan police serv-ices in, each of the metropolitan areas where Itsofficers work.
Auxiliary service producing agenCies do notalways conduct their services in the metropolitan
Other agehcies produce only one or two of these-services. Many agencies supply none of the fourauxiliary eervibee, while some of those, who pro-duce auxiliary services conduct none of the
. direct polite services.=
AGENCIES PRODUCING1
6 DIRECT SERVICES
Different types of agencies Conduct differentservices. For example, there are almostp1 ,300agenCies supplying patrol, but fewer than 900conducting homipide iriyestigations, Municipalpolice department's account for more than70:per-cent of the ?agencies that conduct end of thedirect services we studied (Figure 2.1). The pro-portion of Otharitypes of agencies varies accord-ing to the service. County police and sheriffs are
8Abctut 10 percent of the patrol and burglary andh micide investigation agencies, but only 5 per-cent of the traffic accident investigation agen-cies. State lay' enforcement agencies, in con-trast, are about 3 percent of the traffic accidentinvestigation and homicide invesAigatiom agen-cies, and only 1 percent of the agencies that con-duct the other services. Campus police agenciesr6preaent 5 or more pe,rcent of the total for eachof thele services. Military law enforcement agen-cies account for andffier 3 percent or so of theagenCies conducting_" these services. OtherFederal agendies account for only about 1 per-cent for each service. Other local agencies are
areas whose police agencies they setve. Mallfr about 5 'ftercent of the patrol and traffic accidentlocal police depert(nents, for Inoutside
ance, send investigation agencies, but are only 1 or 2 per-recruits to jraining academies lo dent ,of the criminal investigation' agencies. "';' their metropolitan area. Thesetrainint3 academies
have been included in this study because theyproduce entry-level training for Local depart- 3 Direct-Service Producers in Eachments in the SMSAs we studied. Any °Mlle foul SMSAauxiliary serviceschemical . analysis of evi-dence recruit training, pre-trial detention, and Most metropolitaroreas have both looarandradio Communicationsmay be produced by an State or Federal producers of direct services.
7
1,8 ,)
73%Municipal
PoJiyeDepartments
77%Municipal
Police.Departments'
State and Federal agencies usually, supply directservices toAeveral SMSAs. Thus the total numberof producers for the 80 metropolitan areas Isgreater than the number of agencies supplyingthose servicei. Municipal police departments arethe molt numSrous prbducers of direct services.
More than 60 Pircent of the producers of patrol,traffic control, and criminal investigatich in the 80'metropolitan areas are municipal Once. Thiscategory includes not only the police depart-ments of cities, towns, and villages, but alsotownship and New England town police. Agencies
ti '
89
,
of this type usually supply all three of the direct Metropservices to the juridictions they sertfe. Table 2.1 t., the inyshows a regional aeakdown of the proportion of: Orstidproducers of direct services which are municipalipolice departments. Et
; -titan areaS tiagiy% S
tion.
ahAi -commonly suppl
Countysheriffs' departments, county police4. !fewer of them inVdamp.us policeldepktments, and county prosecutors' police ac,,
. - count for _a4out 8 percent of the producers of;, the kind of ginthe campus: St4 patrol, traffic control, and criminal investigation in
e_rti tropolita areas outside New Englkid (Region.' leges and univcfampuses with1). New Eng and town police conduct these'seri- 4
f the country, county': ;'.; tfAve campus police, condUopng patrol, - trafficcounty police have control, and Crimief investigation. Campusmuch of the territory, 14 Roil e account lot-almost 7 percentof the pr4-
. within metropolitan areas, some of which it urbatit ducprs of direct police services in the 80 SMSAs.but much of Which is rural. County agencies also.] Mili4ry law enforcement agencies als.o sup-' often ,coordinate investigations withrntunicipaV ,,, plydirectePolice services in metropolitan areas.and speCiardistriapalice departments,and sppi Fort,y-eight hase _police units serve Army, Navy,ply them with auxiliary services. Like munic pal Air force:, and Marine"Corps thstatiations-in thedepartments, most bfittem supply all three direct 80 SMS*s. Almost all of these patrol, and moreservices.
in the sample of 80 receive ,!vices of state bureaus df in- _--
university police departmentspatrol and traffic control, butstig ate crimes. We consider all
a single category, regardless ofrning authority responsible forte, -county, and municipal col-rsities are not the only kinds ofheir own law enforcement agen-
. ices in rural parts of metropolitan areas in tho e ales. Many private colleges and univer4ities alsoStates. in other partsheriffs' departments o
. responsibility for seryin
. than haltalso investig ate burglary: InvestigationsState police, highway patrols, and State of homicides and-of more serious burglaries on
bureaus of irwestigation are another group of ,Federal military reservation's are undertaken by.agencies producing direct services. State agent military investigation agencies: the Army Criminal
. ' cies control teaffib on at least some highways ih , Investigations Division, ..the Naval Special In-, . each of the 80 SMSAs. In.laalf of the metropolik veetigations Office, and the Air Force Office of
areas, the highway patrol or State police arse; . -.Spb,cial Investigations. Several of theconduct criminal investigations. Thirteen other` ;Metropolitan areas,llve more, than one instalia-
:
TABLE 2 1 Numbers and Types of Producers Supplying birett Police:Services In Hie 80Metropolltap Areas-4 - .
Percent of Direct Police Producers That Are:Numberof Direct Municipal
Region 8 , 48 44 8 10-Region 9 _170 -- 43 7+ 4Region 10 28 i 68 21 ..
.--
_47ROWS ntay not !OW 100 percent du it teactuncimp cools
9
MilitaryPolice
Federal . DtherPolice Police .
Producers Producers
7
10
, 6
0
3 e.
23 '0 0 7
, 6 4 , 2 . . 5
6 1' 34 4 11
-6 1 . 410 11 5
7
6a
1915
,6 I
'8 Ilk'6
130 o . 0 4.
20
)
.4
tiolLot the same branch of tie military and,therefore, have several base Police prOducers,'
single military investigation unit..Eightyof the 1,454 direct service producers aremilitaryunits.
4,7 Nonmilitary Federal agencies-constitute`,-another group. Of producers. The Federal §ureauof Inyestigatiorkis regularly involved in burglaryend homicide ilnyeatigation on .Federal reserva-tion& in 26 ()Ube 80 metropolitan areas. Theseare SMSAs withimilitary or other Federalseserva-
*tions,, The ,F1211 (and other Federal investigativeagencies-such as the Bureau pf Alcohol, Tobac-co, and Firearms_ and the Drug Enforcement Ad-
-ministration, ponduct inyestiiations in allmetropoliten-SfEias. The enfoicement of Federal
. laws is not within the scope of this study, exceptOn Pederal reservations where Federal _law. sup-Plants State lain( as the general criminal code'.Other Federal agencies producing patrol, traffic
--contra!, or burglary and homicide investigation inFederal, jurisdictions inOlUde the Veterans'Ad-ministiation, the National Par Service, and the__'Bureap of Indian Affairs. These tgenctes producedirectpoilce setivices in a variety ol combine-tions,psually including patrol and Araffid controlFoity of the 1,454 direct service prOdOcers arenonmilitary-Federal agencies.
(
The-final type of djrect service police pro-. dupers we discuss are the ley/ enforcement
°departments of other agencies like housingauthorities, airport authorities, park departments,capitol police, hospital police, and so on. A few ofthese investigate crimes, but most are mitts'and/or trafficcontrol prodticert..Wben we cofi-bine these "specral , district" producers, theymake up about 6 percent of the producers of,patrol, traffic control, and criminal investigation in'the 80 SMSAs,
54 'The median number of patrol producpcs in.the 80 SMSAs is 13. This means that half of the`8f4.1SAs haVe 13 or feWer patrol producers, whilehalf have more than 13. But, a simple count of pro-ducers does not characterize police servicedelivery adequately. For elample, onemetropolitan area might have 10 agencies thatproduce patrol service for a population of onemillion. Another might have 10 agencies, but apopulation of only 100,000. The, difference be:tween the two areas is lost ifbne uses only a sim-ple count of producers. Computing the number ofproducers per 100,000 inhabitants of aMetropolitan area proyides a means of showingthe difference between the two metropolitan
-,areas of the example. They both would have 10producers but the number of producers per
100,000 populatiim in the first Is 1.0, while It is10.0 in the second SMSA. In relative-terms, thereare mpny more producers in relation to con-sumers In the second nfetropotitan area than inthe first. As Table 2.2 shows, the median numberof patrol producers per 190,000 Inhabitants irrthi80 metropolitan areas is 5.9.
.A smaller number of ducers" investigitehomicides in, metropolita reas than conductgeneral area patrol i% the median number ofhomicide investigatiorraroducers is eight. Nomore than fout homicide investigation prOduceisper 100,000 population operate in half of the 80'metropolitan areas. Most metropolitan areas-havefewer producers of traffic accident- investigationand residential -.burglary' investigation ,than ofpatrol, but more producers of these services thanof homicide investigation.
Consideribieregional variation exists in the'number of direct-service producers in an SMSA.Metropolitan areas In California and Arizona(Region 91, and iti.NeW York and New Jersey,(Region 2) generaTly have the larges:number of ,producers of dieect police_services. Regionalvariation is less, for nomber,of -producers per100,000 inhabitants. A common patternacrtisseltregions is for there to be more producers ofpatrol than of other direct services.
In general, metropolitan areas with moreresidents have more producers of direct police,Services. By, computing the number of producersper 109,000 residerts, we can see,whether largerSMSAs,also tend to have relatively more policeservice .producers. We find that this is not thecase. Relative to thelnumber of people living in a 41'
metropolitan ,area, there are fewer producers tothe very largest SMSAs than there are in thesmallest ones. Metropolitan areas with popula-tions-from 125,000 to 20999 tend to have themost producers of direCt services per 100,000residents (Table 2.3).
4
The reason that more agencies producepatrol than the other direCt services is thatsmaller cities, townships, and college campusesoften_oitanize part-time or small, full-time policeagencies to supplement the patrol capability ofother police agencies'responstVe for orOvidIngdirect services to these areas. The municipalpolice departments, county sheriffs' departments,or State police Which have authoritY to producedirect services -for the areas, continue to under-take investigationsreither independently Dr, insome cases, in coordination with the smalleragencies. Where the agencies with overlappingjurisdictions condudt investrgations indepen-
10
1
t
TABLE 2.2 Number of Direct Service Producers in an SMSA Who ProduceRegion
Median Number of Direct Service Pnidudersin an SMSA
,dently, the striall,patrol producers specialize inpatrol and Immediate_ response services and donot usually conduct ,investigations.. We discusssome of these arrangements more fully in Chapter111., - - i
AGENCIES PRODLICING,AUXIlrbkRY SERVICES
,The services we haVe discussed'above aredelivered dtrectry-to-citizens. Auxiliary servicesare used bypolice agencies in the production ofdirect services With the exception of radio corn-,tnunications, few direct service producers pro-duce their own auxiliary services (Table 2.4). Insthis sections we discuss --the types of agenciesSupplying these services. In the next section, wediscuss thlmber of 'producers supplying eachservice to in ividual SMSAs. A single agenci canbe a pr4ducerin each of several metropolitanareas.
The number of agencies producing auxiliaryservices is smaller than for direct services. Thevariety of.agencies producing auxiliary servicesIstgreater (Figure 2.2). Of the 985 ageneies/whoproduce radio communications, only about 60percent are municipal police, departments:. Court-.
Ay_ sheriffs and campus police both constituteabout 10 percent cif the agencies produclhg radio
cpmFnunicaticns. About 3 percent are specializedcommunications_centers.Vany of these dispatch-specialists are _inuniciPaUcomkrtunicationsbureduiorganizecito dispatchfor both police andfire departments. Some are regional communioklions centers organited -to serve several_neighboring police agencies. ;..
The pattern for the .200 detention producing---agencies is quite different. County 'sheriffs main-tain 44 percent of the jails, while municipal polleedepartments maintain ,about 26 percent.Specialized detention Centers account- for it13percent. Most military bases have-their own de-tention facilities. They constitute another 15 per-.cent of the agencieS - producing 'this'These units-detain only. military personnel, and wedid not study them in, depth. We did obtain data onthe detention factlties of the nonmilitary pro-ducers,,however. Althoughcounty sheriffs con-,stitute less than half of the civilian detention_agenciesn the 80 SMSAs, they supply more than80 percent of thaWrimilitery. detention capacity'in these areas. -
; < ; ;All levels of government are inyolved in the.
1 :production or entry-revel 'training.' Municipalagencies constitute about 30 percent of the 226agencies producing entry-level training, while
TABLE 2 4 Auxiliary Seri/ices Supplied by Qirect Service Producers
Type ofDirectService
. Producer
All Direct'Producer§ .
MunicipalPoliceDeparts is
CountyPolice '.and Sheriffs
StatePolice
.
CampusPolice
MilitaryPolide
FederalPolice
OtherPolicePrOducerS
&,
Numberof Direct
PoliceProducers,
Percent of Direct Prdducers That Supply:
Adult Entry- Cher:nice!Pre-Trial Level . LaboratoryDatention' Training Analysis
. Radio'Communi-
cations
1454
936,
108
68
66
87. e
11
6
_01
15
6
7
97 88 -0 86
.108 84
.
58 17 42
40 32 .75
58 o -10
Ir
8
1.
7-
60
'410(
65
0
IAA
12,
State agencies constitute about the same per-centage. About.1 4 percent are regional trainingacademieli. M08t of these academies areorganized prough inter -Jurisdictional arrange-mehts fn whicfra number of local, direct service,producers in a metropolitan area organize oneacademy to serve their combined needs. A
-goyerning board, composed of local [policeK.
-officials, rganizes the curriculum and hires theinstructor . Colleges also offer entryrlev4 train-ing for -di ect_,,service producers in seyeta)SMSAs. Th y account for about 11 percent of theproducere.',of police ecreit training. Countyacademies and military. ,c civilian Federaitageri-cies ire-the other Suppli rs if entry-levet trairr-ing, , _ ,_,k- .
26%Municipal
PoliceDepartments
29%Municipal
Police,Departments
19%Mupicipat
Police ,Departments
tk-.4.1
Thg,humberof agencies regularly producingcrime laboratory analysis for the 80 SMSAs issmailL-only 85. State agencies i constitute about45 percent of these, while Municipal departments.
a and, county sheriffs each make up about 15 per-.
cent. About 10 pereent are. Pederal 'agencieg.There are seven private produCersargi fOur multi-jurisdictional agencies t onducting dhemicalanalysis of evidence. Bost °of these igenOiaesupply crime laboratory analysis' to more than asingle metropolitan area.
Auxiliary Service Producers-in Each $MSA
. The rildriber of producers' of auxiitary serv-. ices in each ,SMSA is much lower- than that for
direct services (Table 2.5). The median number of.radio communications producers in an SMSA. isnine, fouriarantry4evel training and two for -de-
iention 'and for laboratory analysis, There is no. more than one jail and one crime lab for approx-
3---Iti.jr,tely everyseven patrol or investigation pro-ducers in, half of the .SMSAs. There is no more thanone training acadejny.for every three cljredt.serv-,ite producers. Thg median isles than one radio
1.444.
-".:': - . . f
communicationi3producer for e;-.O;;po"lice agency
. ,....
, using radio communiciiiipriN.The number Of auxiliary service Oodubers
increase§in larger SM$As, while the numperrela-iive to thb number of direct -service prodlicers,falls. Sp, in the xneidian.--Sty*A. ofthose.Pover800,000 inptibillation, there igapprokimately onejail andane lab per.ten direct set#toa briodOcers,
=,-,-,-_,*hile in the mediariSMSA of those tinder 1R.§,000- thbre is one jail perily di rifot,Aervic$144,4citrge rs
utand abo on% crime lab per four erect serviceproducers.
._,
- . . , ,_., ti VI i-
It is true that theie are a large'number of --'
police agencies serving metiopOlitanareOf Most, _Of these agencies supply direct Vervices*,,a6,6'radio communications. The number' ofproducers of detention, entry-leveffrpinirig:andcrime lab analysis is substantially smaller. !Th,_roles of different types of agencies aleokaryconsiderably cross, the '80.4,°'SMSAx. levariations in p o ction bafferns 1:iy site 'ofagency, by size ff metropolitan area, and by ,_,,...region, preclude making broad generalizationsfor police services delivery in all 'metropolitanareas. , .' 1,r- , - - '.
--1 .
't
TABLE 25 Number of Auxiliary Service Producers in an SMSA Who Produce Eachof the Auxiliary Services By Size Of SMSAMedial; Number of Auxiliary Service Ledi Nurnberof Auxilidy Servide,
, Producers in an SMSA Producelq man SMSA per DirectService Piciaucers Who Utilize Service,_
, _Conventional wisdom holds, that if manyPolice agencies exist in a metropolitan area, itnecesiarilyf011ows that there must be clUOlicationof services. Police officers gre pictured. as trip-ping ovrr_one another as they weave in and out of-fragmented jurisdictions. Officers are seen asisolated from their counterparts in. nearby depart=mentsand as failing tcopperate across jurisdic-tional bdundariee.
In this ON:toter we present, findings which in-dicate otherWise..We find little duplication of
. services.. We. discuss the ways in which policeagencies in fact Organize ihoir service delivery.systems to avoid duplicating each other's work:Then we examine fresh pursuit legislation whichoperii The boundaries betWeen jurisdictions.Finally, we discuss the extent Of emergencyatsitance, mutual aid agreements, and tieputizaT
:.. tion among polite agencies. , ,......- -...,
.. Alttitffigh we .present findings about many.Workable arrangements for policing among agen-
- -cies . we are in-no way recommending mainte-. - - nance of the status quo. Police organization its
each particular area=-can be, exiMined to -deter-mine -whether,ourrent service delivery, patternscan be imprOVed.=Arravergente which work wellinorie metropolitan ared-mtg.'not. we , well in adifferent area. The recognitionlhat-po cing as
' been organized iri,a veriefg of-whys:led s-to Therealization that inanyoptions. are available for
''''reor§itilizing police -Se delivery.
DUPLICATION.00. SERVICE- .
. Dupticaticin of services has b en a majoconcern of oritice of Americ,an'policing. That oocerzt has arisen from-the observation -that m st
.., ., Is that ,these:agiaRbjes are du011Oating.., tether's work. In 'general, our findings refute thi
assamptiOn . . '
:The Work of policing J4, with few exceptions.divided among ,the variouragencles of an SMSA.Each agency is responsible for,_, conducting alimited set of activities and forSerYing a limitedterritory.
1
Overlapping, itirisdictiohe have Also been. -viewed as indicative of ,duplioate service-sir:thy- -,_,.
: erg. But again,- the asSumption id-generally incOn- -- -:-sistent 'with. our findings; For example,- caul-Ay --sheriffs' departments typically do ,not patrol -inthose parts of their legal jurisdiction, atrolled bymunicipal porice..SimilarlY,city, POlice, agenciessualiy do, not 'patrol residential ,.campuses .or.military bases within city _limit& when thesespecial areas have 'their own poliCe. It is,therefore, important 16 distinguish service areas
_ from jurisdictions. A police; service,-area is any.. territory with a resident popUtatIon and a unique
set of set:vice delivery arrangements. Only.wheretwo or more producers conduct the same servicein a single service, area may they duplicate, eachOther's-work. Even 'this' is not usual, however. -'Most producers conducting the same service inthe same service area Piave adopted divisions_oflabor which eliminate duplication.
- .., ,.---joAltiornation ofDirect-Services
In most Service areas where two-or moreproducers, supply, the same service, the pro-
' clucers have diVided the Work between them. Themost common type -of ,division is alternation.Seryice delivery can alternate in time, -in- space,
1 .or with respect to specific clientele groups:For.,. example,. some smalljtifejlcipal police depart-
ments patrol the streets :of Their- municipglitiesonly from eight A.M. tonidnighf From midnight to-eight A.M., county sheriffs' epartmente patrolthose Runicipatities7-Thisi Iternation in time.N lication .1e-involved. I - such. sitiratiOns,-:,c -sheriffs'
f, '.-.1--pa--.tro---;:l.
substitute -*. A_tteInunicipal police officers.._
-.Alternation. space for patrol usually oc-
cursf'where - - I-ctirsf'where -there is special 'purpose. patrol
agency , operating in the jurOiction of anotheragency, Examples include municipal park policewhcoatrol exclusiyely in the parks; school dis-Motor community college police who patrol onlybn campus;and special district police who patrol,airp'orts, bridget;- or hospitals. The defining,-characteristic -Of alternation-in space is the sup-
patrol services to an enclave of anotheragency's ruiTadiction, where the enclave does nothave a resident population. Officers from thelarger jurisdiction may br may riot patrol theenclav6; generally, they do riot., ."
For 'traffic patrol,. a geographic division ofresponsibility by type of thoroughfare is softenestablished.State agencies often patrol traffic oninter-State freeways and majorState highways,but not els4where in thOurisdiction. Municipaland country police rarely patrol freeways.'
Aiteniation based on clientele served is ex-empjified by the relationship between municipalpolice departments arid militSry policeiwhere
. municipalities adjoin large .military base& Both40*
, 0
military police and municipal police Officers maypatrol the downtown area of thgrnunicipality. Themilitary police limit their attention to military per-sonnel, while. the municipal police retain their'responsibility for dealing with civilians.. ,,
For traffic acbident investigation, the divi-.41
,sion of responsibility between a9encisios is oftendetermihed by the seriousness of the accident;i.e., fatalities may be investigated by an agencyother than the one which investigates nonfatalpersonal injury accidents.' Also, property losslimits may determine which agency Will investi-gate a particular accident.
Figure 3.1 illustrates the extent of trafficpatrol alternation in the 80 SMSAs. The SMSAsare ordered from leff,to right according*to thepercentage-of their "service areas with alternatOtraffipatrol producers. Above the tine arp barsindicating the percentage of service areas withalternate traffic patrol .producers, Half of themetropolitan areas have alternation in more than47 percept of theiservice areas. Half have 47
'FIGURE-Alternation of tank *aka
4
Inter-quartile Range
(67% Alternate
a
percent or less..(That is, the 'Median SMSA hasalternate, producers in 47 percent of its serviceareas.) One-foutth of the SMSAs have alternationin .33= percent or fewer Of, their services areas
',Ancther fourth have alternation of traffic patrol inmore Phan 67 percent of their service areas. (That
,is,- the inter-quartile range is between.33 and 67percent.) SerVipia areas.with alternate producersof traffic patrol tend to be larger tjian those,with-out alternate producers. In half of the SMSAs,over three-quarters of the population is served byalternate traffic patrol producers.
As shown in Table 3.1 gthere is more alternLion of patrol,- traffic- patrol, and accident in-.vestigation than of burglary' or homicide in-vestigation. Legal powers and duties assigned to.
. different types Of agencies by State law influencealternation of service delivery. In our sample ofNew England SMSAs, for example, all serviceareas receive accident investigation servicesfrom alternating producers because df Statepolicy( In Massachusetts, the Registry of MotorVehicles investigates all fatal accidents, .and inConnecticut, the Connecticut State Polio n-yestigate all accidents on the freeways which relocated-in each of the four Connecticut SMSAs,Local police- agencies investigate other trafficaccidents in the SMSAs of these States.
-ter T ere is usually more alternation of patroland ent.investigation in SMSAs with largerptopulations. These SMSAs are more likelyto- have airports, municipal parks, and other`enclaves, with 'specialized police forces. LargerSMSAs are also more likely to have major free-Ways crossing several municipalities, each with
its own local police. This creates more serviceareas, to receive alternate service from Statepolice or highway patrols.
-Coordination of Direct Services
Coordination occurs-when two of more producers plan and execute service activitiestogether in a single service area. Two Agenciesinvestigating homicides or residential burglariesin the same service area Usually coordinate their
' work. Regular coordination of criminal investiga-tion typically involves performance of two relatedsets of activities: one based,on local contacts,the other on special investigative skills. Screen-ing crime repdtts, conducting,initial inquiries,Andproviding contacts and background informationregarding the service area are typically carriedout by a service area's own police depar,tment.Departments performing only these aspects ofcriminal investigation usually participate in in-vestigations only in their own jurisdiction. Theywork with investigative specialists, who gatherand assemble physical evidence and testimony.These specialists typically work with depart=ments in numerous service areas.
Coordination in butiglary investigatprot-curs primarily in small towns and in special policedistricts, ed., P011ege and university campuses.Most of the assistance kr local pi:dice agencies inthese service areas comes from the detectivesempliodd by county 'and State investigativeagencies. so
Metropolitan areas vary widely in the per-centage of their service'areas for which agencies
TABLE3.1 Alternation, Coordldation and Duplication of DirectPolice Service Delivery in 80 SMSAS
, '- -Percent of Service Areas M Each
PoliceSetvice
.
Patrol
Traffic Patrol
Traffic AccidentInvestigation
Residential Btirtili'ary
Investigation
*Homicide.InVeStigation
SMSA Receiving Service From:
AlternateProducers'.
C ordinatedPr rs
DdplicateProducers
Median
Inter-QuartileRange. Median
Inter-QuartileRange Median
Inter -
QuartileRange
21 4 -38 0 0 - 0 0 -1447
e33 - E37 0 0- 0' 0 0 -13
35, 13 - 64 0 0 - 7 0 0- 7
7 0 - 6 0 - 27 0 0 - 0
0., 0.-15 ,,,33* 13 - 70 0
8
coordinate homicide investigation. This variationis displayed in Figure 3.2. In 16 of the 80 SMSAs,no- service area ,has coOrdinated homicide in-vestigation. These SMSAs afe grouped at the left
- side cif the figure. All-service areas have coordi-nated homicide investigation in nine metropolitanareas. These aie.at the right side of the figure.The median SMSA has coordinated homicide in--vestigatIon in 33 percent, of its service areas. The
'inter-quartile range is from 13 percent to 70 per-cent of theiervice areas.
As Table 3.1 shows, coordination is a morecomfnon arrangement for criminal investigationthan for patrol, traffic patrol, or accident inves-tigation. 'Coordination is most extensive forhomicide investigation. In over half of the SMSAs,at least op-third of the service areas have coor-dinated homicide irkestigation. The median for
_coordination of burglary investigation is 6 per-cent, with an inter-quartile range from zero to` 27percent. In half of the SMSAs, 7 percent or less ofthe population I,s served by coordinated homicide
investigit(on, reflecting the smaller. populationsof most service Ateas with -c oordRiated investiga-tion services.
State laws and policies are important indetermining the eitent of coordination p1homicide Investigation. County "'prosecutors.' a
detectives invEistigatewall homicides and othermajor crimes in California and New'. JerseySMSAs. State detective bureaus have beenestablished to investigate homicides inMassachusetts and New Mexico. In many other &States, State police regularly coordinate withpolice in some, seryice areas where local in-vestigative resources need to be supplemented.
In addition to producers who regularly coar-dinate.all investigations of burglary or hatnicide,there is also consideraple temporary or specialpurpose cooperation between departments. Oc-cassional cdoperation-on investigations is prac-tically universal.. few, if any, police agencies,whatever their resources, .find- it possible togather all the information and evidence they need
Or .1
(13% Coordination)
Median(33% Coordination)
A
(70% Coordinat
1 .
'
.
18
in all cases Without the assistance of tother agen--, cies. In .maily metropolitan areas, special inter-
agehoy,task forces have been established to pro-vide continuity to the.coopetative efforts of the
, Parlous criminal investigation agencies workirig.in the area. Several SMSAs, including Des-Moines, Iowa and 'Madison, Wisconsin, have
,-\developed multi-jurisdictional major casesquads. The squads train, together at regular
(intervals and are available to any jurisdiction intij e areaiif a major caseusually a homocide
ccurs and the local force needs the help of aspecialized-team.
Duplication of Direct Services.
Duplication occurs only in those serviceareas' where two or more Police agencies-supplythO:sairie service without{ alternating or coor-dinating their activi ties. As shown in Table 3.1, noduplIcatioh exists in Aver half of the SMSAs for alldirect bervices. There is no duplication in resi-dential burglary investigation and homicide in-
vestigation in three-quarters of the SMSAs. Moreduplication exists in the supply of general areapatrol thpn in the supplytf t other direct serv-ices. Figure 3.3 displays th extent of patrolduplication for the 80 SMSAs., orty-two of the 80SMSAAaye no duplication f patrol. The inter-quartile range is zero, to t4 percent. Only about.10 percent of the SMSAs have more than one-third of the serviee areas receiving duplicatePatrol 'seriices. In the SMSA_ with the mostduplication of patrol, 79 percent of the service -areas (but only 48 percent of the population areserved byduplicate patrol producers. Duplicationof patrol production occurs primarily in service ,areas with smallerpopblations; and this accountsfor the smaller proportion Of population being 7"served by du ice producers.,
Duplication, DPordlnation, and Alternation ofAuxiliary ServiCes
Duplication, and coordination of auxiliary
(14% Duplicate)
Services are rare. Only a few SMSAs have policeagencies receiving an auxiliary service from t ocoordinating producers. In more than half of heSMSAs,-rio duplication exists for any of the au il-iary services (Table 3.2). Where duplication x-ists, for training and chemical analysis, it may ean advantage. Police ajncies uSing two or m reacademies or labs have the choice of where tosendrecruits or evidence. These are services forWhich a choice of suppliers may be particularlyuseful to the agency needing the service.
,There-is some alternation in redid com-munications. Some smaller municipal agenci sare dispaiChed by a civilian during, the day-timhours. (This person may also keep poliCe,,and/o
_nonpolice recorddand-do othersecretarial work.In the evening hours, these agencies are dis-;patched by a county sheriff or a neighbor,ing citypolice department. Some alternation occurs inthe delivery of pre-trial detention where twoagencies specialize: one holds male prisoners,\while the other holds female priponers. However,this type bf alternation is not dltensive, Alterna-tion in entry-level training and crime laboratoryanalysis is very infrequent.
Duplkation and Diversity4
Although there is alrbost no duplication in4 service delivery, there is certainly much diversity
in service arrangements. Diversity, by itself, islikely to be neither everywhere useful nor every-where harmful. It may or may not lead to confusionof respon, bility. Most police chiefs .with whomwe spoke expressed little concern abOut the ex-
_
istence of a number of patrol, traffic contra!, andcriminal investigation producers in ft-metropolitan areas,a,nor were they coriceNnedabout those -other agencies serving in their ownservice areas. At the same time, some chiefs wereconcerned about ambiguities in the division ofresponsibilities between' their own gepardnent sand others operating inhe,.same areas. Clearly,some localities have notdipelopedWorking rela-tionships that are understood and accepted by allthe agencies affected. Such localities are rare,-however.
FRESH PURSUIT
The diviiion of metropolitan areas intoseveral separate police jurisdictions is seen bysome obserVers as a deterrent to effective lawenforcement. They assume that police officershave no authority to pursue a fleeing suspect,beyond jurisdictional boundaries. Because policeofficers' authority is largely determined by Statelegislation, we examined State laws regardingfresh pursuit both within sod between States. Wefound that police officers'in most Slates have ex-plicit authority td pursue suspects beyond- ,thelimits of their own jurisdictions.' HoWever, thatauthority is subject to a variety of restrictions.
Intra-State Fresh Pursuit
Thirty-nine States have intra-State freshpursuit legislationstatutes authorizing countyor municipal peace officers to pursue suspectedcriminals 'across municipal and county lines.These States are shown in Map 3.1.
TABLE-32 Alternation, Coordination, and Duplication of Auxiliary ,
Police Service Delivery in 80 SPASAs.,
' ' Percent of Service Areas in EachSMSA Receiving Service From:
antra -Stag fresh pursuit is generally' not aproblem for offi ers'employed,by State =level lawenforcement a encies. Most State Law, enforbe-ment agencies have,_ by definition; State-widejurisdiction. St to police may pursue suspectedoffenders anyw ere.within.their State. County andlocal peace 'Ulcers have more restrictedj risdictions.-F =sh pursuit legislation is not al-
ayst uniform' applicable to these peace.fficers. In Mai :, 'for example; county sheriffsay pursue a s pect anywhefe in the State for
any offense, but uniolpal peace officers are per-mitted by legislation to pursue only as' far as th,er,county lines. In outh Carolina, sheriffs and theirdeputies may p rsue into adjacent counties for
%any offense, bu municipal peace officers maypursue only thr miles beyond their owls. 'Citylimits.
Pursuit authtype of offense. Npermitted to oursin the State, but trcounties. In VirOinState-wide authoribut can pursue onlfor a misdemeanorsence.
rity may also be limited by therth Carolina county sheriffs aree suspected felons anywhereotherwise Jimited to their own
, all peace officers are giveny to pursue suspected felons,
into an adjacent jurisdictionomitted in an officer's pre-
.
Of the 39 Stat s having specific legislationon inha-State fresh p rsuit, 22 authorize all coun7ty and municipal pease officers to engage in fresh,,pursuit throughout the it State for ank offense. Anadditional eight State authorize State- wide pur-suit under at least so e circumstances. That 30States authorize some form of State-wide freshpursuit contradicts an blanket assertion thatpolice officers are unab e to pursue beyond theirown jurisdictions. Of the nine additional Stateshaving other forms of legislation regarding infra-State fresh pursuit, eight authorize county-widepursuit forany offense.
Eleven States have ho legislation pertaining"sespecifically to intra-State fresh pursuit. Lack of
specific legislation does not, however,, precludeUltra-State fresh pursuit activity 61 these States.ly States having no Applicable statutes or caselaw, officers have the same right to.arrest anotherperson asdo private_Rersons under the commonlaw. (Under cornmorf law, e citizen may make anarrest only for a'n offense committed in -his/herpresence.) So, event States,,with no legislationor case law-specifically applicable to intra-Statefresh pursuit, law saforcement officers are nothelpless if a suspected criminal crosses jurisdic-tional lines: the citizen's arrest right extendssate- wide..
22
. , .
Stendaidi of Knowledget
The Standard of knowledge required of anofficer before he can engage in fresh, pursuit de-pends,. in many States, upon the type of crimecommitted. For example, an officer in Alabamacan make. an arrest for a misdemeanor withopt aWarrant'only if the crime is committed in his pre-sence. But to make an arrest -for a felony, theofficer needs only to have reasonable cause tobelieve a felony has been committed.
Fqr misdemeanors, 13 of the 39- States withfresh pursuit, legislation grant officers authority toengage in fresh pursuit when they have reason.:ble cause to believe that a crime has been at-tempted or,-committed. Twenty-fOur States giantfresh pursuit for misdemeanors.under the morelimited condition that the crime was attempted orcommitted in the officer's p-resence.,Practicallyall of the 39 States grant fresh pursuit authority -
with reasonable cause for felOnies.
inter-State-Fresh Pursuit
When a suspect flees ,across State lines,what, authority does, the pursuing officer have?Here the leilelatioh
does,specific: a majority Of
States have, extended broad authority to thepolice toffio_eres -exemplified by this statute:
Any member of a duly organized state, coun-ty or municipal peace unit of another state ofthe United States who enters this state infresh pursuit, and continues within this statein suciffresh pursuit: of a person in order to.arrest him on the ground that he is believedto have committed a felony In such otherstate, shall have the same authority to arrestand hold such perecn in custody, as has anymember of any dilly orgahlzed state, countyor municipal peace unit of this state, to ar-rest and hold inrcusfody- a- person on theground that he Is believed to have committeda felony in this' state. (Kahsas S.A. §62-R2(1937)]'
A statute like this is designated a Uniform Act onFresh Pursuit and has been enacted by 31 States.Ten more States have enacted variations of theUniform Act. Of these 10, tw'o have broadened theauthority of the Uniform Act to include .any
.--offense. The other eight require reciprocity fortheir own Act to authorize Inter-State fresh pur-gull A police officer in any of these eight Statescan pursue across State lines into any other State -
that has passed a variant of the Uniform Act. By1974, only nine -States had not enacted: anylegislation on inter-State fresh pursuit. Most ofthese States are located in the South, as ehovinon Map 3.7. .
IV,
MAP 3.2
Distributicin of inter-state Fresh Pursuit Legislation
MONTANA vo
J
No Legislation Reciprocity quired,
Uniform Act Permitting Purs4Git for Felony Pursuit Allow for any Offense .
Police officere finrri-ost States have,relatively brOad powers:to pursue fleeingi_
.-'suspects, partidularly when a ttlony issuspected. Some States without specific intra-:State authority have used their authority underthe Uniform Act authorizing inter-State fresh pur- .
suit as authorization for fresh pursuit within theirewn State. So the actual practice concerning in-tra-State fresh pursuit may be somewhat under-stated,
EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE, MUTUALAID AGREEMENTS, AND DEPUTIZA-TION
Presumed lack of cooperation among paceagencies /is a favorite.tbpic of critics ofmetropolitan policing. In contrast, we find a greatdeal of mutual assistance. We deaLonly with localpro cers of general area patrol since They are
dp, gencies usually viewed as most likely to1.ttheed emergency as§istance.- .
Patterns of Inter-Agency Assistance
Eighty-six percent of local patrol agenciesin the 80 SMSAs report that they assist otherpolice' departments outside their jurisdictions(Table 3.3). Ninety-one percent report That theyreceive 'assistance from other agencies. Is thisassistance "reciprocal"? In almost all cases,4heanswer is yes. Only 3 percent of local patrolprOducers report assisting other agencies, whilenot receiving assistance themselves. Eight pep -cent report receiving assistance without them-selves providing assistance: Together, bothtypes of nonreciprocal assistance apply to only
.1
11 percent of the patrol agencies. Ninety-threepercent of all local patr61 agencies in the 80
SMSAs report providing or receiving assistance..
riiiuhicripal police, departments provide <assistance outside their jurisdiotips more oftenthan other types of local patrol enpies,. Morethan 90 percent of municipal patr lencies indi-.rate that their officers go beyond risdictionalboundaries -to "assist other agenciele. !Countysheriffs are slightly less likely to assist outside,their jurisdictions: 77 percent provide 4 d outsidetheir jurisdictions. It should be noted,. ',owever,that out-of-jurisdiction for most county pr d_ucersmeans beyond county lines, Almost ,ail bountysheriffs do assist the municillalities",within, theircounty. _Special patrol producers-and carnpuspolice agencies are much lyss-likely to assistoutside their jurisdictions. IriSome instances, thelegal powers of theseofficers are limited to thejurisdictions of their employing agency by Statelaw; for example, to a college or unlyersity tam-pus. These agencies are also less likely to shareradio frequencies'with other agencies, and sotheir officers are not as likely to be aware ofanother agency's need for emergency help.
More than 90 percent. of municipal policeagencies, and about 80 percent of the countyagencies; 'report receiving assistance., Similarproportions of campus and other special districtpatrol producers report receiving assistance.
Mutual Aid Agreements
Although almost all local. police, agenciesprovide assistance to and receive assistancefrom other agencies, fewer local agencies enterinto format ,mutual aid agreements with otherdepartments.
TABLE 3.3 of Local Patrol .Producers Who`Give or ReceiveAssistance -
And Who Ate Members of Formal Mutual Aid Agreements
Type of ProduceiPercent of
Local PatrolProducers--
Who:
Assist Others
Nation"-wide
MunicipalPolide
Depart -_ments
,
CountyPollee
kCdmpuss Police
Other.Police
OutsideJurisdiction
86 92 77 56 . 63
ReceiveAssistance 91 92 79 87' 97From Others
Medibers ofFormal Mutual 30 32 32Aid Agreements
24 37.
---
the patrol agencies have someaid agreement with at least one
Municipal police departments arerganize such aid agreements.
Fift ce of the municipal police depart-ments, but onlY'a out 30 percent of county agen-
ies, campus pol ce,, and other specialized pro -ucers belong to utual aid pacts.
Significant ,rAional differences exist inutual aid pact membership. The West has thegest proportion of agencies who are parties to
fo mal aid arrangements; the South has thes allest proportion. The large proportion ofagencies in the West' who have formal aidagfeements is due principally to California law.which requires all police agencies to be membersof formal mutual aid - pacts.
Patterns of Deputization
-Depiltization meankthat police officers fromone jurisdiction .are given police powers in ajurisdiction or jurisdictions other than their own.Almost two out of five local petrel agencies usesome type of deputization arrang. ement. The mostprevalent arrangement is a nonmutual one whereone agency's officers are deputized by a secondagency, but the first agency does not deputize thesecond agency's officers.
_ The officers of over -one-third of the localpatrol agencies we studied are deputized byother police agencies., Seventeen percent ofpatrol producers _deputize o,fficers from othjurisdictions. ExaminatiOn of deputization p,
terns for county and municipal police depart:ments provides a clue as to why a: larger numberof agencies have officers .daputiieq by otheragencies than deputize officers froM 6ther,agen-cieS,
Nearly 5Cpercent odicate thatthey dagencies, white only
e county agencies InTze officers from otherpercent of the municipal
agencies and almoq no campus agencies deput,ize officers from other agencies. In many in-stances, county sheriffs deputize officers from thesmaller municipal agencied o7erating within their,jurisdictions. Deputization enables countysheriffs, who may have many municipal depart-ments within lheir overall jurisdictions, to drawupon these departments for back-Up assistancewithin the county as a whole:
Fewer than 20 percent of the county patrolagencies have officers who have beerrdeputizedby other departMents. Sheriffs' departmentofficers do not need to be deputized bymunicipalities to have powert of arrest within the. .
municipalities in their own county. This contrastswith municipal, campus, and other local Policedepartments, which have more of their officers
'deputized by other agencies.Many of these aresmall departments. Across the country, more than-50 percent of the departments with only part-timeofficers and more than 30 percent of the depart-ments pith 1 to 10 officers have their officersdeputized by another agency.
Campus police departments are most likelyto have their officers deputized by city, county, orState police. This deputization may give campuspolice their formal police powers, since in someStates college and university security depart-ments are not empoivered to authorize their ownofficers. Campus police are not likely to deputizeothers-7-other agencies -with legal jurisdiction ona'6ampus do not need their officers deputized.
-Participation in- Emergency Assistence .
Only 50 percent of the patrol producers whoboth give and,receive emergency assistance out-,side their jurisdiction are mumblers o_f mutual aidagreement* ClearlY, assiSlanc"e is available inmany places without formal agreements. Twenty-six percent of the agencies Which report neithergiving, nor .receiving any *external assistancebelong to mutual aid agreements; so belonging toa mutual ald'pact is no guarantee that assistancehag been provided. (Of' course, there may havebeen no need for assistance in -some .se thesecases.) Almost 70, petoent of the produOrs whoreport- bdth' giving end receiving emergencyassistant are either members of mutual aidpacts or have some fOrm of 'deputization agree-
,ment Thus, most of the agencies reporting mutualassistance do have some formal- arrangementsbetween them, although the abserfcrOf.formal ar-rangerhents does not preclude assistance.
Larger municipal police departmtnts areless like to give and receive emergencyessis-tance titii small departments (Table 3A). Morethan 90 percent of municipal police departmentssmaller than 50-full-time sworn officers bothgiveand receive emergency assistance. For municipaldepartments !artier than 150 officers, this propor-tion falls to 80 percent giving assistance and 61percent-receiving assistance. 'About 50 percentOf the municipal,' withelB0 or fewerfull-time.sworn -officers are parties to mutual aidagreements, while only 24,percent of the largestdepartments Participate in such agreements. Therelationship for county departments IS the bp-
i posite. Larger countx departments are mlikely to both give `and reCell/de agsl-Stanoe rftaare their large municipal' counterparts. Smaller
county departments are notes likely to partici-pate in a Mutual aid agreement as are smallerniunlcipaWepartments. Almost 50 percent of thecounty agencies with over 150 full -time swimOfficers participate in such agreements. Depart-ment size has no 'relationship to assistance for
!campus abd other local agencies.
COOPERATION, NOT 1SOLA1 ION
We find much more cooperation amongpolice ,agencies producing patrol services than
;.r.tTAM 3.4
Type,ofo Patrol
Producer
Municipal PoliceDepartments ByNumber of Full-Time OfficersPart-Time Only1 to 45 to 1011 to 2021 to '60 '-51 to 1,50Over 150'
Coupty PoliceAnd SheriffsBy Number ofFull-Time-Officers1 to 45 to 1011 to 2021 to 5061 to 150Oder 150 -
Campus PISLiceBY Number ofFull-TimeOfficersPart-Time Only1 to 45 to 1011 to 20
to 5b'51 to 160
Other LocalP,rodUcers By fNumber of Full-Time OfficersPart-Time Only1 to 45 to10.11 to 20
gl, to 5p51 to-150
. f
a.
one would expect after reading many ccf: thedescriptions of metropolitan policing which navel.appeared in national reports. Nationwide, about90 percent , of all agencies give 'or receiveemergency assistance outside their own jurisdic-tions. While the propdrtion of agencies whobelong to formal mutual aid agreements is lower(nearly 50 percent of all patrol agencies), mein:-bership in such formal agreements is not neces-sary for emergency assistance to be given. Agen-cies operating in metropolitan areas With largenumbers of patrol producers are more likely toengage in both formal and informal assistance.
Assistance By Size of Producer
Percent df Patrol Producers That: -
Provide, Receive BelongNumber Assistance Assistance ' Tb A
Reporting To Other From Other MutualPolice Police Aid
Agencies- Agencies -Agreemetit
,
841 I 92
62 95213eos_
9295
119 93119 9376 8746 80
7
2 504 75
16 6927 8526 6916 88
93 5a
3 -0\ -113 31 \30 B4
'18 6129 65 .
T33,
38
211108
.6
26
53'
7360
" 5033
.3
92
9896'95-9694
'61
7.9
50100
75856594
87
s- 100 ,
77927895 4067 33
97
51
5311P46
50
6457
.24
27
13'0
223150
32
2811
32
a"
Not only do-the various agencies patrollingparts of metropolitan areas. provide each rather.with *needed emergency assistance in mostcases, but they also have 'generally organizedtheir work to avoid duplicating each other's ac-tivities-Patrol, traffic patrol, and traffic accident
- Investigation are conducted in alternate times orplaces in most service areas that have more than
tone producer of the, service. Coordination of cri-minal investigations is common.
Overlappinb-,jurisdictions 'usually do notresult in duplicatiortof service delivery. Nor domany separate jurisdictions limit fresh pursuit.
'Most States thavelegislation explicitly, ,authoriz-ing pursuit beyond local boundaries. Cooperationbetween police agencies throughout-the Natiorrs,
---metropolitan areas is extensive.
MOTES TO CHAPTER II1. The process of determining 'Whether* a
state sloes or dpes not have. legislation in thiSarea _involves a somewhat complex anaksjp.There may be a statute dealing With Meetpowers, but jurisdictional, limits are not men-tioned. Or, a statute dealing with the problem of
.t
dat
intra-State fresh rtursuit may have been repealed. ,To illustrate, loWapofice officers are ordered to"pursue and arrest any persOn fleeing fromjustice." (Iowa Code,,,Anh.. .§-366A.'17 .and 18(1g73)] Although this` duty is, not limited banyreference_ to jurisdictional lines; a recent Iowacase has held Ilzatariofficer,,seeking to make anarrest without a warrant outside his originatingjurisdiction must be treated as aprivate person.[Stale v. V'Kelly, 21,1. N.W. 2nd :589,(1 97-3)]wyoming,tird have a statute permitting State-wide purSull, Wyd. Stat. §7-1 63'(1 957); but Rile56 of the Wyoming -Rules of Criminal Procedure
"'provided that this statute be superseded as ofFebruary 11, 1969. And in Illinois, the intra-State(fresh pursuit perwer was presumed by law'enforoement offiCials to be defined by case law orby opinions of the Attorney General. Upon furtherinvestigation,however, citations verifying theie
-authdrities Were not found.
The lull citations'to. relevant statutes are-,contained in Larry Wagner, "Patterns oloatate*Law's Relating to pwti Pqrsuit" (Blooming1M, In, diana: Wttrkshbp in-Political Theory and Poi yAnalysis, Police Services Study Technical Rep tNumigg.t1-1, 1975).
r
-
18*
w.Chapter IV.
. AdENCIF SIZE ANti*. .
'SERVICE DL1VERYElimiRate Small departments! That _ is the
solution tb metropokan police problems accord-ing to some commissions .on governmentreorganization. Some recommend eliminatingdepartments with 10 or fewer officers; others callfor ellininating. ,departrhents with 25. or fewer.officers. Some* even suggest that. departmentswittits many as 50 officers are still too small. Thecall_ or larger police departments 4i;. based onseveral assumptions, about the role of srliall -departments in service delivery: (1) that shall
service" police department. .Small departmentsare viewed as inadequate because they lack theresources toirvide themsdlves with crime labsand detention facilities. They may have too fewofficers to justifylheir own training programs orfulkime fedi° Communications staff. Or they mayhave, tol,few-serious crimes reported to justifythe emPToynierit of investigative specialists. Theinability of small departments to supply such'services, howev.er, should, not be interpreted asindiCating that the services are not available to
departments do not provide -a full range of ser,v- small departments and the communities theyiceato,the communities they serve; (2) that smallig" serve..Withfew eiCeptions,all direct police serv-departments "ikaste" perionriel by creating the ice producers in the 80 inetripolitan areas notneed for separate administrations for each small supplying their own auxiliary §erviCes have ar-agency; and (3) that small departinents predomi- rangements with other. agencie's to supply .themnate in service deihiery (especially for patrol). lh, with entry-level training, cherAical analysis Of evi-this chapter, we present evidence that Those dente, detention of suspected offenders,assumption's are, by and large, incorrect. -and radio communications. AS we have seen in
Chapter the ,assistance of investigativeWe do not intend to suggest thet,all small specialists from other agencies also common.departments are delivering 'the besL possiblepolice services. Undoubtedly, there '0%room for Reliance on 'other agencies ,,for auxiliaryimprovement.departments
robTems wh
hat we do find is that smalln.ot generally cause the kinds of
h have been attributed to then.' inreports y Commission on. LawEnforcement and Administration of Justice and
_several State Aplanning agencies. Small depart-
-ments mayindeedbe inappropriate for supplying. some kinds of police services or for some typesof 'vice areas, but large departments may alsobe inappropriate for certain ta'site and particularadds of communities: For examples small depart-.mentd*ray have morirsupportioe contests be-twedri police and citizens. It may also be elffier tqdesign police policies which are responsivedifferent communities within the metropolitanarea if thereiare several smaller departments thanit,..wduld be if there are a few or Only,one large=department. The chpice of agency *size and
-.organization should be made on the basis of thejob to be dbne and the needs of those who are to,Pe served.
AGENCY Sl4E AND SERVICESPRODUCED
Sortie of the discussibn of .police agencysize has centered around the notion of the "full-4
.1
seryices_is? not limited to small departmenta...Infact, there is only one departinent in the 86metropolitan areas producing all of the serviceswe studied. Like the smaller agencies:rnost largedepartments obtain some auxiliary services from
* other. p Cers. Lague departments are morelikely arrduct all of the direct services westy:Deb, t even, large departments are some=times specialized and produce only one Of two ofthese direct services.
Patrol is the only, service riot ipmrrionlyregarded as 'potentially "specialized." DirectService agencies which are concerned only withtraffic control ar commonly viewed as specializ-ing in traffic, an ncies whose-primary activityis the investigation of re'Dorted crimes are seen,as specializing in criminal investigation. In a simi-lar ways there are some agencies which s ializein patrol, although they are commonly t ght df
- as :'limited service: rather than specialized agen-cies:, These:are mainly special district policesuch asejii,oseot. parks or hospitals, but somesmall municipal police departments also fit thisclassification. Traffic control and criminalvestigation arecohducted in these patrol serviceareas by officers from other agencies with over-lapping jurisdictions. Agencies. special-1En in
29
- r,. .
.patrol mad ,be effective In meeting the distinct_ . , ,
:_needs of some parts or a metropolitan area for-some`particularpairo/ activity. There is no more ..reason for agencies-specializing inpatrol to sup-ply other police services than there is for agen-cies specializing in 'affic-'obntrol to inyestigatehothicide or agen specializing in traffic acci-dent investigation patrbl.-
,
.Most local police departments do not
,specialize in a single service, of course. Regard-less of size, most local patrol agencies also sup-Ply their service areas with traffic 'control-seIcetraffic patrol and accident investigation (Ta-ble 4,1). More than 90 percentof the municipalpolice departments with 11 °more officers sup-
.' ply all five of the direct services. we examined.Smaller municipal police departments are lesslikely thin larger agencies to conduct residential'burglary investigation, and even tete likely to
Type of LocalPatrol Producerand Number of
Full-TimeSworn Officers
:ILocal Pates)!Agencies Reporting
Mu9lcipaiPolicedepalimglts ByNumber Full-Time Officers-Part-Time Only1 'to 4-5 to 1011 to 2021 to 50,.51 to 150Oyer 150 s
Courity Police-and Sheriffs By .Number of Full-:TIme-Officers
3 to 4N 5 to 10 '-
11 to 20'21 to- 5051 to .150Over 150
Other Local PatrolPr.oduaers By "Number of Full: ,Time Officers -
Part-TimeOnly,
r 5 to 1011 to 202116 5051 to 150
conduct homicide investigation. County sheriffs'departments typically conduct investigations intheir service areas.
As we sawin_Chapter small agendeswhich do- investigate homicides are quite likely, to,receive the assistance of investigativespecialists-from other agencies. Thus, serviceareas patrolled by small, local agencies are notwithout the services of investigative specialists.When serious crimes occur in these areas, in-vestigators fromother.agencies coordinate theirinvestigation with officers .of the small patrolagency, or they conduct the entire investigationand the local patrol agency does not participate.
Almost all county police and sheriffs'departments that patrol.also investigate reportedcrime. Fewer of these departments conduct trafficcontrol services, although a majority do so.,
TABLE 4.1 Production of Addifio`nai Services By Local Patrol PrOducer,
Department size makes no_differerice in the serv-ices `produced, by county departments. Otherlocal., police agencies, including campus andother special district police, Are lesC likely thaneither county or municipal psilice to conduct their.own investigations of reported crime, but they aresomewhat More likely than county agencies to beinvolved in traffic control. larger campus andother special district -agencies are somewhatmore likely to conduct more direct police serv-
. ices; but the relationship of agency size serv-ices .produced is not as marked as it is formunicipal police departments.
Fewer departments supply their owri auxili-ary services than supply direct services. Radiocommunicationac the auxiliary service most.commonly supplifid by patrol agencies. Almost allcounty police and sheriffs' departmbnts conducttheir own radio communications regardless ofagency size. For municipal police departments,campud police, and otheLagencies servingspecial districts, larger departmentsare morelately to conduct their own radio communica-tions. It isimportant to note that many agenciesespecially-the smaller oneshave arrangementswith other agerties to conduct radio communica-tions for them during some parts of the day. In
. more than half of the 80 metropolitan areas, atleast,one patrol agency supplying ,its own radio,communications also has an alter ata supplier ofthis service. County sheriffs are an important sup-plier of radio Communications. Communicationscenters specializing in this service hive beenestablished in some SMSAs. Municipal police andother local agencies also su radio com--.municationa fOr each other. I reas, time-sharing arrangements have b e ised so thateach pf three, or four small agencies has respon-sibility for radio communications for all of themduring certain, hours of the day.
Only the largest municipal police depart-['dents are likely to conduct their own entry-leveltraining. some of these departments also trainpctlice recruits tor other police agencies in theirareas. State and regional criminal juitice trainingacademies and universities, colleges, and techni.cal Institutes are other common producers of en-frx-level training. Entry-level training is 'requiredloyiMore than 9,0 percent of the municipal policedepartments and .tounty police and sheriffs'departments in the 80 SMSAsi3Over 80 percent of ----all campus and other local polices agencies alsorequire entry-level training. The latter agenciesare less likely to be subject to state requirementsfor recruit training. -.
31
County sheriffs' departments are the onlylYpe of local patrol agency likely to supply pre-trial detentick. in most States, county sheriffshave 4he.. legal respbpsibility to maintain jails.Other-arrangenients are found, hoimr3ver. Cb.r.M@C-tiOUt has State jailsdKentucky and Pennsylvaniahave county jails which are independent ofthasheriff, and in other metropolitan areas there are,,municipal or county jails not associated withdirect police 'service agencies.- few Of tha-,larger municipal- police departments also main:.taln -their own jails. but they are the exceplion:..County sheriffs' :departments produce Pre-trial
"detention in 62 of the 80'SMSAs and contributeover 70 percent of the total, detention capacity.__acity:Specialized, detention -agencies. serve of ,the80 metropolitan areas andscontribUte about one-fifth of the detention Capacity.' Municipal' Policedepartments produce pre-trial detention in 17SMSAS and contribute less than one-tenth of the.detention capacity. Detentiqn is usually:Su-oiled',in a county -by- county basis so that multi - countymetropolitan areas have separate jails' servingeach 'of Their counties. While county sheriffs'departments and specialized detention agenciestypically y-suPply detention services tb all policeagencies operating in the county, most municipalpolice department WIC are used exclusively-bythoSe departfnents themselves.
Few local patrol. agencies Condubt'r:hemicalanalysis of evidence. Even the largest agenciesuse other agenclea' laboratories rather than
.employing .experts to identify narcotlds: blood,and other substances. State agencies are 4he
_most common supplieraof this auxiliary"aervice.In SOfili, States, laboratory services are prbducedby the State,police or State bureau, of investiga-lion. In others,_ a separate State crime lab hasbeen established. The two types-of arrangements -
are equally, common in the 80 metropolitan areas-we stbdied, and most patrol agencies obtainchemical analyses froM State agencies, But thereare alio -other arrangements In '..the 20metropolitan arms where they are found,.municipal police department labS and sheriffs'department labs are used by` other local Agen-cies. In a few metropolitan areas, hospitallaboratories are used as a Common practice, andIn four. SMSAs, regional crime lobe ,have* beenorganized.
The "full-service". police.departrilent is cer-tainly, not a widely adopted -model_ for..,metropb-litan policing. instead, 'even the ,largestlocal police agenciet obtain auxiliary servicesfrom other agencies," Direct Cervices are alscisometimes divided among specializedrindticers.
Many small municipal, campus, and special dis-trict' agenplegrare, in effect, patrol specialists.Their'utility should not be judged on the basis oftow many services they themselves produce;rather, they should be evaluated on the basis ofwhether their specialized patrol. service isneeded and whether there is abetter way to meetthe need.
Agency Size and'Per net Deployment
Small d artments are sometimesthought to make inefficient use of theiremployees. Each department requires its ownchief, and evert very small departments usuallyhave assistant chiefs and others with tit1:41- hichindicate management responsibilities: What ob-servers often overlook, however, is the on-streetpresence of many police administrators, par-.ticularly in small departments. In departmentswith fewer than, five full-time officers, the chief is aregular part of the patrol force. In somewhat*ger departments, the chief may not-patrol, buthe still maintains supervisory conTact with patroloperations. Rather than small departmentsremoving officers from_ direct service activitiesand placing, them in administrative assignments,the opposite appears to be the case. Smallermunicipal patrol agencies have a lower propor-tion of their officers assigned to administrationand a higher proportion.assigned to patrol. Cam-pusend special district)olice make similar kindsof assignments. County sheriffs' departments donot fit this pattern becausie of the greater. ad-ministrative burden most of them have, regardlessof size, from court related activities such as main-'raining jails, serving civil processes, bailiff duty,and the record keeping whi h these entail.
Municipal, campus, and special districtdepartments with 10 or fewer officers assign, onthe average,. more than 90 percent of theirofficers to patrol. Municipal departments withmore than 150 officers average less than 60 per-cent of their officers assigned to patrol. As Figure4.1, shows, the percentage of officers assigned topatrOl decreases as agency size increases. Thereverse is true of assignments to administrativeservices. But the decreases in patrol assignmentare not equaled by the increases. in administrative
assignment. Larger" departments are more likelyto assign personnel to other direct service orauxiliary service tasks. Departments with morethan 150 sworn officers assign, on the average.
4 15 percent of their sworn officers to criminalinvestigation, 8 percent to traffic control, and 3percent to work with juveniles. These depart-ments, also average 13 percent of theif
officers assigned to administrative services, 2percent to radio communications, and about 1percent each to training, detention,-and crime lab.The percentage figures show the proportionatedifference in assignment, but they' do not revealthe absolute differences. Fewer than 100 officers.have full-time administrative assignments in the467. fullctime departments with 10 or fewerofficers. The 411,departmenta vitlrat least 150officers together have more than1,000 officers
_.assigned to administrative services.
32
Administrative sqrvices are important. WeIdo not intend to sugg&st that records, research,internal operations, legal assistance, and otherstaff services should be elielinated. But not alldepartments need to supply all of these, and full-time sworn employees may not be needed to con -duct
'such activities in smaller departments. Small
departments usually put their emphasis on gettingofficers out on patrol.
Agency Size and Patrol Density
Small municipal police departmentsgenerally supply a much higher density of patrolthan do large municipal departments. The mediancitizen-to-patrol officer ratio at 10 P.M. is lessthan 2,400 to 1 for municipal departments with 5to 10 officers and more than 4,200 to 1 formunicipal "departments" with more than 150officers. This means that in the smaller depart-Merits there are about 4 officers on patrol at 10P.M. per 10,000 citizens, while there are approx-iritately, 2.4 officers on patrol at 10 P.M. per10,000 citizens in the .departments over 150officers in size. As Table 4.2 shows, the larger themunicipal police agency, the more residents eachon-street patrol officer usually has to serve.While many larger municipal polite departmentshave more sworn officers' per 1,000 residentsthan do small departments, they are less able totranslate this personnel advantage into as greatan on-street'patrol presence because of compet-ing demands for officers for assignrrient to otherduties.,Larger municipal departments choose toassign a much lower proportion of their swornpersonnel to patrol. They also place a lower pro-portion of those assigned to patrol out on thestreet. Through the use of part-time and super-visory personnelernalikr municipal departmentsfield More patrol officers - =per ofliceriassigned to patrol than do larger departments.
Campus and other special district policeproducers achieve higher densities of patrol thanall except the smallest municipal police depart-
,ments. Many of the campus and other special dis-.
trict police specialize in ratrol. As, a conse-quence, over half of their service areas havefewer than 1,800 residents per officer on patrol at10 P.M., regardless of agenqy size.
County police and sheriffs' departments,regardless of.size, supply a much lower density ofpatrol than do Municipal police departments. Anumber of the larger county patroi agencies havehigher patrol densities than many of the smallercounty patrol departments, but even these havemore residents served by 'a single patrol officerthan is common in service areas of the ,largestmunicipal police departments.
As rftentioned .above, county sheriffs'departments typically must assign 'officers to
related &ties which are not shared by
municipal police. Sheriffs' departments assign anaverage of 50 percent of their officers to patrol,15 percent to Jail supervision, and 15 percent toadnAnistrative services. . t
,r
Those who urge elimination of small policedepartments usually assert that a consolidatedagenc would reduce the number of personnelneed d or - at least not require additionalemp yees. These findings make that assertionquestionable. The .model for the consolidated -agency is the large municipal police department..It is true that Rany of these might . simply beenlarged through merger with their smallerneighboring agencies. But these larger municipalagencies Put relatively fewer officers on, patrolthan do the small agencies they would replace.i
FIGUAE 4.1
Average Percent of Sworn Officers Assigned to Patrol, Other DirectServices, Auxiliary Services, and Administration by Size of Producer
Mynicipal Police Agencies of Different Sizes
stoic) 11 to 20 21 to 50 5110150
Numtier of sworn Officers Employed
:33
Assigned toAdministration-
Assigned toAuxiliary Services
Assigned toOther Direct Services
Assigned to Patrol
More than 150_
`Therefore, it would seem that more, not fewer,Offi.,, would be, needed to merntain currentpa den es In the areas now patrolled by the
all :p: ents. We have no evidence to con-: to the cerrent'clebate abdut the benefits ofg.mord officereon patrol.What this studyshow, however, is that larger departments
not translating their relative personnel advan-tage Into on-street presence.
DO SMALL POLICE AGENCIESDOMINATE SERVICEDELIVERY?
While there are indeed many small policedepartments serving metropolitan areas in theUnited States; it is inaccurate Jo maintain thatsmall departments dominate service delivery.Small departments constitute the majority &localpolice agencies in many metropolitan areas. This
has led some observers to conclude that theymust be a major fact* in metropolitan policeservice delivery, at least for patrolthe servicemost likely to be conducted by small police agen-cies While small departments are more numerousthan-large departments, they employ only a smallfraction 'of, local patrol officers- in mostmetropolitan areas and patrol for only a smallfraction of the populaticin of Most SMSAs.-Mucheffort is being directed at their eliminationhowever, so they merit discussion here.
'Small departments are numerous. In the 80metropolitan'areas we studied, more than half ofthe local police 'agencies have no more than 10
lull-time sworn officers. One hundred and thirty-seven ofjhese employ no full-time sworn officers.In contrast, there are only a few very large depart-ments. Only 10 local police agencies in the 80 t
SMSAs employ more than 500 officers.,
TABLE 4.2 Patrol Deployment and Inslty skocal Patrol Producerst
On-Street Patrol Forte (10 PM.)*Type of Producer
and Number ofFull Time
Sworn Officer?
Municipal Police.Departments ByNumber of Full-Time Officers
Number ofProducersReporting
NumberNumber-of Officers
On the Street
of Inhabitants"per Officer on the per
Street (1973 pop. est.) ,
Natter of inhabitants"Full-Time Sworn Officer
'_0973 pop. est.)
Inter-QuartileMedian Range
Inter-QuartileMedian Range
Inter-QuartileMedian Range
' Part-Time Only 48 1 1,- 1 1107 - 1791- 1 to 4 209 1 1 - 1 1623
, Number of Full-Tinie OfficersPart-Time Only1to 4`5 to 1011 to 2021 to 5051 to 150
*only ocOducers assigning officers at**Ulf is the resident populstion of the
merit's togs/ jurisdiction
2102518
.21
3,
1
2468
.2 -, 31 .! 1
1 - 34- 55- 7r - 18
12571346126817701250
016 - 2010486 - 2124745 - 1982782 - 2021
1034 --2894311 - 5764
726_401333488179
331 - 2124 .
23 - 719238 622'71 - 568
10 P M are mcludgd Several email departments do riot assign °pout at 10 P11.. these are excluped from this tableservice area patrolled by each department As explained in Chapter 1, this Is ofih smatter than the population of a depart-
4 ti
In general co ty shaft depaffEnente atelarger than other typ of local police. agencies.Half of the county once and. sheriffs', depart-ments have at Ost 38 sworn officers. Only 14percentorthes agencies havd 10 or fewer swornofficers. Cou police and sheriffs' departmentsare also mo e likely than other types of localdirect sere agencies to employ civilians. Overhalf the county police and sheriffs' departments.have at least seven full-time nonsworhemployees. These agencies are mOre likely than,others to employ civilians because they are more -likely to produce pre-trial detention and radiocommunications. These services, along withadministrative services, are assignments moot
'frequently given to nonsworn -personnel. Most'agencies of other typos are small.
But; while small police agencies are themost common producers of patrol, most full-timegwom officers are employed by relatively largeagencies. More -than 50,000 full-time policeofficers are employed in the 80 metropolitanareas. Nearly 50 percent of these officers areemployed by departments having more than 150sworn officers. Twenty percent of the agencies
Type ofPatrol
Producer.
producing patrol employ 80 per ent of the full-time sworn officers. Poli6e les with fewerthan10 full-time sWom offic s full 50 percentof all agencies7employ only 5 pe ent of the full-time police officers in the,80 metropolitan areas.So,-while the statement that America is a nation ofsmall police-forces is true in terms of the numberOf Police agencies, it is also true that most policeOfficers work in, . and most Americans receivepolice services from, moderate- to large-sizedpolice agencies.
Patrol agency size varies considerably fromregion to region -(Table 4.3). Large variationsalso -exist within each region and across agencytypes. Sheriffs' and county police departmentstend, 'on the average, to be, larger than the other.toes of local patrol producers; but municipalpolice departments, due' to their prevalence,dominate all size ranges: For example, of the 67local patrol producers having,more than 150 full-time sworn officers, 48 (72 percent) atemunicipal police. departments. Other local pro-ducers tend, in general, to be smaller than eithermunicipal or county producers:
TtBLE 4.3 Size of Local Patrol Prod ucers By Region ,
N rtheast Regiont Mi&est Regions Southern Regions
I
Western Regions
Municipal Policepepartments '(Number)
Full-lime PersonnelMedianInter-Quartile Range
Fuli-Time'SwornMedian
, inter - Quartile _Range
CountyPoUce andSheriffi (Number)
, ' Full -Time Personnel- -- Median. -Inter-Quartile Range
', Full-Time Sworn. Median
Inter-Quaitile Range
Other Local .._ Produders (Number)
.
- Full-Time Personnel- Mediae
inter-Quartile Range
. Full-Tirrie SwornMedianInter-Q- uartile Range
,
°
1
(59)
189 - 33
178 - 30
(0)
,
. (10)
87 -11
86 - 10
2
(133)
2010 - 36
199 - 35
f5)
5641 - 100
5438 - 80
(1 1) .18
4 --21
154 - 20r
3
(110)
31 - 6
2e-1---6
(2)
i
o'32 - sr
29 - 62*
0 0)
33 ; 20*.
3
' 1 ; 5*
5 7
(187) (34)
-
5 21 - 20 0 - 13
4 21 - 16 0 - 9
.(23) (4)
55 8634 - 79 27 - 67
.
36' 49-20 - 60 25 - 58
(21) (2)
96 - 33 9 *- 10
86 - 26' 7 -10
r
4 6
P. /(187) (89)
10 84 -F 3 - 22
.
8 64 -22' 3 - 17
(27) (18)
- 87 .' 3423 - 174 21 - 125
36 3418 - 14915 - 100
(36) - (24)
12 0 12 '7 - 22 e - 30
. 10 9-7 7 21 5.- 16
8'(21)
10.'2 - 22
71 - 18
(4)
3432 - 65
2523 - 65
(5)
75.- 13
71._
5 - 8
9
(73)
2110 - 77
168 - 51
(8)
228118-480
18690 - 319
(27)
105 - p
88 -.20
3
2
7
6
-
10
(19)
5- 11
4- 10
(5)
I'
31- 66
17 t
- 39
(0)
n these ca363. the ((ileum, ly roporttrd
; The lE(rge f-Oatrol-producing agencies ofany type are found in California and Arizona(Region 9). Sheriffi'' and county police depart-ments are parlicWarly large in that region. NewEngland, New York and New Jersey, and the West
,(Regions; A, 2, and 9) tend ,to have largermunicipal police departments than do otherregions, while municipal departments tend to bevery small in Pennsylvania and Virginia, the Mid-.
west, and the Northwest (Regions 3, 5, 7, and 10).
Table 4.4 provides some further perspectiv6on the debate over;q1iminating small municipalpolice departments. Small agencies are indeed*quite common across the country. In the 80metropolitan areas, nearly 60 percent of themunicipal agencies employ 10 full-time swornofficers or fewer. Most of these agencies patrol,but small agencies by no means dominate'metropolitan police patrolling.
In the 80,SMSAs, patrol officers from smallmunicipal departments constitute only about 1,0percent of the on-street patrol force at 10 P.M. Inmany regions this proportion is even lower. 00/yin Pennsylvania and Virginia (Region 3) and The
Northwest (Region ,101, do small dePartmentsemploy 20 percent of the sworn officers, Com-,plate elimination of all municipal patfol producersefnplqying 10 or /ewer officers would have asmall effect ort the, way that patrol service isdelivered in metropolitan areas as a whole.However, as we have seen, it would probablyhave a negative impact on the availability, ofpatrol ,service to the residents of the parts ofmetropolitan areas that are supplied by thesmaller producers. These service areas typically'have more officers on patrol in relation to resi-dents served,
AGEi4CY SIZE RECONSIDERED
It has often den argued that all policedepartments should be large enough
that_produce
every type of police service. It has also beenassumed that large police departments eitherproduce all' auxiliary_ services for themselves ordo without. However, we have found that law en-forcement agencies do not need to produce allpolice services themselves. There are many
TABLE 4A Municipal Police Departments By Size and Proportion of On-Street Patrol Force (10 P.M.)
Nation-wide
Northeast Regions Midwest Regions Southern Regions Western Regiope
Number :..Reporting
Percent ofMunicipal PoliceDepartments ByNumber of Full-Time Officers
Part-Time Only1 to 45 to 1011 - 2021 to 5051 to154Over 150
Percent of On-Street Patrol,Force, (10 P.M.)Frorn-MunicipafPolide By Numberof Full-TimeOfficer
Part- Time Only1- -4 -5 to 10 . .
11. to 2032 to 5051 to 150Over 150
(916)
827,241413
95
1
466
10,1530
(59)
75
202725'7
9
1
1
61324153
.
.
'
(133)
21313253411
. 2'
.
03
,A12.2719 (19
,
,
,
(111)
...,
204323
531
5
514124.50
40
1189)
,
16352010
993
26 .
t 77 .
8
Ti
(34)
293512
9339'
3S492
1438
'' 4 .
(188)
. .
2263114
' 1296
02
.65
' 814-32 .
6
(89)
,
3-333311
588
0353t
. 1042
_
8
(21)
03833
5' 51010
04'723
1236
9
(73)
03
' 36152121
, 6
' 00537
'1826'
10
(19)
55321
_-- 110
11.0
,
..
.0 -
1410
50
360
Gokomris may not tot& too percent doe to totioding errors
. spetlallzed agencies available.to supply auxili-ary services. Not only do most large departmentsobtain some auxiliary services from.other agen-cies, but many do not even _produce all of thedirect services for the areas they serve. Likesmaller agencies, they often rely on specializedproducers to supply some services to their serv-ice-aread:
Smaller departments generally have lowerproportions.of personnel assigned to administra-tion and highe proportions assigned to patrol.They typically Put more officers-on_the street perthousand residents patrolled than do largerdepartments.' But, while' they put a dispropor-tionately large number of officers on patrol and
.are the most Common' producers of patrOl,municipal police departments with fewer than 10
full-time officers supply only about 10 percent of
'o
the total patrol force on the street. Eliminatingsmall departments would, thus, have only aminimal effect on police patrol in most SMSAs,although the effect would probably tze either toreduce on- street patrol presence or to *mesethe number of police officers employed.
Small departments can hardly be a majorcause of ineffective or inefficient policing in mostmetropolitan areas. More often small departm,entsare organized to supply increased levels of patrolactivity and to direct patrol activities to thespecific _needs of theirimited service areas. Soparks, airports, hospitals, and commuter cam-puses, in addition, to residential communities,have police departments which are usually smalland usually concerned primarily with patrol. Assuch, the small department may be a very usefulorganizational alternative.
3749
tI
Chapter Vf
OPTIONS FOR ORGANIZINGMETROPOLITAN POLICING
Although a great deal hasiken written aboutthe reorganization of police services delivery,surprisingly little information has been availableori- the various ways poljcing is actuallyorganized. This report has described the arrange-.ments for conducting patrol, traffic control:andc minal investigation in 80 small- to medium-sited metropolitan areas.' rganizational arrange-ments for supplying police departments withchemical analysis qevidence, entry-level train-ing of reQpits, radio communications, and pre-
' trial detention of suspects were also discussed.This inforrrietice on current police serices deliv-
ery organization challenges seVeral,assumptionswhich have been the basis of d'roposals for policereorganization. The overriding conclusion to bedrdwn from this report is that there are many alter-native ways to organize the delivery of policeservices.
Those who have written about metropolitanpolice services have generally assumed thatsystematic Ays of working together are notpossible for individual police agencies. AuceSmith expressed this view:
There is therefore no such thing in the UnitedStates as a polke system, nor even a set ofpolice systems within any reasonably accur-.ate sense of the term. Our so-calledsystems are mere collections of police unitshaving some similarity of authority,,orgaeiza-lion, or jurisdiction; but they lack anysystematic relationship to each other,
Similarly, the President's Commission On Law En-fortement anti Administration of Justice summa-rized this standard image in its-. report, TheChallenge of Crime in a Free Society:
The machinery of law enforcement in thiscountry is fragmented, complicated and fre-quently overlapping. America is essentially anatt6n.of small police forces, each operatingindependently within the limits of its jurisdic-tion.. The boundaries that define and liniitpolice Operations do not, hinder the move:
ment of criminals, of course. They can anddo take advantage of ancient political and
- geographic boundaries, which often givethem sanctuary from- effective police ac-tivities.
.. coordination of activity among policeagencies, Olen when the areas they work inare contiguous or overlapping tends to besporadic_end informal, to the extent that it_existsat all.2
Convehtional wis om holds that coordina-tion and cooperation of i vities can occur onlyunder the direction of a single/teverarchinghierarchy. This assumption is clearly con-tradicted by the experience °Many of the policeagenties in the 80 metropOlitan areas we studied.Many types of systematic relationships have beenworked out among the agencies policingmetropolitan areas. Agencies patrolling or con-trolling traffic for the same service area typicallyalternate their activities to avoid duplicating eachother's work. Coordination of crirninal investiga-tions is a standard procedure for many policedepartments. Malt direct service police agenciesreceive at least some auxiliary services fromother agencies. Almost all local patrol agendesreport giving and receiving emergency assis-tance.
The standard prescription that it is neces-.sary to organize alrservice activities within asingle, 'lull-service" police d partment is basedmore on abstract principles of bureaucraticOrganization than on examination of police ex-perience. Police departments have worked out avariety of ways to cooperate. This is not to Saythat all divisions of labor among' separate' agen-oies are effective. There are pccasional cases ofconfusibn, noncooperation, and isolation be-tween departments, but a depdrtment conductinge variety of police services may alSo have tenserelationships among its specialized units. Sinceeach metropolitan area presents a different com-bination of agencies, personnel, and resourc ''s,
Viz_ an ex_ aminItion of th needs of each particulararea pest wa to determine beneficialChange.
The work of po cing metropolitan areas inthe United States is divided' up in various ways.One sort of 'divisi n is geographic. Different ,
:officers are- assigned 'responsibility for servingdiffecent parts of the SMSA. In some instances,-these officers are organizedintoeeparate depart-mente. In\ other cases, the geci-graphic assign-ments are made to officers within the same policedepartment.
Division of labor in-metropolitan policing isalso achieved hy-Asigning officers to barticularservices and restricting their activities to thoseservices. "For example, some offiders areassigned,,to control traffic, others to patrol, hdothers to irivestIgate/eported crimes. In someplaces;:different officers are assigned separatelyto traffic patrol and to traffic accident investiga-tion. Similarly, there are service areas for which,
_the officers investigating residential burglary aredifferent forn those investigating homicide.'Thiskind of specialization is not practiced in all serv-ice areas, however. In some departments, general
` -area Rtrol, traffic control, and criminal investiga- .tion are-condlited by the same. Off er. Policegenerklists are found both in very I.policeagencies and in large departments usin teampolicing concepts as organizational guidelines.
All metropolitan areas have both geographic,and service-specific divisions of policing.Different officers are responsible for serving,different parts of the SMSA: Usually these officersare employed and, assigned by several different_police agencies. At the same time, at least someparts of each. SMSA have specialist officers-
'respOnsible for producing traffic control or cri-minal invettigation. Patrol specialists (officersconductirironly general area patrol arid no trafficof criminal investigation activities) are commonin some metropolitan areas, but are not found inall SMSAs. In most SPISAs, some direct police.service agencies are specialized, while othersproduce a variety of police services.
Auxiliary service OrOduction is similarlydivided. There are a few_ police departments inwhich generalist police officers produce \theirown support services. The same officers area ssigned to defention and to radio communica- ,tons apd,may rotate to street duty which involves
. patrol,_traffic control, and criminal investigation.But these arrangements are quite rare. Mucheorecommon- Is the department which obtains eachauxillity,service from persons who specialize inthe .production of that service. -These may be
40
employees of the police agency uifing the auxil- -iary service, or they may. be employed by anotheragency Kim which the police deparimentoi3tainsthe support service. Radio communications isusually produced within the department beingdispatched. Pre-trial detention, entry-level train- _
ins, and chemical analysis of evidence-ereusually obtained from other agencies. In eithercase, however, the officers Who use the auxiliaryservices in the conduct of patrol, traffic control,or criminal investigation do not also produce thesupport, services. Other personnel produce thesupport services for the direct service officers touse as needed.
1
In many instances, the producers of auxiliaryservices supply numerous police departmentsthus, in several of the 80, metropolitan areas asingle crime lab and only one pre-trial detentionfacility serve all police departments in the area. Inmetropolitan areas with military bases, there are.always at least two producers of these servicesbecause of the separate proyiskin for auxiliaryservices by military agencies.
Whether it is preferable to have all serviceproduction facilities contained in a single depart-ment or to have departments organized alongeither geographic or service-specifiP lines is anissue which requires further study. While somecriminal Justice reformers .think that haying .
services within the same department facilitates'production of the separate services, we. havefound considerable inter-departmental. com-munication, cooperation, and coordination, ofservice.
The methods we used to study the organiza-tion of police services delivery should be useful'to those considering reorganization ot policing inspecific metropolitan areas. Our first questionwas: "What police services do we-want to knowabout?" Having answered that question,- wedetermined which agencies produce these .serv-
Ices for the ,metropolitan areas. Then, we ex-amined -the standard procedures for deliveringeach service. We determined which parts of each Aof the 80 metropolitan areas each agency served,and asked whether there were certain places,times, or people In each area which the agencyunder study did not serve. Next, we exploredwhether any agencies did serve those ndt servedby the first agency. In this waymwe tablishedthe extent of service altematicif, whi h is con-siderable for patrol and trafflaTfontro We also,asked whether each agencYegular orkedwith other agencies in dondfictIng the services itsupFilied.Ilhis line of ,questioning revealed that
coordination is standard procedure for manydeparynente conducting homicide investigation.
Using this approach; we _find that:thecepted picture -of police services 'deliveryorganization is far toe simple. There are, indeed,many police agencies serving most metropolitan'are , but they t§pically have different sorts ofser, ce esponsibilities. Most metropolitan areasreser d by some specialized agencies. Their
cers -conduct only one service or a fewc Osely related services. We also find spacialized:,p patrolagepoles serving campuses, housingatithorities, hbspitals, Parks, airports,.and smallmunicipalities. these agencies supplement the
= wok of departments conducting a broader rangeof p liCe services.
Evaluation these alternative ways oforga izing the delivery. of. police services inmetro °titan areas requires detailed study of theOpera ions of police agencies. How do the serv-ice-re ted activities of specialized agenciesdiffer from those of general service agenciesconducting the seine service? How do com-munications among Officers in. different agencies.differ from communications .among officers in
.different divisions of the same agency?,Do thei7edifferences in organization affect the kinds ofservice citizens eceive from police? Answers tothese questions shouldbe taken.intcrount in
any recommendations for, reo4anizing'Metropolitan police services..
Researchers have started to investigatesome of these questions, but our generalknowledge about the relationship-of organizationto performance is stilt milk") sketchy. Knowledgeabout the specific problems in communication,coordination, and cooperatiori within and be-tween police agencies in a Particularmetropolitan area is, hciwever, iiseential for in-formed recommendations abp'ut poncereorganization in that SMSA. Organizational ar-rangereehts ,which work welt for some servicesmay be poorlyfauited for oth r serviceeVand ar-rangements which are appropriate to the needs ofone metropolitan area may biqUite, inappropriatefor another. ReorganizatiOn planning Must lakeipto account the different kinds of- resourcesneErded to produce different polipe-Services aswell as the unique service delivery patterns andthe problems of the particular metropolitan area.-
. NOTES TO CHAPTER V
1. Bruce Smith, Police Systems in the United States(New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1949), p. 22.
2. President's Commission on Law Enforcement andAdministration of Justice, The Challenge of Crime in a FreeSociety (Washington, D.C.. Government Printing Office. 1967),
p.-119.
.,
AGENCY An organization Which, (Under a.direct'legal relationship .to a gowning authority,has its own budget and personnel. Agencyrefers-to the entire organization, regardlessof its regional divisions or the number -ofmetropPlitan areas it serves. An agendy isnot to be confused with a producer, that partof an agency servinaa speregion. The distinction -is
. Federal Bureau of (nyeagency producing one or more services in41 of the-80 metro tan areas we studied.f he -total- numb of FBI producers in thestudy_ areas is, therefore, 41. -
ALTERNATION An* organizational arranlgement_ arnOnd two or more producers which sere
the _sarrie. service recipient but syste-.. maticallyAivide their production ac=
tivities,O(ier space, over time, or among,clientele. For example, alternation in space-fortraffic patrol o6&:u1-.Sin a town where theState police patrol all State and Federalhighways within the city limits and the townpolice patrol all otherpublic thoroughfares.
AUXILIARY-PRODUCER Any agency or part-of anagency which conducts activities designedto help' police departments supply directpolice .services. Prodkicers- need notnecessarily interact with citizens to produceauxiliaryservices (for example, Wilinirig, lab
-4
Appendix A
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
geograbbinillustrated in the
tigation, a single
analysis).AUXILIARY SERVICE An activity (such as dis-
patching, chemical analysis, training, deten-.tion) designed to help police departmentssimply direct -police services (such asgeneral patrol, :traffic patrol, criminal in-vestigation) to citizens:
COORDINATION An organizational errand men-4uno0g-two or more departments serving the_sate- service recipients. In a coordinated,---arrangement-the _participating departments
F. interact to produce the service. An exampleof coordination in crithinal loyestigatiou oc-curs when_ several departmentalofficersWork_ on e case,sharing-leaes and rnaintain-
;_ singlecese record.
DIRECT PRODUCER Any agency-or part of, anagency which conducts activities designed*.to influence the safety of the citizet.....:serves and Which does so throtigh direct in-teraction with the citizens. In this study, a.direcatpucer,is any agency or part of anagen hich performs general area patrcil.,areatraffic patrol, traffic accident irivestigatihn,or criminal investigatipn.
DIRECT SERVICE AnaptiVity or set of related ac-- tivities performed by officers having special
powers of arrest and designed to influence.the safety Otthe peOple in- its-service area.-The service is produced by officers directlyinteracting with citizens (e.g., traffic afro!,criminal investigation)`:
DUPLICATION A -situation In which a policedepartment or service area receives a serv-ice from two or tore producers withoutcoordination or .alfiernation.
is;
ENCLAVE A territorially distinct -area served byone police department, but aisd incitided inthe jurisdiction of another police depart-ment.,
GENERAL AREA PATROL Organized survelliarthe- of public places within a specified territory
and response to yeports Of Suspected cri --minaI acts to preVent crime, apprehend of.-ferldsgs,er maintain-public Order.
GOVERNING AUTHORITY A set.of officials and-procedures for determining provision ofservice. For example:A city council and-the'ordinances it enacts constitute the govern-
. Ing authority for a municipal pollee depart-merit: -
INTER- QUARTILE RANGE A range:Of values (e:gri _number of hours-of training rectified) for adistributiOn ,of cases (e.g., police depart-Merils) starting-,---Wthe loWer end, at thevalue of-the case in the 25th percentile, ofthe distribution and ending, at the upper end,at the Value of the case in the 75th percen-tile of the distribution. Thus, the inter-quar-w.the range shows th'e value limits of the mid-dle %percent of the 90sis ins distribution.
4
'MEDIAN A tilue, an,Joidered seCof valueSbelow 'and above Which there 'is-an ebual
Abmberof cases. . - -TOOL ..(See, GENERAL AREA PATROL)
ODOCER,An agency or that part'of an agencywhich supplies a serylca to a recipient with--in an SRISA._for example, a State highwaypatr6l may-previde traffic patrol -to-serviceareas in all Sin Itq State. When theSlat highway atrol is referred to as a pro-ducer for an -SMSA,, onlyVhat part of theagency and those personnel in that part oaftlitt agency serving The SMSA are included.When the Stale highway pakoris referred toas an agency, theentire Organization and allits personntilere included. See AGENCY.
s
REGULAR PRODUCER An agency or part of anagency whicbsupplies Service on a regular
-basisito se6viceareas (in the 9 ase of directsarvices) or_ Other agencies fin the case ofauxiliary services). There.are four types ofregular_ production:
,1) Sole producer for service areas ordirect police agencies
2) Coordintation3) Dqplioation4) AfteinatIon
%
RVICE AREA A Partion or an SMSA having at, twat 100 resiMitss, some way, of making
collective decisions :about police services'in the area, and distinct legal arrangement
,.
.2:
'With a. producer of a direct Policeservicek',Thus, for each direct service, the 'popblation-7
the metropolitan ;arealS! ditstidiad. lnto-mutually exclusive service ;areas; each:.served tly,oneor more proapers: The"'serv-ice areas for;one direct ice mayfrom the service areas -for another direst-
- service since a community of people mayhave, `for example, ortlk arrwernent forpatrol ,and _moth for criinitrat investiga--bona. -
SMSA (Standard Metropo an Statistical Area)designation specified by the U.S. Bureau orthe Census to, syttmaticapty. identify:metrepolitan-arees-inthe-United States. Ant
_SMSA-is 'deffned (except in New EngtStates) as a countkorgroup of contigu s-cotiqjles Mat contains at least-one central'city of 50,000 inhabitants.or morrorseveralcities wit a combined pePtilation of at leatt-50,000. Contiguows counties includettin'a SMSA if they meet_cri elated toand economic relationships 40-the_ centralcity. In the tie,k England States, SMSASPon-sist of- clusters of .conrigybps-;ctliqs --and
'towns which meet similarcri las.
SWORN-POLICE AnYindividual given extraordrn;-_,ary power dterrest by 'virtue ofstatAtory oroffitirlegallrval4Latithorization.
TRAFFIC CONTROL Th *Set of producer 'ac-tivitiemelatedlo traffic patrol and traffic ac-cident inveMigation..
COpies of the following technical reports are available at the indicated prices (postpaid)by writing to the Publications Secretary, Workshop in Political Theory and PolicyAnalysis, Indiana University, Morgan Hall 121,1BloomingtorOndiana 47401.
T-1 Larry Wagner. Patterns of Statelaws Relating to 'Fresh Pursuit'. "...
T-2 Larry Wagner and Thomas Kramer, "A Symposium 'of Recruitment.
.,,
Systems ficifeabe Officers." . ,. .
T-3 Thomas Kramer and Larry Wagner, "Statutory Prpvisions Regarding En-tri,Level Training of Peace Officers.'
# .:,
... 1- -
1
[$1.90.]
[$1.00]
- ($1.00]
'1._xi.
T-4 Elinor Ostrom. "A Historical Review:of Entry-Level Trai: ning -Legisla-tion." '
.($1.00]
Thomas Kramer, Frank Anechiarico, and Larry Wagner. "State StatutoryAuthorization of the Law'Enforcement Functions`of Stale, County, and
JP Municipal Agencies." [$5,50)
T-7 Phillip M. Gregg. "Personnel Practices in the Police Services Industry." [$3.25]
T-10 'Eric Scott. "College and University Police Kgeilcies." [$1.75]
T'12 Roger B. Parks*. "Police Patrol in Metropolitan AreaImplications for.Restructuring the Police," [$1.50]
1.-16 Roger B. Parks.,'Nictims' Satisfaction With Police:.The Response Fac-:tar." . ). ' .#, . , [$1.75) -
- /.. .
c.'T-1'4 Eric Scott " "Determinants ofMunicipal Police EXpenditures:, A Review
Essayg' . . . ... ,. , ' i .[62.001 .,
T-15 John P. McIver. "Measures ofMetropolitan Police. Industry Structures ,!-"\ SerVice Structure Matride's for the Albany /Georgia SMSA."
T-16 Elinor Ostrom. "Pe1re6bonsolidation'and Econornies-okScale: Do They90 Together ?'.
.
1-17 Gordon P. Whitaker. "Size and Effectiveness in the Delivery Of HumanServices."
T-19 Elinor Ostrom, Roger B. Parks, a,n'd Gcialon P. Whitaker.".A Public Serv-ice Indust*rApproach to the Study of Police in MetropOlitan Areas."
-48 15 8
[$1.00]
'[$1'.60] P-
[$1.00],
-[$1.75] .
1-25 Frances P. Bish. "The Limits of Organizational Reform."[$1.7p)
1-29 Gordon P. Whitaker and Stephen Mastrofski. "Equity in the Delivery ofPolice 'Services."
[$1.75]
Fact shebts are- available free of charge by writing to the Publications Secretary,Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, Morgan Hall 121,Bloomington, Indiana 47401.
F-1 Eiinox Ostrom. "The Topeka Major Case Squad."
F-2 Nancy M. Neubert. "The Major Investigative Team of PoliGounty."
F-3 Stephen Mastrofski. "The Tuscaloosa County Homicide Unit."
F-4 Nancy M. Neubert. "A Comparison of Major Case Squads in Four MetropolitanAreas,"
F-5 Staff Unit, Kansas City/Missouri Police Department. "Kansas City AreaMetro Squad."
F-6 Nancy M. Neubert. "The State Police-of Crawford and Erie Counties."
F-7 Gary Miller. "The Universal City Joint Dispatching System."
F-8 Eric Scott. "The Intra-County Major Case Investigation Unit of Dane County."
F-9 John' P. McIver. "The Worchaster County Fraudulent Check Association:Community Cooperation in Law Enforcement"
