'&_$‘.L'.fl‘.mx{~‘o o o o o .I. ' ".‘.'.'.‘.!.".‘"f“'f"".;"""‘ v7 vv---.vv‘ -'.m5§‘y"t?tf‘~gfifl 5‘;.£",.:‘. ‘§s:' A new STUDY 0:: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FORMAL EDUCATION LEVELS OF 556 poucs OFFICERS IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, AND mm- PATROL DUTY PERFORMANCE RECORDS. Thesis for the Degree of M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNWERSITY Thomas Joseph McGreevy 19.6.4 .2. ‘.3 .0: 0 THESIS 31 LIBRARY Michigan State University III III III" I” I III! “III I I I/ 9 Ha. '“-' a A p , 'WRA7D. , W .. - NI LGIIC 2 I; “if %7a‘339 I? if A: ' ‘L I A FIELD STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FORMAL EDUCATION LEVELS OF 555 POLICE OFFICERS IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, AND THEIR PATROL DUTY PERFORMANCE RECORDS BY Thomas Joseph HcGreevy AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University - in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Police Administration and Public Safety 1964 I r’ i— i (. ." ‘- xi. APPROVED " I\ I1~gm~wb I “'1' I.. . Chairman I fir ,. Member 2 '0 . 1 It) ‘ / / {_/ Ill :‘V / "”;§?71£1[??Y§Ki22£égng2i: / : er? {/1 V ABSTRACT A FIELD STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FORMAL EDUCATION LEVELS OF 556 POLICE OFFICERS IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, AND THEIR PATROL DUTY PERFORMANCE RECORDS by Thomas Joseph NcGreevy Intelligent selection, comprehensive training, and careful supervision are the keys to development of effective police systems. Selection processes are most important, because good training programs and outstanding leadership cannot produce high quality police officers from inferior raw material. The prerequisites established for those applying for appoint- ments to police forces determine the caliber of police personnel. Specific levels of formal education are usually listed among other prerequisites. In recent years, public service employers have been urged to require police service applicants to have more years of formal educa- tion than in the past. Some recOQnized authorities have advised that only college-trained applicants be considered for police service appointments. Some American police departments have reSponded by raising their standards for applicants, thereby eliminating from their recruiting bases the greater proportion of otherwise eligible appli- cants. This study was conducted to determine.whether police service employers who raise their educational standards can expect better educated policemen to accomplish basic police tasks more effectively than other policemen with fewer years of formal education. The study was limited to consideration of the quantitative aspects of the per- formance of basic police tasks whose accomplishment is the principal responsibility of police patrolmen, who constitute a substantial percentage of American law enforcement personnel. A group of 556 police patrolmen in St. Louis, Missouri, were selected as a sample group. All performed essentially the same police tasks under essentially the same conditions at the same time. The officers were placed in sub—groups according to their levels of formal education. Performance reports submitted by the 556 officers were examined and the individual performance totals for each officer during a 28-week period was compiled. 0f the 37 police tasks whose accomplish- ment was recorded, il tasks were selected for study. The educational sub-groups' average daily rate of production per officer for each of these ll tasks was then determined. The ll tasks were then'weighted according to their relative importance in the city where they, were performed. Then statistical manipulations of data were performed to provide each of the educational sub-groups with a performance index. These indexes reflected the sub- groups' overall productivity records and were comparable. Comparisons were made and the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation was computed, using the levels of formal education of the sub-groups and their performance indexes as the variables. It was found that there was no significant amount of linear relationship between the 556 police officers' levels of formal education and their overall productivity as indicated by the perform- ance indexes reflecting their accomplishment of the II selected basic police tasks. These findings engendered questions about the advisa- bility of raising educational standards for all police service aspirants on the basis of subjective evidence alone. The study concluded by producing recommendations for further objective research in order to determine whether educational standards should be raised or lowered for applicants, or whether some new'system for recruiting American police service personnel ought to be devised in order to provide police'service employers‘wlth valid and reliable yardsticks to be used in applicant selection pragrams. A FIELD STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETHEEN THE FORMAL EDUCATION LEVELS OF 555 POLICE OFFICERS IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, AND THEIR EATROL DUTY PERFORMANCE RECORDS A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Collegeeof Business and Public Service Michigan State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science by Thomas Joseph licGreevy July i96h :3»; m ‘02?'(“/ 9 re» OJ PREFACE Because the constructive comments and suggestions of the Isabel's of the faculty at Michigan State University have cmtributed so much to the development of this thesis. I wish to record here my gratitude for their patience and encouragement. Of particular impor- tance have been the timely critiques provided by my principal counselor, Undersheriff Samuel C. Chapman of Multnomah County, Oregon, fonmerly of the faculty of the School of Police Administration and Public Safety, wholmaintained his lively interest in my thesis research for some three years. To the Police Commissioners and Chief Curtis Brostron of the MetrOpolitan Police Department of St. Louis, Missouri. I owe a debt of gratitude that is substantial. ‘without their wholehearted support, and the helpful efforts of their staff members, research data would not have been available. Mr. Glen R. Murphy, Director of Planning and Re- search, and Mr. Roy E. Hollady, then the Director of Training,‘were the principal staff members*with whom I was fortunate to associate in St. Louis. It was their initial enthusiasm for my thesis project which made its later development possible. And to The Provost Marshal General, Department of the Army, I extend my sincere thanks for the Opportunity to attend Michigan State University. His sponsorship made my attendance at the university pos- sible; his personal interest in my work made conpletion of my thesis research an enjoyable responsibility. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I 0 WE PROBLE" O O O I O 0 O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1 me PrObI w 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 2 Statement of the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Significance of the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Definitions of Terms Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 n. mewmwmmv..............}....... 9 Developing the Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Selecting a Locus for the Study . . . ......... . l2 The Individuals and Groups Studied . . . . ....... i3 The community . . . . ....... . . ........ l3 The police department ......... . . . . . . . . lh Selecting the sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l6 Composition of the sample population . . ..... . . l7 The Performance Totals Studied . ..... . . . . . . . 23 Police work in the seven districts . . . . . . . . . . 23 Tasks whose accomplishment was recorded . . ...... 24 Defining the selected tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Relative importance of the selected tasks . . . . . . . 27 Significance of the selected tasks . . . . . . . . . . 28 Performance of the tasks by individual officers . . . . 28 Manipulation of the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 iii CHAPTER PAGE Developing production-per-patrol-day totals ...... 30 Developing performance indexes . . . . . . ...... 3i Statistical analysis ....... . ......... 34 Data Presentation . . . . ......... . . ..... 3h Presenting the findings ....... . ........ 3h Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . ...... 35 Limitations arising from assumptions ...... . . . 35 Limitations arising from the data . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Limitations arising from the tasks . . ..... . . . 37 Limitations arising from the methodology ....... 37 Limitations arising from non-evaluated variables . . . 38 III. THE FINDINGS. . . . . . . . . . . ............. 39 Daily Productivity Totals . . . ............. 39 Combined Daily Productivity Records ...... . . . . . Si The Sub-groups' Performance Indexes ........... 52 Heights . . . . .................... 53 Performance indexes ..... . . . . . . . ...... SA The Coefficient of Correlations between Formal Education and Productivity-per-Day . . ........ 57 IV. THE CONCLUSIONS AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS .......... 60 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . ...... . ...... 60 Acceptance of the null hypothesis ........ . . . 60 Principle conclusion of the study . . . . . . . . . . . 6i iv CHAPTER PAGE Implications of the study ...... . . . ..... 62 Recommendations . ........ . . . . . . ..... 67 Additional research ......... . . . . . 57 More graduate research work ..... . . . . . . . . 69 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7i APPENDIX A ORGANIZATIONAL CHART . . . . . . . . . . ...... 72 APPENDIX 3 MAP OF ST. LOUIS POLICE DISTRICTS . . . . . ..... 73 APPENDIX E SAMPLE DAILY ACTIVITY REPORT . . . . . . ...... 74 APPENDIX D BASIC RESEARCH DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 TABLE I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. LIST OF TABLES Parking Meter Tags Issued . . . ..... . . . . Other Parking Tags issued . . . . . . . . . . . Hazardous Traffic Violation Citations Issued . Non-hazardous Traffic Violation Citations Issued Business Checks Completed. . . . . . . . . . .. Business Interviews Conducted . . . . . . . .. Ordinance Violation Notices Issued . . . . . .. . Curfew Notices Issued . . . . . . . . . . . .. Vehicles Stopped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pedestrians Questioned . . . . . . . . . . . . . Field Interrogation Cards Made . . . . . . . Ranking of the Daily Production-per-Officer Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relative Numerical Weights Assigned to the Selected Patrol Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . .. Performance Indexes by Education Groups . . . . Basic Research Data . . . . . . . . . . . . .. vi PAGE #0 Al 42 43 45 #6 47 49 so 52 54 SS 85 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE I. Variations in Number of Parking Meter Tags issued Daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . no 2. Variations in Number of Other Parking Tags Issued Daily . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . hi 3. Variations in Number of Hazardous Traffic Violation Citations Issued Daily . . . ....... . . . #2 h. Variations in Number of Non-hazardous Traffic Violation Citations Issued Daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5. Variations in Number of Business Checks Completed Daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... Ah 6. Variations in Number of Business interviews Conducted Daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AS 7. Variations in Number of Ordinance Violation Notices Issued Daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A6 8. Variations in Number of Curfew Notices Issued Daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... A7 9. Variations in Number of Vehicles Stopped Daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . 48 i0. Variations in Number of Pedestrians Questioned Daily .......... . .......... #9 vii FIGURE PAGE ll. Variations in Number of Field Interrogation Cards Made Daily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 12. Variations in Performance Indexes . . . .......... SS viii CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM For many years, Americans have been told that education is a positive "good," that they'will be individually and collectively enriched by it, and that education adds dimensions to character and native ability, helping individuals become potentially better citizens and potentially more productive and more successful workers, super- visors, and executives. In recent years, the high regard in which mostikmericans hold education has been manifested by employers in both private and public sectors of the national economy who have consis- tently sought to hire the best-educated applicants for jobs at all levels, while supporting private and governmental efforts to provide more and better education for everyone. When discussing education for the police career field, progres- sive police administrators throughout our nation, influential writers in professional iaw*enforcement journals, and prominent educators In the colleges and universities offering courses to police-service aspirants have generally agreed that better-educated police officers are needed in.AmerIcan communities. They have emphasized the fact that the demanding tasks performed by police officers require that only applicants of high potential should be selected for the nation's police forces. And they regard the extent of applicants' fonmal education as one of the most Important factors having predictive value In terms of future job success. I. THE PROBLBI Statmng 91th; problem. is there really any relationship between police officers' levels of formal education and their records of work acconplished? Can enployers of police officers reasonably expect that applicants with high levels of formal education will pro- duce more work or better quality work than other applicants with fewer years of formal education? Or, on the other hand, does more than "X" years of formal education have a deleterious effect on off icers' work production? These questions have not yet ban authoritatively answered. It is still speculation vbether the educational levels of police officers have any significant effect upon their on-the-job performances of. duty. Answering these questions involves recognizing the two aspects of work accamlished by policemen, the quantitative and the qualitative aspects, and then studying each of these aspects separately. Groups of police officers Idiose educational levels and work production records can be determined and conpared must be selected, and specific tasks per- formed by all officers in the sample groups must be designated for study. The first step in finding answers to questions about the value of high-level education for police officers was to determine If there was any linear (straight-line) relationship batman the formal educa- tional‘levels of police patrelun and the records reflecting their accoapiishment of certain basic police tasks. The next step was then to determine, if some relationship was found, the extent of that relationship. Since the"Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation is, probably, the most widely used measure of the strength i that statistic of the linear relationship between the two variables," was selected to indicate the extent of any relationship found to exist between the formal education levels and work perfonnance records of the policeman in the sanple groups. Because data relating to the qualitative aspects of work accom- plished by polioe officers could not be deveIOped, it was decided to limit the study to consideration of the quantitative aspects of the work accomplished by the menbers of the selected senile groups. Significance 91:93 problem. Chicago Police Superintendent Orlando Ii. Wilson, formerly the dean of the School of Criminology at the Berkeley mus of the University of California, and for many years one of the most respected spokesmn for professional police adnlnistra- tors in the United States, believes that the "quality of police service is more strongly influenced by the competence of the individual mentors of the force than by any other single factor."2 According to Vilson, the competence of policeman is established by several processes, the first of which is the method by which they are selected for appoint- ment as police officers.3 Wilson's statenents on the inportance of effective selection methods are accepted as axiomatic by his colleagues. 'John E. Freund, m §l amenta%____8__ Statistics, (Englewood Cliffs, II. J.: Prentice- Inc., , p. 32. 2D. II. Nilson, _P_9_____lice Plann ,(Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher,l 957 , p. 221i. 3Ibid. 1, In ;P_9_l_i_c_e_ Administration, Wilson enumerates some standards which should be considered by those charged with responsibility for selecting police officers. The educational level of applicants is listed among those standards by Wilson, who writes that it is essential that all police officers be at least high school graduates, but avers that university-trained applicants are better qualified for appointment than applicants without advanced education. He firmly reconnends two years of college for all applicants as a preliminary requisite.“ instructor Thanas M. Frost of the Chicago Police Academy, in 5 Forward Lag} _i_n_ _P_g_l_i__c_e_ §ducation, considers advanced education less important. Frost writes that "a college education is not essential."5 At the opposite end of the pole is Professor A. C. Germann, who advises that "steps be taken to elevate educational requirements to that of a college de- gree."6 The wide range in reconvnendations exists because the conclusions of these authors, reference the level of education to be required of applicants, were formulated on the basis of each writer's personal experiences and observations In the In enforcement field, and not on the basis of valid, reliable and objective studies.7 To understand why “o. H. Wilson Police ministration, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.. l950 . p. 333. 5Thomas H. Frost, A Forward Look in Police Education, (Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, l959’, p. l69. 5A. C. Germann, Police Personnel n ement, (Springfield, ill.: Charles C. Thonas, Publisher. i958 , p. 2 . 7During August l96l, Supt. Wilson, Mr. Frost, and Prof. Germann confirmed in letters to the writer that they had based their published conclusions and recmndations on subjective evidence. 5 these respected authors have relied entirely on subjective evidence in forming the conclusions on which their recommendations are based, John P. Kenney's discussion of applicant selection standards in £9_l_i_c_g Manama; Planning is helpful. Professor Kenney notes that "no studies have been made to evaluate the imortance of advanced educa- tion . . . ."8 Extensive library research, a necessary preliminary to any field study, led to the conclusion that Professor Mnney's state- ment could be expanded. Nothing was found to indicate that any studies have been conducted to determine if formal education at 591 level can be considered a reliable index of the job performance to be expected of applicants who are selected for appointment to police forces. Since recognized authorities are agreed that an applicant's level of education ought to be evaluated prior to his selection or non- selection for appointment, since those who evaluate applicants must rely on either their own subjective judgments'or the subjective judg- ments of the authorities in the field when choosing an educational standard to apply, and since subjective judgments are seldom as valid or reliable as objective ones, the writer considers that a series of field studies ought to be conducted to establish objectively and definitively the precise relationship, if any exists, between appli- cants' levels of education and the performance records they can be expected to establish if they are appointed police officers. 8John P. Kenney, Police Management Planning, (Springfield, Ill.: Charles E. Thomas, Publisher, I959). p. 60. This study ls only a first step, but it is an essential first step. It is a step that must be taken if those selecting and applying educational standards for our nation's police forces are ever to base their decisions, their plans, and their programs on valid, reliable, and objective evidence. iI. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED .Eggmgl education. Formal education, in this study, was interpreted as education at public or private grammar and high schools and at institutions chartered by the several states as col- leges or universities. U. S. Armed Forces Institute certificates of course completion, General Educational Development equivalency certificates, and diplomas from correspondence schools and vocational Institutes were not considered as evidence of formal education beyond the level completed by an individual in recognized elementary and secondary schools and in accredited colleges and universities. Policemen; Etrglme ; pgj_i_c_g office; . These three terms were used interchangeably when describing the lowest ranking sworn members of police forces. £19.91 3%. Patrol duty was interpreted as a policeman's assigned work when he operated independently away from headquarters. In this study, m 99.2! was used to describe the work assignments of.policemen who provided police services in designated areas (beats) within a community, which they traversed continually in patrol vehicles (automobiles). Because the number of foot patrolman on duty in the community selected as the locus for the field study was an insignificant one, foot patrolman were not included in the sample population. 9g 91’ m gm. The term "day of patrol duty" was interpreted as eight consecutive hours of patrol duty by the same patrolman. Performance. The term ”performance" was interpreted as the execution of selected police functions by policemen assigned to patrol duty. CHAPTER II THE METHODOLOGY The findings and conclusions presented by individuals who have conducted research studies are valid and reliable only when the researchers work systematically and conscientiously, with an awareness of the limitations imposed on them, and when they disclose the methods and techniques they used in their quests for new knowledge. Research- ers must make these disclosures so that their colleagues, their readers, and the public may judge for themselves the integrity of the researchers and the merits of their work. In order that this research report may properly be assessed, this chapter contains methodological data relating to the development of a hypothesis, the individuals and groups studied, the data- gatherlng phase of the study, the evaluation and analysis of statis- tical data, and the presentation of the data. In addition, an exposition of the known limitations imposed on the study is set forth. i. DEVELOPING THE HYPOTHESIS During the fall and‘winter of l959-l960, there was con- siderable discussion by undergraduates of the School of Police Administration at Michigan State University relative to the merits of raising standards for those applying for appointments as police officers in communities throughout the United States. All agreed that the nationally-known authorities were correct In emphasizing IO better selection methods as oneiof the important steps to be taken if the American police service is to be substantially improved. Perhaps since all discussant5*were themselves university students, the question of higher educational standards was raised at the outset, and quickly disposed of. Most agreed that all police force appointees should be required to have had advanced (college-level) education. A few disagreed with the consensus, saying that the colleges would never produce enough applicants to staff all of America's police organiza- tions, while others noted that no one had ever produced reliable evidence that college-trained men were needed for all police jobs. Further consideration of this latter point provoked thoughts of the consequences of any substantial raising of education prerequisites. Raising standards (from present levels) would eliminate from further consideration millions of new eligible candidates for police service appointments. Unless it is first demonstrated that such a reduction in the recruiting base is necessary or desirable, raising educational standards cannot be logically justified. Library research during the first half of l960 failed to disclose any evidence to support the recommendations of those who advocated raising educational standards. So, during the summer of l960, the writer conducted a small-scale field study of the relation- ship between patrolmen's educational levels and their records of work production. This exploratory research was conducted in Oak Park, Michigan, where Director Glenford 5. Leonard of the Department of Public Safety provided access to departmental records and facilities. ll Although only 35 officers were included in the sample group, and although the research design was developed as the research work pregressed, the.gxyggg£‘§gg£g study produced information of value. Three of the four college graduates performing patrol duties in Oak Park were in the low third of the departmental patrol force *when all 35 patrolmen were ranked according to overall productivity per patrol hour. But, because of the exceptional production record of the fourth member of the college-educated group, the college graduates ranked highest in work production as a group. The grammar school graduates' group (four officers) ranked second. The largest group (27 officers), the high school graduates, produced the lowest record of overall production per patrol hour worked. However, the range between the top group's overall index of productivity and that of the lowest group was not a substantial one. These findings provided the null hypothesis to be tested in the subsequent full-scale field study: the formal education of police patrolman has no substantial linear (straight line) relationship to the quantities of work they produce. The Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation was determined to be the most‘widely accepted statistic for indicating the extent of linear relationships between two variables, so it was determined to use this statistic in reporting any straight-line relationship between the educational levels of police officers and their records of work accomplished that might be found during the field study. 12 The writer, after consultations with Mr. Geoffrey Y. Cornog and Dr. Donald H. Olmsted, of the Department of Political Science and the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, re5pectlvely, at chhigan State University, decided arbitrarily to test this hypothesis with the following criterion: reject the null hypothesis if the coefficient of correlation is greater than .05 or less than -.05; accept the null hypothesis if the coefficient of correlation is between .05 and 0 or between 0 and -.05. ll. SELECTING A LOCUS FOR THE STUDY in selecting a police organization for the full-scale study, the four principal requisites were: (i) the selected police force had to be a relatively large one, in order to provide an adequate sample population; (2) the selected police force had to provide reasonably accurate and complete personnel and production records; (3) the selected police organization had to be located relatively near East Lansing, Michigan, so that on-the-scene research activity could be conducted within the limitations imposed by the time and money available for the study; and (h) the selected police force had to be one whose superiorofficers would authorize the study and would provide assur- ances of cooperation and assistance. The Metropolitan Police Department of St. Louis, Missouri, qualified in every respect. ‘Hith a departmental roster of approximately 13 3,000 personnel, including over l900 sworn police personnel, the HetrOpolitan Police Department had a large number of patrolmen whose educational levels ranged from the seventh grade to four years of college. Under the leadership of Colonel H. Sam Priest (President of the Board of Police Commissioners) and Colonel Curtis Brostron (Chief of Police), the commanders and staff officers within the MetrOpolitan Police Department had devised and installed a modern records control system, completing the‘work during the summer of l960. St. Louis is within a day's drive from East Lansing; this proximity made possible owe visits to the city, totalling l6 days. At the urging of Mr. Roy E. Hollady, then the director of training in the St. Louis department, and with the assent of Mr. Glen R. Murphy, the director of planning and research, Colonel Brostnon extended a cordial invitation to visit St. Louis and the Metropolitan Police Department. He agreed to provide access to the department's records and facilities in the interests of the study. Since no other community or police organization satisfied all four basic requirements, the Metropolitan Police Department of St. Louis was selected as the locus for the full-scale research effort. iii. THE INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS STUDIED 'Ihg community. St. Louis was founded in l76h as a fur-trading station. it was incorporated as a town in i808, and chartered as a city in l822. St. Louis has been the principal community of the Mississippi Valley for almost 200 years. The city is now one of lh America's dozen-largest. With more than 800,000 people living in the 6l.37 square miles within the city boundaries, St. Louis is the center of a metropolitan area with a total population of more than one and three-quarters million persons. Occupying about l9 miles along the west bank of the Mississippi River, the city extends westward for about seven miles. Many of the residential districts, because of the city's vast industrial expansion and urban redevelopment projects, now lie in communities adjacent to the city. From these residential communities come daily many thousands of people to‘work, to shop, and to enjoy the recreational and cultural facilities of the city.9 ,Ihg.ggligg degartmen . One hundred years old in l96l, the Metropolitan Police Department was organizationally patterned on the U. S. Marine Corps of the Civil Her era. Because of the unsettled political conditions in St. Louis during the early l860's, local control of the Metropolitan Police Department was withheld by the State of Missouri. This system has persisted to the present day. The governor appoints a president and three other members to the Board of Police Commissioners. The mayor of St. Louis is the‘gx officio fifth member of the board, which serves as the top executive group for the department.‘0 9Joseph L. Morse (ed.), Funk and Hagnalls Standard Reference Engxclgggdia, (New York: Standard Reference works Publishing 00.. '"Ca, l . XXI. 7763'ha 'oThe l96i organizational chart of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department is presented in Appendix A. l5 By statute, the city of St. Louis is divided into twelve police districts. initially, each of these districts had its own district police station, superior officers, and full complement of police officers. Now, due to socio-economic changes in the city, industrial development, and population movement to the suburbs, the necessity for l2 separate districts no longer exists. However, because of the statutory requirements, the twelve districts exist nominally, but actually the 4th District has been combined with the former 8th District (now called the Central District because its command post is located in the departmental headquarters building), while the 7th and llth districts have been combined with the 3rd and 9th Districts, ll respectively. in addition to the personnel assigned to district stations, other police officers and supervisors assigned to field units work under the commander of the Bureau of Field Operations. This bureau is the department's largest in terms of personnel assigned. Other members of the department are assigned to the Bureau of inspections, the Bureau of Services, and to staff units under the direct control of the chief of police or the commissioners. Over lOOO members of the department are non-sworn civilian personnel. These civilian employees do not wear uniforms or perform law enforcement functions, but they do make substantial contributions to the department and to their community. The organizational chart shown in Appendix A indicates HAmiap showing the statutory district boundaries is presented in Appendix B. l6 a few’of the responsible positions held by civilians, and indicates the command structure for all department personnel.‘2 Selecting.£hg sgmgl . A sample, as the word implies, is a smaller representation of a larger whole. The use of samples allows for more valuable scientific work by making the time of the researchers more productive. They can make a more comprehensive and intensive analysis of fewer cases than would be possible if they were examining a mass of material. Sampling makes research less expensive in terms of time and money too, thus permitting study of problems that could not otherwise be investigated. There are only two basic requirements in selecting samples; reliable samples must he'sgggesentative and they must be gdggugge.'3 To be representative, a sample must be a carefully assembled smaller edition of the universe to be sampled. A population sample, for example, must have the characteristics of the population of the universe, in approximately the same degree. in this study, the universe is all policeman in the United States. The pertinent characteristics are the educational levels and the productivity of police officers. No sources of information are available to indicate these characteristics for the universe population, but since the St. Louis police officers range from 7th graders to college graduates, and since St. Louis police officers perform generally the same police tasks as other American police officers, representativeness to an IZThis chart reflects the organizational plan in effect during the research study interval. I3H'illiam J. Goode and Paul K. Hatt, Methods'Lg Social Research, (New York: McGraw-Hili Book 00., inc., i952), p. 2l3. 17 unknown degree is assumed. To be adequate, a sample must be large enough to allow confidence in the stability of its characteristics.‘4 in this study, St. Louis was selected as the locus because a large sample population could be studied. However, a large sample population does not insure reliability. Since there is no method for calculat- ing the limits of permissable error or the statistically-required number of individuals for a sample group if strict probability sampling techniques are not used, application of any findings or conclusions to the population of the universe is dangerous. in this study, as many St.Louis police officers as possible were included in the sample in order to obtain as many data as possible, since it was impossible to determine accurately the precise number of individuals needed in a sample group to adequately reflect in miniature the educational levels and productivity rates of the more than 3l0,000 state and local police officers in the United States.'5 W 919313 population. in addition to the number of individuals in the sample, consideration had to be given to their education, their duty assignments, and their performance opportunities. ‘NgmggLIQE officers. Since valid records of the edu- cational achievements of all members of the St. Louis department were llmaid” p. 225. 'SUnited States Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract ‘gfi.£gg United States: l962, (Hashington: Government Printing office, l§32), p. 534. l8 available, the problem‘was to assemble a homogeneous group whose work production records were comparable. As persons performing dissimilar work produce different types of work records, the largest group of individuals performing similar duties was chosen as the group from which the sample would be drawn. These individuals were the motorized (automobile) patrolmen. Hence, no foot patrolmen, motorcycle officers. plainclothesmen. patrolmen on special assignments or individuals with supervisory rank or administrative responsibility'were included in the base group. Education. Using the electronic data-processing system installed at department headquarters, the departmental statisticians produced a record of the pro-service formal education for each patrol- man in the department. Since the punched card data were originally extracted from individual personnel records on file in the depart- mental personnel office, 50 personnel recordsiwere selected at random and examined by thewriter.‘6 No discrepancies were noted, so the statisticians' data were accepted as accurate. ‘Qgty assignments. Police officers assigned to patrol duty do not necessarily always perform this type of work. Sometimes patrolmen are assigned temporarily to non-patrol duties. or they may be promoted or given supervisory responsibilities for an interval. Again using the electronic data-processing system. over l25.000 '6The procedural steps and the Table of Random Numbers supplied by John E. Freund. op.cit.. pp. l95 and 39l, were used to assure randomness of the selections. i9 patrolmen's daily activity reports were examined. The punched cards which reflected more than 50 per cent of an 8-hour day spent on other than patrol dutiesiwere discarded. Held for further study'were the coded daily activity reports of all patrolmen which reflected 50 per cent or more of each reported duty tour spent on motorized beat patrol. it was recognized that some members of the staple population base were thus held to have worked one or more eight-hour days of petrol duty during which they may have spent from one to #9 per cent of their time in the performance of non-patrol duties. However. since there was no evidence that officers with particular levels of formal education were singled out in this respect, lt*was assumed that any amount of result- ant discrimination is spread randomly among officers at all levels of formal education and therefore does not distort the overall statis- tical comparisons. Perfonmence egggrtunitles. To insure that each patrolmen selected for inclusion in the sample population furnished his particular education group with adequate representation, it was necessary to consider the aspects of each officer's duty assignment ‘which may have influenced his opportunities to perfonn the kinds of work.on‘whlch the individual records of productivity'would be based. District assignmen . Examination of the neighbor- hoodsiwithin each of the l2 police districts led to the elimination of five districts from further consideration. The Central-hth District was found to be restricted to the heart of downtown St. Louis. No other district contained such a concentration of com- mercial, governmental, financial, and cultural activities and 20 establishments. in the Central-llth District were found almost no private residences. liorkers living elsewhere crowded the streets of the district during the days, while only a relatively few recreation seekers, residents of expensive apartment houses, and transients were found in the district at night. Many officers working in the Central- lith District were foot patrolmen, whereas no other district had more than a very few men assigned to foot patrol duty. The police hazards in the Central-nth District were considerably different than those elsewhere in the city too. it was the only district with concentrated high-risk, high-value, low-population police problems. On the other hand, the let, 2nd, and 6th Districts encompassed the principal middle-class residential sections of the city. They could not be compared socially, economically, or racially with the remaining districts. Review of the crime and incident records, crime trend charts. and records of calls for police services throughout the city also substantiated the conclusion that neither the Central-llth, lst, 2nd, nor 6th District officers could be considered to have had the ease nuwers of opportunities to perform the principal police tasks as the 722 officers assigned to patrol duty in the other seven districts. Accordingly, all coded and punch daily activity reports submitted by the patrolmen working in the Central-llth, lst. 2nd, and 6th Districts were discarded and were not included in further compar- isons. SEED assigm . if certain officers patrolled only during daylight hours, while others worked only at night, then the officers' opportunities to perform similar tasks would not be 2i comparable. in St. Louis, as in many large police departments, officers work three watches (or shifts) every day. Fortunately for the writer, watch assignments for all St. Louis patrol officers were regularly rotated. Prior to i9 September l960, watch assignments were rotated every four weeks. Since that date they have been rotated every three mks, insuring over an extended period that all patrolmen will have had approximately the sane number of assignments to each of the three watches and approximately the same number of opportunities to perform the same kinds of police tasks. 5.9.9.! Assignmen . if all patrol beets were of the sane size, certain patrolmen would undoubtedly have more Opportunities to perform their tasks than their colleagues, simply because some areas contain more police hazards than other areas of the same size. To apportion patrol work equally to all patrolmen, comprehensive beat- anaiysis studies were undertaken by the analysis of the Metropolitan Police Department Office of Planning and Research. These studies were completed early in l960. They provided the information needed for a departmental realigment of beat boundaries. High hazard beats with many calls for police services were reduced in size. Low hazard beats, with fewer calls for services, were expanded. According to Mr. Glen R. Murphy, the director of planning and research, after completion of the boundary realignment program in mid—i960, each beat officer was assigned a beat comparable to all other beats in respect to an approximately equal combination of hazards, calls for services, 22 and area to be covered.‘7 The sustained beat analysis program has made it possible to continue making adjustments of beat boundaries, even during the period covered in this study, to assure each beat patrolman of approximately the same amount of work as his fellow patrolmen. Any non-discernible inequities that have remained or that have developed since completion of the beat boundary realignment program were assumed to be non-significant during the study since they could be presumed to occur equally for patnoimen at all educational levels. 931; assigged £9 33.591 1251. Since no daily activity reports were coded and punched on cards before 22 August i960. and since the data-gathering phase of this study was conducted during March l96i, the patrolmen's records of work accomplished during a 28-week period, from 22 August l960 to 5 March i96i, were examined. The records for this period reflected production totals for one hdweek watch assignment period and for eight 3-week.watch assignment periods. These records included all productivity reported in the coded daily activity reports prepared by patrolmen completing three assignments to each of the three daily watches. Not all 722 officers performing patrol duty in the seven districts selected for study‘were assigned regularly,however, to patrol duty. Many officers completed more than i30 eight-hour days on patrol duty. Some others worked only three or ‘7During March i96l, in a series of conversations with the waiter, Mr. Murphy explained his beat analysis study and made the statement here attributed to him. 23 four days on patrol assignments. interviews with district comnanders revealed that any officer with fewer than l0 eight-hour days of petrol duty during a 28-week period could be safely assumed to be regularly assigned to non-patrol duties. To assure that all officers included in the sample population were actually patrol officers, l66 officers credited with fewer than i0 eight-hour days on patrol duty were eliminated from further consideration. Discarding the productivity and educational achivement records of these i66 policemen, after eliminating all other non-patrolmen in the department and all patrol officers working in the Central-llth, let, 2nd, and 6th Districts, resulted in a sale group population of 556 regularly-assigned motorized patrol officers who could be presuned to have performed the same types of work under approximately the same circumstances, with their opportunities to accomiish their tasks limited only by the number of days each man worked.‘8 N. THE PERFORMANCE TOTALS STUOIED Pglice ark 1.1.9.9. geven geiected digtricts. The 5th, iDth, l2th, and the combined 3rd-7th and 9th-lith Districts are contiguous districts along the center of St. Louis' east-west axis. They extend from the Mississippi River to the city's western boundaries. in the last century, the homes in these districts were occupied by St. Louis' ”The total author of days worked on patrol duty by each of the 556 patrolmen were provided by the Metropolitan Police Department statisticians. They are included in Appendix C. 2h white middle-class citizens. in l960-6l, some of the now dilapidated single-family and multiple-unit dwellings*were occupied by low-income Megro families. Many other houses and apartment buildings -- entire neighborhoods -- were vacant and awaiting the wreckers whose work precedes urban renewal construction. Manufacturing plants and other commercial facilities were found throughout all seven districts. Neighborhood shopping centers were important features of each district too, as were theaters, bars, hotels, public transportation facilities and parking meters. The police tasks performed by police officers in every large city‘were being performed by the patrolmen in these districts, who encountered the same kinds of problems and conditions that exist to some degree in every American city. 13919 M accggglisivnent was recorded. The activity report submitted daily by St. Louis patrolmen listed 37 types of work performed by police officers. Each of these police tasks was iden- tified on the activity report forms by a descriptive phrase and by a code number that was used M transferring reported data to punch cards for utilization in the electronic data processing system.‘9 Not all of these 37 types of work were performed frequently enough by patrolmen to qualify as reliable or statistically-slgnificant units of measurement. For example, juveniles were seldom detained and vehicles were seldom towed. Others of the listed tasks were so broad in scope.as to make comparisons meaningless, e.g., complaint investi- gations, notifications, assists to other officers. Still others, those ‘9A sample daily activity report is presented in Appendix D. 25 dealing with arrests, were not conducive to valid measurement or analysis because of a Missouri statute permitting twenty-hour deten- tions of individuals without formal charges; these arrests "on suspicion" were reported together with more conventional types of arrests made by St. Louis policemen. For validity and reliability, in view of the cited reasons, ll work categories were culled from the 37 available. These ll tasks were selected to be the tasks whose accomplishment by patrolmen would determine their levels of production. Defining the selected tasks. Since many terms and expressions used by law enforcement officers may have different meanings from jurisdiction to Jurisdiction, the following definitions are presented as those which applied to police work in St. Louis. isguing parking‘mstgg.tgg§;_ Parking meters are located in every St. Louis police district. All patrolmen were responsible for checking the meters on their boats and for issuing parking viola- tion notices (tags) when automobiles were parked at meters which indicated the authorized parking time had expired. issuing‘gghg;_parking‘tggg. ‘These citations were issued by all beat patrolmen to operators of motor vehicles who parked their vehicles in violation of local ordinances, other than meter regula- tions, or in such a manner as to endanger the public safety or obstruct the public ways. issuing hazardous traffic violation citations. All beat patrolmen were required to report the number of summonses they issued for hazardous traffic violations. Considered to be hazardous traffic 26 violations were such offenses as reckless driving, speeding, disregard- ing signs and signals, making improper turns, failing to yield the right of‘way, following too closely, and leaving the scene of accidents. issuing non-hazardous traffic violation citations. All citations issued for such offenses as driving without valid operators' licenses, driving vehicles without mandatory safety equipment, driving vehicles with defective equipment, making unnecessary horn noise, and driving unregistered vehicles were included in this category. Completing business checks. Beat officers were required to report the number of doors and windows they physically checked at closed business establishments. While on patrol, St. Louis patrolmen ‘were directed to dismount from their patrol cars and make business checks on foot. Eggductigg business interviews. Beat officers reported the number of Open business establishments they visited in line of duty in order to talk.with owners, managers, or employees. issuing ordinance violation notices. These notices included those issued to violators of ordinances regulating the non- criminal behavior of St. Louis citizens in the interests of public health and public safety. Among the offenses for which these notices were issued were unlawful burning of rubbish, blocking of public ways, unlawful dumping, violations of fire laws or rooming house regulations, and violations of ordinances governing the conduct of businesses. 27 Issuing‘ggrfigg notices. Curfew notices*were those citations issued to individuals unlawfully abroad in the night-l time. While officers on the day watch could not issue these notices, the watch rotation system provided all officers with approximately equal numbers of opportunities to issue curfew notices. Stopping vehicles. All beat patrolmen were directed to be alert for the presence of suspicious motor vehicles on their beats. whenever a patrolman reported that he had stopped a vehicle, it reflected the halting of a suspicious vehicle for summary or more comprehensive investigation. Questioning pedestrians. Each police officer was required to report the number of pedestrians he interviewed in the line of duty while patrolling his beat. ‘flgklgg.§lglg interrogation.gg£gg. Patrol officers were encouraged to stop and question persons abroad in the nighttime, those found in the vicinity of crime scenes, and others whose general appear- ances or behavior‘was strange, suspicious,or unnatural. Field interrogation report cards were furnished all patrolmen for easy reporting of interviews of this character. Relative imrtance _o_f 5113 selected Legs. While the eleven tasks defined above are not among the most notable, most sensational, or most glamorous tasks performed by police personnel, they do provide a cross-section of the patrol tasks most frequently performed by patrolmen. Tasks such as these are the bread-and-butter police tasks whose accomplishment determines ultimately the efficiency of patrolmen 28 and the effectiveness of departmental public safety, accident pre- vention, and crime prevention programs. Significance'gf'thg selected'tggkg. Except for the issuance of ordinance violation notices and the issuances of curfew notices, each of the ll selected tasks was accomplished more than h,000 times by the 556 patrolmen in the sanple population during the 28-week research period. There were fewer than 500 ordinance violation notices and curfew notices issued. These two tasks were included among the selected tasks to determine whether officers at particular education levels were inclined to emphasize or de-emphasize the performance of important but unpopular police tasks. Performance.gf.;gg tasks‘by individual officers. As each task‘was accomplished by a St. Louis patrolman, he was responsible for recording its performance on a rough-draft work sheet. when he returned to his district station after completing his tour of patrol duty, he used the work sheet as the primary source of data when pre- paring his daily activity report. All daily activity reports were fonwarded each day by the district commanders to departmental head- quarters where all of the data contained in the individual daily activity reports were coded and where punched cards were prepared. The daily activity reports were returned to the districts for filing. The punched cards were retained by the departmental statisticians who used them when preparing periodic (every three weeks) summaries of individ- ual performances which listed the production totals for every police officer in the HetrOpolitan Police Department. The punched cards were 29 also available and useful for beat analysis studies, for long-range and short-range planning, and for independent studies such as this one. For this study, the punched cards reflecting the daily motorized patrol activity of each of the 556 patrolmen in the sample group, excepting those cards discarded for any of the reasons previous- ly noted, were totalled. The electronic data processing system thus provided each officer's 28-week performance totals for each of the ll selected tasks, plus the number of days of patrol duty worked by each officer during the research interval of 28 weeks.20 All officers' punched performance records were identified by their departmental serial numbers (DSN). These same serial numbers were used to identify individuals when determining each officer's level of formal education.21 In using the Metropolitan Police Department's electronic data processing system to develop these basic educational and perform- ance date, two assumptions were made: (i) The educational data contained originally in the officers' personnel records and the performance data contained originally in the officers' daily activity reports were accurately transferred to the punched cards by the coding clerks and the card- punch operators. (2) The daily activity reports submitted by this 20These data are presented in Appendix C. 2'These serial numbers are presented in Appendix C. 29a individual officers were conscientiously prepared and accurately reflect the amounts of work actually accomplished by the officers who prepared them. Performance 2: the tasks by education sub:groups. After the individual totals furnished by the departmental statisticians were made available, l0 formal education sub-groups were designated. Groupings were established for 7th, 8th, 9th, lOth, llth, and 12th graders and for those who had completed one, two, three, or four years of college. Each of the 556 officers in the sample group, depending on the highest level of formal education he had completed, was assigned to one of the l0 sub-groups. Then the days-worked totals and the performance totals for each of the ll selected tasks, as reported for each officer in each sub-group, were added to produce sub-group totals. As might be expected, the sub-groups were not of equal size. There were relatively few patrolmen in the 7th grade sub-group and in the three sub-groups for officers with two or more years of college. These officers, from four sub-groups, numbered only no, and constituted only 7.l9 per cent of the total sample group of 556 officers. In the absence of authoritative data regarding the formal education levels of all American police officers. it is impossible to accurately state how the St. Louis ratio of hO/SSG compares with the number of 7th graders and officers with two or more years of college in the total American policeman population. it is, however, common knowledge that 3013 American police patrolmen in other American com- munities have fewer than eight years of formal education and that some other officers have two or more years of college. For easier handling in the data-analysis phase of this 30 study,and to reduce the possibilities of confusion for readers of this report, the officers who completed one, two, three, and four years of college are hereafter referred to as l3th, lkth, lSth, and l6th graders. V. HANIPULATION OF THE DATA Neither the individual officers' raw production totals nor the educational sub-groups' raw’production totals, even when presented with the days-worked totals and the pertinent formal education data, provided the basis for useful comparisons. Data manipulation was required for a new presentation of the data in a meaningful form. Develpping production pg; gal-gay 3315933. The individual officers’ production totals were made more significant by combining all production totals and days-worked totals within each of the formal educational sub-groups. However, without further manipulation, comparisons between the sub-groups could not be made. Hence, each of the la sub-groups' eleven production totals (one total for each of the ll tasks) was divided by the number of days-worked by all members of the sub-group. The ll resultant quotients became the sub-groups' production per patrol-day totals for each of the ll selected tasks. - The manipulation process is illustrated here for a hypothetical sub-group whose four members perfonmed three types of work. 3i Sub-group ”X” Individuals Task #l Task g2 Task g3 Days werked A 50 80 30 60 3 l90 l27 65 95 c #0 l43 25 35 D 20 50 30 l0 3'55 11733 T55 7236 Sub-group Days Average Number of Units of Production Total; Worked Productionyper Patrol-Dgy Task #l 300 200 l.50 Task #2 #00 200 2.00 Task #3 ISO 200 .75 Develpping performance indexes. Using the ID sub-groups' production per day averages, comparisons of the sub-groups' perform- ances for each of the ll task categories were easily made. However, no comparisons for the l0 sub-groups' production of all ll tasks in combination were possible without additional manipulation of the col- lected data and the addition of other data. Weighting 333% The ll tasks, which were considered as the yardsticks by which the productivity of the ten sub-groups would be determined, vary in their relative importance. Some of the tasks are relatively more or less important than others. For example, the issuance of a citation for a hazardous traffic violation is more apt to be considered an important police service than the issuance of a citation for a parking ordinance violation. No intelligent determination of productivity based on consideration of several dissimilar tasks can be made without first assigning weights 32 to the tasks. The weights should indicate the relative importance of each of the dissimilar tasks. There is not now, nor is there likely to be in the future, any universal scale of valuations permitting the arbitrary assignment of weights to different types of work. Assigning relative weights involves consideration of the relative importance of the designated tasks in the Specific communities where they are accom- plished. Specific types of police work accomplished by officers are mone or less important, relative one another, according to the emphasis and stress, or lack of emphasis and stress, placed on their accomplish- ment by the officers‘ supervisors. For example, in a city where there was no serious traffic problem, traffic control tasks would be weighted less heavily than in a city where the police department had a drive in progress to reduce accidents and violations of traffic laws. . So that preper relative weights might be assigned to each of the ll selected tasks accomplished by the officers in the sample population, Major Ola P. McAllister, Commander of the Metro- politan Police Department's Northern Area; Captain Walter Eitzman, 9th-llth District Commander; and Mr. Glen R. Hurphy, Director of the Office of Planning and Research, were asked in March l96l to independently assign relative weights to each of the eleven tasks. Each panel member*was asked to consider the relative importance of the several tasks from his own point of view. While the weights assigned by the three panel members were essentially similar, there were minor differences which . 33 were resolved by determining the consensus of the panel as indicated by the arithmetic mean of the three weights assigned by the panelists for each of the ll tasks. Computing‘gpg indexes. Each sub-group's ll raw produc- tion totals were multiplied by the weights designated for each of the tasks. The ll products were added together. The sum of the products was divided by the number of days worked by all members of the sub- group. The resultant quotient was the sub-group's performance index. The procedural steps taken in determining the performance indexes for each of the sub-groups are illustrated here. The hypothetical Sub group "X", which was introduced for illustrative purposes on page 32, is again used for the same purpose, with 200 again representing the number of days worked by all members of Sub- group ”X". Sub-group Weight Weighted Production Tetals Assigned Tetals Task #l 300 l 300 3800 a l9.0 Task #2 #00 5 2000 200 k l 0 lo I 00 Tas #3 5 5 l9.0 - Sub-group ”X"'s Performance 3800 index The performance indexes do not have absolute values. The index numbers have no meaning standing alone. But the index number of a particular sub-group does have meaning when compared with similarly-derived index numbers of other sub-groups from the same sample population. The performance indexes are indications of the superiority or inferiority of the several sub-groups, relative one 3h another, in respect to the performance of selected tasks that the members of all sub-groups accomplished under essentially the same conditions. It should be recalled that the performance indexes of the 10 subvgroups‘were computed considering only the quantitative aspects of their respective productivity. All qualitative aspects of the work accomplished have been omitted from consideration in this study to permit concentration on the more precisely measurable quantitative aspects of work accomplished by the patrolmen in the sample population. Statistical analysi . With the sub-groups' performance indexes and their levels of formal education as the two variables, the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation were computed to indicate the strength of any linear (straight-line) relationship that existed between the formal education and the productivity of the sub-groups constituting the sample population. Vi. DATA PRESENTATION Presenting‘thg finding . The findings in respect to the average daily production of each of the l0 sub-groups for each of the ll selected tasks are presented in the following chapter. So that they may be readily assimilated, the findings are presented in tables and graphs rather than narratively. Additional tables and graphs summarizing the findings, including the weights assigned to each of the ll tasks, are presented 35 in Chapter III together with the performance indexes for each of the l0 educational sub-groups and the derivation of the coefficient of correlation showing the strength of the linear relationship between the two variables. in the final chapter, conclusions indicated by the findings and the recommendations suggested by the conclusions are presented. Vii. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY All studies conducted by researchers who conscientiously use accepted variations of the general scientific method of investi- gation have a certain value because they discover new knowledge, eliminate untenable hypotheses from further consideration, or collect and confirm already~known facts. To accurately assess the value of any particular study, however, it is essential to recognize the limitations of the study. Each study has its limitations, and they arise from several sources. ‘gjmitations arising‘figgg assgmption . Assumptions are state- ments of alleged facts that are accepted as true without proof. Social scientists must base their work on more assumptions than do the physical scientists. Fer example, social scientists assume that human behavior is regular, knowable, and -- to some degree -- predictable. Because all of the factors Influencing human behavior have not been identified nor measured, the social scientist must rely on their assumptions if they are to proceed to study human behavior. 36 Like all students of human behavior, the writer has had to accept many assumptions in order to conduct his study. For example, it has been assumed that the quantitative aspects of productivity could be treated separately from the qualitative aspects; that the formal education of policemen was a factor influencing their behavior *while on patrol duty; that all members of the sample group who completed "X" years of formal schooling had the benefit of similar educational experiences and achieved similar educational outcomes although they may have attended different schools at different times; that the 556 individuals in the sample population were a fair repre- sentation of the total patrolman population in St. Louis; and that influences on the officers' productivity caused by variations in duty assignments were spread uniformly among officers at all levels of formal education. These assumptions, and others noted earlier, limit the value of the research effort because It is not known, and cannot be learned, whether the erter erred in accepting them. Limitations arising mmggg. The formal educational data pertaining to each of the 556 officers in the sample group were extracted from departmental personnel records. These data were not verified at the schools and colleges attended by the Individual officers, nor were the academic achievement records of the 556 officers searched for or examined to determine their academic grades or relative class standings. The departmental personnel records may or may not have reflected formal educational achievement by individual officers subsequent to employment; time did not permit individual interviews of 37 the officers in the sample group or the verification of any statements they might have made about off-duty educational accomplishments had they been interviewed. The production data supplied by the officers in their daily activity reports were also unverified. The lack of verification of their performance claims‘were most apparent when evaluating their accomplishment of certain tasks whose accomplishment could not be substantiated by other evidence, e.g., conducting business checks. Additionally, the selected tasks have not been shown to be the most reliable Indexes of productivity. Other, non-selected tasks -- or even tasks whose accomplishment'was not reported by the St. Louis patrolmen -- might have been better sources of meaningful data. Limitations arising m 333%. Using the accomplishment of ii arbitrarily-selected tasks as the measurement of productivity limited the value of the study for two basic reasons: (i) no tasks were included that could be described as particularly noteworthy individual accomplishments, such as making on-sight arrests of at- large felons; and (2) some of the selected tasks were not accomplished frequently enough by the officers in the sample population to comfortably guarantee their statistical significance. Limitations arising 3.0.1..“ _t_f_i_g methodology. As was noted in the opening chapter, and again in Chapter Ii, no consideration was given in this study to the qualitative aspects of the work accom- plished by the patrolmen. This significant restricting of the scope of thestudy constitutes a limitation of major proportions; some may 38 maintain that the two aspects of production cannot or should not be separated. Another limiting factor is the method employed to select a sample population. More valid and reliable conclusions would have resulted if the sample population had been randomly-selected from the entire American policeman population. That the production records of officers from different communities would not be comparable -- even if available -- does not eliminate the built-in limitation. Limitations arising‘fggg‘gggrevaluated variables. It was assumed that the large number of patrolmen (556 individuals) in the sample population permits the non-consideration of variables other than formal educational levels and productivity totals. But since other variables, such as race, religion, family background, motiva- tion, enthusiasm, quality of training, state of health, and age, were not scientifically eliminated as factors possibly Influencing the officers' production records, their non-consideration limits the value of the study. CHAPTER III THE FINDINGS In any research study, the findings are the fruits of the methodological activities and are the basis for any conclusions that are drawn by the researcher or by those who ponder his research report. The findings of every research report, including this report, must be viewed In light of the methods used to develop them. I. DAILY PRODUCTlVITY TOTALS After selecting the sample population, the tasks whose vaccompllshment would serve to indicate the relative daily productivity of the patrolmen constituting the sample population,and the variation of the general scientific method to be employed in the research effort, the‘writer used data manipulation processes to compute the average productivity per day totals for each of the ID educational level sub- groups in respect to each of the ll selected tasks. The findings are herewith presented in tabular and graphic form. .- ”n+40no _-'p-.~lvb./ v . .— pr Cf‘ (nynf‘nv v .4 sued daily'per off-ice; numb 0 a (if D is ‘I Ann-xv -AI 5" ’ ‘1. HIGHEST NUMBER NO. OF TOTAL NUMBER AVERAGE NO. OF GRADE 0F DAYS OF NOTICES NOTICES ISSUED COMPLETED OFFICERS yoRKED ISSUED DAILY FER OFFICER 7 5 343 5 .015 , 8 58 4,162 22 .005 9 26 2,135 4 .002 10 95 8,072 51 .006- 11 39 3.1.31. 13 .004 12 269 25,059 179 .007 13 29 2,630 10 .004 '14 19 1,418 5 .004 15 10 841. 5 .006 16 6 678 2 .003 7 to 16 556 48,775 296 .006 .0I6 .0I4 OIZ .Oi .008 .006 .004 .002 7 8 9 I0 II' I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 L Highest grade completed ” WWW-”W FIGURE 8 VARIATIONS IN THE NUMBER OF CURFEi-i NOTICES ISSUED DAILY 56 FATROIMENIN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI; AUGUST 1960 - MARCH 1961. CURFEW NCTICE‘S ISSUED -BY EDUCATION GROUPS- TABLE VIII .335 _' v-~—v--—~—v-—-~. e 47 TABLE VI BUSINESS INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED ---BY EDUCATION GROUPS-- -_._. HIGHEST NUMBER NO. OF TOTAL NUMBER AVERAGE NUMBER Average nUmber of business interviews‘ conducteddaily per officer GRADE 0F DAYS OF INTERVIEES OF INTERVIEWS COMPLETED OFFICERS W CONDUCTED W 7 5 - 343 53 .155 8 ‘58 4,162 2,508 .603 9 26 2,135 962 .451 10 95 8,072 5,312 .658 11 39 3,434 3,172 . .924 12 269 ' 25,059 16,505 .659 13 29 2,630 1,948 .741 14 19 1,418 1,334 . .941 15 10 844 407 .482 16 6 678 430 .634 7 to 16 556 48,775 32,631 .669 :.N3 1.9 $.8. .7 .6 ;.5 {.4. ;..3 {.2 .I C) .7 a 9 I0 I: I2 i3 WI4‘I5 l6 Highest grade completed FIGURE 6 VARIATIONS IN THE NUMBER OF BUSINESS INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED DAILY E BY 5’56FATR0LMENIN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI; AUGUST 1960 -. MARCH 1961. TABLE X PEDESTRIANS QUESTIONED -BY EDUCATION GROUPS- 4 HIGHEST NUMBER NO. OF TOTAL NO. OF AVERAGE NIH/BER OF .“ f pedestrians daily per Officer GRADE 0F DAYS PEDESTRIANS PEDESTRIANS QUETIONED QQMELEIED OFFICERS UORKED CUESTIONED DAILY FER OFFICER 7 5 343 89 :260~ 8 58 4,162 1,717 .413 9 26 2,135 785 ' .368 10 95 8,072 3,777 .468' 11 39 3,434 1,008 .294 12 269 25,059 14,167 .565 13 29 2,630 2,268 .862 14 19 1,418 731 .516 15 10 844 495 .587 16 6 678 175 .258 7 to 16 556 48,775 25,212 . .517 ‘I13 .8 .6 a4 .2 C) ‘Average number 0 questioned .-o ”-4 '7 E3 ‘9 . lC) ll l2 |3>. L4 I51 l6 Highest grade completed FIGURE 10 . VARIATIONS IN THE NUIvEER OF PEDISTRIAAS QUESTIONED DAILY DYV‘556‘PATROLMENIN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI; AUGUST 1960 - MARCH 1961. _h._ 49 Average number of non-hazardous traffic ‘viOlation citations issued daily per Officer TABLE Iv #3 NON-HAZARDOUS TRAFFIC VIOLATION CITATIOIIS ISSUED --BY EDUCATION GROUPS—- F r Ifi HIGHEST . NUMBER NO. OF TOTAL NUMBER AVERAGE NUMBER GRADE OF DAYS OF CITATIONS OF CITATIONS ISSUED 9.2mm m w ISSUED W - 7 5 343 20 .058 8 58 4,162 220 . .053 9 26 2,135 171 .080 10 95 8,072 732 ' .091 11 39 3,434 162 , .047 12 269 25,059 2,727 .109 13 29 2,630 252 .096 14 -19 1,418, 94 .066 15 10 844 81 .096 16 6 678 29 .043 7 to 16 556 48,775 4,488 .092 .12 .LB .hS J4; J2 138 £36 £14 £32 7 '8 9 Io II I2 I3 l4 l5_ I8 ' ' Highest grade completed I FIGURE 4 - VARIATIONS IN THE NUMBER OF NON-HAZARDOUS TRAFFIC VIOLATION CITATIONS ISSUED DAILY BY 556 FATROLMFN ‘IIN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI; 11133115? 1960 1 MARCH 1961. fl-~—.-.— — O - .q...—A1—.‘ ' {Average number of field interrogation I TABLE XI FIELD INTERROGATION CARDS MADE --BY EDUCATION GROUPS— HIGHEST NUMBER NO. OF TOTAL NUMBER. AVERAGE NO. OF cards made daily per officer GRADE ' OF‘ DAYS OF CARDS CARDS MADE QQMELEIED. QEEIQEBé. EQEEED MADE IEQJQLIEZLEEEIQEE 7 5 343 117 .341 8 58 4,162 1,965 .472 9 26 2,135 884 . .414 10 95 8,072 4,120 .510 11 39 3,434 1,152 .336 12 269 25,059 16,303 .651 13 29 2,630 2,735 1.040 14 . 19 1,418 715 .504 15 10 844 811 .961 16 6 '678 143 .211 7 to 16 556 48,775 28,945 .593 |.2 l1) .8 .6 _ .I4 .2 C) 7.8 9 .IO II I2' l3 l4 I5 l6 HighéSt grade completed I ”I . FIGURE 11 VARIATIONS IN THE NUMBER OF FIELD INTERROGATION CARDS MADE DAILY 31.556 PATROLMEN IN ST. LOUIS, FESSOURI;_A_UGUST 1960~ - MARCH 1961. WWW—o -— —-.. ___,-ec—-v 51 iii. COMBINED DAILY PRODUCTIVITY RECORDS The tables and graphs presented in the foregoing pages indicate that there are wide variations in formal education sub-group productivity, even within individual sub-groups. For example, the 7th graders compiled the highest average daily production rate in respect to two of the ll tasks, i.e., issuing'gghgg ggrkiggugggg and Issuing‘gggfgg notices, while compiling the lowest average daily production record in respect to two other tasks, i.e., issuing hagggg- .925 traffic violation citations and Stgpging gehicle . In Table Xii, the rankings of all sub-groups In respect to their relative records of accomplishment for the ll tasks are presented. The actual amounts of average daily,production per officer are not included in this report because the writer‘was interested in the productivity of groups of officers in the sample population and not concerned with the average amounts of work performed daily by the officers as individuals.22 The i3th graders led all other sub-groups by compiling the highest average daily production records in five of the ll task categories. Of the other nine educational sub-groups, only the 7th graders and the lSth graders led all other sub-groups in average daily production per officer more than once. The l3th graders also compiled one of the highest over-all daily production records. They were sur- passed only by the l2th graders who ranked no lower than fifth among all sub-groups in average daily productivity per officer for any of 22Freund,9_p.. _c_i_§., PP- ‘95 and 391 52 the eleven tasks. At the opposite end of the scale were the 16th graders who ranked no higher than sixth among all sub-groups in average daily production per officer for any of the eleven tasks. TABLE XII RANKING OF THE AVERAGE DAILY PRODUCTION PER OFFICER TOTALS --EDUCATION GROUPS-- HIGHEST NUMBER or IIAIIIIIIIIISa GRADE COMPLETED must 2 3 h 5 6 J 8 9 Lowest Long 7 2 I O o o o I 2 2 3 II 8 o I 0 I I 3 2 2 I 0 II 9 o o I I 3 I 3 o I I II IO 0 O I 3 1+ I I I o 0 II II o I I o o 2 I I L» I II l2 I 2 5 2 I o o o o 0 II I3 5 3 2 O o I o o o 0 II "I I O o 2 2 u I I o a II Is 2 1+ I I o I o I o I II I6 0 O o o o I O 2 1+ A II TI T2" IT TO TI TI; “5' T6 T2 T6 TIES a. Some columns include ties, thus proving some columnar totals greater or less than II. The rankings in Table XII reflect the high-to-low average productivity per officer per day achievements of all sub-groups for the li CBSKS‘wIthOUt reference to the relative importance of the tasks. III. THE SUB'GROUPS' PERFORMANCE INDEXES it was assumed that St. Louis patrolmen had approximately the same number of opportunities to perform the same tasks, limited only 53 by the number of days they‘worked on patrol duty assignments. it was also assumed that some officers concentrated their efforts on certain of the tasks to be accomplished while on patrol, to the detriment of their productivity records in respect to the other tasks. Because all ll tasks were not equally important, the patrolmeanho compiled high productivity records for a few tasks, if they were the most imrtant tasks, may ha\e surpassed other officers in overall productivity although the.other officers' records reflected greater productivity in more task categories. To enable comarisons to be made of the ID sub-groups' produc- tivity records, the development of performance indexes‘was necessary. And to deveIOp indexes, numerical values (weights) had to be computed and assigned to each of the task categories. Without weights, it would be necessary to equate the issuance of a citation for parking at an expired meter (a 2-minute task) with the preparation of a field interro- gation card (a 5-minute to IO-minute task) or the issuance of an ordinance violation notice (a relatively routine task) with the issuance of a hazardous traffic violation citation (a more significant task). Heights. As was reported in Section V of Chapter ii, the panel weighted the li tasks from the viewpoints of a superior officer, a district commander, and a headquarters staff member. in any police department, it is the personnel at these levels, and not the patrol officers themselves, who determine‘which police tasks deserve the patrol officers' performance priorities. Each of the three panelists independently prepared a table of numerical values for the selected tasks. The arithmetic means of the three numerical values proposed for 5h each task, rounded to the nearest whole number, were determined to be the weights to be used in computation of overall performance indexes for each of the lO sub-groups. These weights are shown in Table XIII. TABLE XIII RELATIVE NUMERICAL HEIGHTS ASSIGNED TO THE SELECTED PATROL TASKS PATROL TASK WEIGHT Issuing a parking meter tag i Issuing any other parking tag i issuing a hazardous traffic violation citation 9 issuing a non-hazardous traffic violation citation 8 Completing a business check h Conducting a business interview 3 issuing an ordinance violation notice 2 Stapping a vehicle lO Questioning a pedestrian l0 Making a field interrogation card lO Performance indexes. Using the weights listed in Table XIII and the mathematical processes outlined in Section V of Chapter ii, the performance indexes for the l0 sub-groups were computed. These indexes, presented numberically in Table XIV and graphically in Fugure l2, con- stitute the best available yardsticks for judging the overall average productivity per patrolman per day of the ID formal education sub- groups relative to one another. I60 Performance indexes TABLE XIV PERFORIUIBEE INDEXES -BY EDUCATION GROUPS- HIGHEST GRADE COMPLETED 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 7to 16 NUMBER OF OFFICERS 5 58 26 95 39 269 29 19 IO 6 556 INDE 82 123 105 .. 111 120 120 158 102 98 82 118 X i4O iZO 7 8 9 IO M i2 l3 l4 g - Rounded 139 #388,195? mh91e_number,_lg___ 2 l5 i6 Highest grade completed FIGURE 12 ' VARIATIOIS IN THE PERFORMADEE INDEXES OF 556 PA’I‘ROLMEN IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI; AUGUST 1960 {MARCH 1961. 55 56 Examining the sub-groups' performance indexes, after first examining the rankings in Table Xii, points up the value of weighting the selected tasks. For example, the lSth graders compiled enviable production records in six task categories, leading all other sub- groups in average daily production in two instances; in eight of the task categories, the lSth graders ranked no lower than fourth among all sub-groups. On the other hand, the 8th graders ranked as high as second only once, and they ranked sixth or lower in average daily production of eight of the ll selected tasks. However, after weighting all of the tasks and computing the performance indexes, we find the 8th graderSIwith a perfonnance index of l23, the second highest, and we find the iSth graderSIwith a performance index of 98, one of the lowest. This apparent transposition of the two sub-groups on the overall productivity Scale is explained by noting that the lSth graders accomplished the less important tasks frequently, while the 8th graders excelled, relatively, in the accomplishment of the more heavily- weighted tasks. The similar performance indexes of the llth and i2th graders (each sub-group compiled a performance index of l20) are also unexplainable when looking only at Table XII. The llth graders ranked sixth or lower in nine of the II task categories, while the 12th graders had no ranking'lower than fifth in any of the task categories. When it is noted that the llth graders excelled in the production of the most frequently accomplished tasks, i.e., completing business checks, and conducting business interviews, the weighting of the tasks assumes its proper importance. Even though a relatively small numerical value 57 (four) was assigned as the weight for the conducting of business checks task category, the task itself loomed large‘when computing the perfornr ance indexes because it was the only task accomplished once or more than once daily by the average patrolman in each of the in sub-groups. Conducting business interviews, the next most frequently accomplished task, was another forte of the llth graders, who conducted 40 per cent more interviews per day than the l2th graders -- though both groups averaged less than one interview daily per officer. The most pertinent observation that can be made relates to the crookedness of the line drawn in Figure l2 to connect the dots representing the performance indexes of the sub-groups. while a positive statement cannot be made about the extent of any linear relationship between fennel education and productivity on the basis of Figure l2 alone, the graph does indicate clearly that any existing statistical relationship will be less than a substantial one. IV. THE COEFFICIENT 0F CORRELATION BETUEEH FORHAL EDUCKTION AND PRODUCTIVITY PER DAY One of this study's purposes was to establish the extent of the linear (straight line) relationship between the formal education of 556 St. Louis police officers and their daily rates of production in respect to ll selected tasks, provided that such a relationship existed in some degree. The extent, or strengths, or linear relation- ships is expressed by coefficients of correlation (5). Using an accepted formula for determing.;, the coefficient of correlation describing the strength of the linear relationship between the formal education levels of the sample groups and their performance 53 indexes was determined to be -.Oh. The 5 of -.0’+ indicates the bare existence of an insignificant amount of negative correlations. The negativeness of the correlation has no significant meaning. The com- putation of'; is shown here. Level of Performance Educet ion l ndexes 2 2 (3') (d1) (XI) (Y') (X]Y]) I6 82 256 5724 IiIZ IS 98 225 9604 lb l02 l96 lOHOh lh28 I3 I58 I69 2h96h 2054 l2 l20 lhh lflhOO ‘ lth II I20 IZI lhhoo I320 I0 III I00 I232I IIIO 9 I05 8| IIOZS 9&5 8 l23 64 l5l29 98k 7 82 49 6721» 571i g, . "5 {y} . il01 2"7. m5 9,12 . 125595 me . 12.337 The number of cases (3) a lo (Xin "(531) (fin) '23 ”Vt.“ {xgz - (éx})2 n . €Y‘2 " (81,2 . 12 .637 - (115) (ll0l) - -.ou «1 l0 . Rios - (ma):f «pa . 125.959 - mom The data presented in Table XIV, reproduced graphically in Figure l2, disclose that both the lowest and highest sub-groups on the formal education axis had identical performance indexes. No other formal education sub-group compiled a performance index falling near the imaginary straight line that could be drawn between the two low points in Figure l2 which represent the performance indexes of the 22Freund, 93. 513.. p. 328. 59 of the 7th graders and the l6th graders. However the imaginary straight line between the two low points in Figure l2 was not the only imaginary straight line that might be drawn. The -.04 coefficient of correlation signifies the strength of the linear relationship existing when the best-fitting straight line possible is placed over the jagged-peaked line shown in Figure l2. CHAPTER IV CONCLUSIONS AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS l . CONCLUS IONS Accegtance gf. the M hxathesi . The study was designed to test the null hypothesis that the formal education of police patrol- men (when grouped according to their education levels) has no substantial linear relationship to the quantities of work they produce. It was decided during the planning of the study, as reported in Chapter II, to reject the null hypothesis if the coefficient of cor- relation was greater than .05 or less than -.05, and to accept the null hypothesis if the coefficient or correlation was between .05 and 0 or between 0 and -.05. As was indicated on the preceding pages, the coefficient of correlation reflecting the strength of the linear relationship between the levels of formal education of the l0 sub-groups and their performance indexes was -.0h. Hence the null hypothesis is accepted. No evidence*was developed to indicate any linear relationship between the formal educational levels of the 556 St. Louis police patrolmen and their records of productivity when they were grouped together according to their educational levels. Because the original hypothesis was a null hypothesis, acceptance of it does not mean that the reverse of the null hypothesis is necessarily false. That is, it might not be incorrect to say that 6i formal education does have some substantial relationship to the productivity of police patrolmen. However, because of the smallness of the hypothesis acceptance range (from .05 to -.OS), in contrast to the rejection range (from l.0 to .05l and from -.05l to -l.0), the acceptance of the hypothesis assumes more significance than would be the case if the null hypothesis had been formulated‘with a wider acceptance range. Principle conclusion 9; HEM- Based on the findings and the acceptance of the null hypothesis, the study indicated that there was no significant linear relationship between the formal education levels of the 556 St. Louis patrolmen in the ten sub-groups and their records of police work accomplished. Essentially, then, more or less formal education did not,‘pg;.§g, mean that more or less police work was accomplished by the patrolmen in the sample population. However, examination of Figure l2 on page 55 reveals that while no significant linear relationship exists, a curvilinear relationship in some degree probably does exist. it is readily apparent that only the peak achieved by the 8th graders constitutes a substantial deviation from the curve that rises from the 7th graders' performance index (82), peaks'with the l3th graders' per- formance index (l58), and declines again to the performance index of the l6th graders (82). Since the pre-selected null hypothesis did not involve testing for a curvilinear relationship between the officers‘ education levels and their productivity records, the data manipulations required for the valid statistical derivation of the 62 quadratic (curvilinear) term were neither prograamed nor carried out. igplications gfi tbs agggx. Keeping the limitations of the study in mind, certain logical inference may be drawn from the find- ings and conclusions: (I) Patrolman with more than one year of college were less productive, on the average, than any other St. Louis patrolmen except those with only seven years of formal education. It may be inferred that applicants with two or more years of college will pro- duce less work as patrolmen than any patrolmen*with fewer years of education who are similarly employed (excepting those patrol officers with fewer than eight years of formal education). Chicago Police Superintendent O. H. Wilson notes that it is difficult for him to conceive of advanced education as a liability for police officers, but admits that some of the ”more menial duties . . . over a prolonged period might become boring or demeaning“ to college-trained men seeking challenges and opportunies to utilize their advanced training. Supt. Uilson also noted that he was thinking about officers as potential high ranking superior officers and police administrators when he advocated in‘ggllgg Administration two or more years of college as a prerequisite for all applicants seeking appointment to police forces.23 Professor Germann also admits that college- trained police officers “may be” less productive than their fellow 23Letter to the writer from Supt. Wilson, l0 August l96l. G‘s k» officers with fewer years of formal education. He feels that any deficiencies in the productivity of college-educated police officers are probably the product of poor supervision and inadequate leadership by superior officers who do not appreciate the fact that college~trained police officers require different handling than their colleagues if they are to use their talents fully.2“ The two authors differ in their hypotheses about the causes or explanation for the relatively poor productivity records of patrolmen in St. Louis with two or more years of college training. Supt. Wilson suggests the non-challenging nature of the work ordinarily performed by patrol officers might be the principal factor contrib- uting to these records. Prof. Germann believes the fault may lie with supervisors who fail to motivate or utilize their college-trained 25 patrolmen prOperly. Thomas M. Frost, author of'g Forward Look l .figllgg Education, supported Supt. Wilson and Prof. Germann by noting that his analyses of frequently performed patrol tasks indicated to him that college training is not needed by the police officers respon- sible for accomplishing them.26 It may be that a feeling of ennui arising from 2“Letter to the writer from Prof. Germann, l5 August l96l. 25Proi’. Germann did not imply, directly or indirectly, that he believed this to be the case in St. Louis. 26Letter to the writer from Mr. Frost, l9 August l96l. repetitive performances of the same tasks, the small amount of conscious intellectual effort required to accomplish many routine patrol tasks, either of the explanations suggested by Wilson and German, or some other "common sense" explanation is the correct explanation for the relatively low productivity records of the best- educated patrolmen in St. Louis. However, all of these possibly- correct explanations must be regarded as unexamined hypotheses until they are measured as possible influences by researchers using some reliable variation of the general scientific method of investigation. (2) Since St. Louis patrolmen with more than one year of college did not, on the average, accomplish as much work as their fellow officers with fewer years of formal education, it may be inferred that perhaps applicants with advanced education ought not to be recruited to fill patrolman position vacancies in American police forces. \ If college-trained patrolmen are bored by patrol duty assignments, or if college training is a liability because special leadership techniques are needed to stimulate college-trained patrolmen to equal the productivity of their brother officers with fewer years of education, or if -- for any reason -- college-trained patrolmen are unable or unwilling to accomplish as much work as other patrol officers, then police administrators in the United States might be well-advised to seek other applicants and to avoid hiring college- trained applicants to fill their patrolman position vacancies. But, if college-trained men are not hired as patrolmen, how will the superior officer positions and the police 65 administrator positions in American police forces come to be occupied by college-trained personnel? No authorities were identified who did not agree with Supt. Wilson's statement about the desirability of college background for superior officers and top police administrators. Facing this problem in his consideration of the future development of American law enforcement in.£gligg Systems.lg ythg.ggl£gg.§£ggg§, Bruce Smith preposed dual-level hiring of police personnel. Smith wrote in l9h9 that he believed individuals with advanced (college level) education are not suited for the work that patrol officers are hired to perform. He suggested that only high school graduates be recruited for appointment as patrolmen, while candidates for supervisory and administrative posts be recruited separately. He proposed recruitment from the ranks of the college graduates or from among those who demonstrated they possess the needed skills, talents, or leadership abilities in career fields other than law enforcement. Smith cited the U. 5. Armed Forces, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the police systems of the continental EurOpean countries as examples of public service organizations which recruit successfully at more than one level.27 Bruce Smith, Jr., in his l960 revision of'flgllgg Systems _i_g fig M,.S_Q_t_e_s_, repeated the statements presented in the earlier edition by his father. He also noted, for example, that the Metropolitan Police force of London has never produced from its 27Bruce Smith, Police Systems 13 the United States, (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, l§E§7, pp. 336-7. 66 ranks a commissioner or (with one exception) a deputy or assistant commissioner. These top administrators usually have been recruited from the officer ranks of the British military forces, which ordinarily supply the chief constables of the English and Welsh county police forces too.28 Sir Harold Scott, himself a Metropolitan Police Commissioner in London (l9h5-53) without previous law enforcement experience, writes that one of his predecessors, Lord Trenchard, con- ceived a dual recruitment program for the Metropolitan Police force while commissioner in the decade before the Second world War. Lord Trenchard founded the MetrOpolitan Police College at Hendon to provide specialized police training to young men from the English universities and public schools.29 Following training at Hendon, these men were then appointed station inspectors, i.e., precinct commanders, in the Metropolitan Police Force of London. When the Second World War began in l939, the MetrOpolitan Police College was closed. Recruitment of mid-range supervisors from outside the Metropolitan Police force was not resumed after the war, no doubt partly because of the resentment among members of the police force, described by Scott in his book, Sggtlgnd Yard.3° 28Bruce Smith, Police Systeming the United States, ed. Bruce Smith, Jr. (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1960). pp. 195-7. 29English public schools are roughly the equivalent of privately-endowed liberal arts colleges in the United States. 3oSir Harold Scott, Scotland Yard, (New York: Random House, '955) 0 Pa M. 67 Although Lord Trenchard‘s prograa for dual-level recruitment of personnel for the Metropolitan Police Department of London was discontinued, the dual-level recruiting programs of the U. 5. Armed Forces, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the police forces of continental European countries, which were described as successful by Bruce Smith in l9h9, were reportedly still Operating successfully in l960, when Bruce Smith, Jr., revised his father's book.” it may be that those responsible for appointing police super- visors and police achinistrators in the United States should look outside their on departments to this latter group of organizations for the answers to their questions about recruiting police force personnel, at all levels. ll. RECOHEMMTIOMS Additional psearch. Other studies, designed to test the hypothesis tested in this study, ought to be conducted to confirm the findings presented in this report. But even should these findings be confirmed, it will have been dononstrated only that there is no significant 1193;; relationship between patrol officers' rate of pro- duction and their levels of formal education. Ila conclusions will be derived regarding the extent or strength of any g‘rvilinear relation- ship that mlght exist. And, as is evident in Figure l2 on page 55, some type of curvilinear relationship probably does exist. Research 3'sruee Smith (ed. Bruce Smith, Jr.), op. cit., pp. 336-7 68 efforts, testing hypotheses involving the quadratic (curvilinear) term, must be conducted to determine the type and extent of this relation- ship. Because no attenpt was made in this study to examine the qualitative aspects of police officers' work production in relation to their levels of formal education, studies in this area too are needed, to complement and supplement this one. it is yet speculation whether there is any linear relationship between the average patrol- man's level of education and the quality of the work he accomplishes and, for that matter, whether there is any significant relationship batman how well he acconllshes his work and the amount of work he accomplishes. Uniform measuring techniques must be devised and applied, using a variation of the general scientific method, to determine if the work accomplished by the top producers in selected police depart- ments is of higher, lower, or the same quality as the work accomplished by other patrolman with lower rates of productivity. Only when research efforts of this type and other studies, which will determine the extent of any relationship between both (qualitative and quantita- tive) aspects of work accomplished by patrolmen and their (formal education levels, have been coapleted may it be stated with authority that patrolmen with certain levels of education are better, or poorer, patrolmen than others with more or less education. Studies, such as those suggested here, may disclose that formal education has no precise relationship to the performance of 69 patrol duties by police officers, but it may be revealed that other independent variables do have a significant cause-and-effect relation- ship to the quantity or quality of the work accomplished by individual patrolmen. Personality inventory test scores, general educational development test scores, various aptitude test scores, age, home or religious background, and any number of other attributes, achievements, and factors may turn out to be the key or keys to successful patrolman procurement programs of the future. Then, if and when police administrators are able to determine what to look for when selecting future patrolmen from among applicants, still more studies ought to be conducted to discover what they should look for when selecting supervisors, detectives and other specialists, and superior officers. Since different skills, different understandings, and different attitudes are needed by indi- viduals assuming different responsibilities and new duties, it cannot be taken on faith that the exceptional patrolman will make an acceptable specialist or supervisor. .5252 graduate research,wggk. Few basic research studies and analyses of available data have been conducted in the law enforcement field by any researchers using variations of the general scientific method of investigation. While it is true that planners and analysts in almost every large police department are occupied constantly with research projects, usually their efforts must be devoted to a series of immediate problems which require immediate solutions. in other words, they are engaged in applied research which produces few general- izations of wide application. And apparently there are few foundations 7O interested in sponsoring the basic research needed to produce new knowledge in the law enforcement field. So it appears that graduate students in die colleges and universities will have to begin the basic research efforts which will produce the right questions to be asked and the means of answering them. Scientifically determining the formal educational standards that ought to be required of applicants for all types of law enforcement positions is only one of the tasks needing accomplish- ment. But if faculty advisors require their students to prepare for research work as undergraduates, and if capable undergraduates can be encouraged to enroll as graduate students, and if graduate committees insist that their graduate degree candidates tackle substantial research problems, then today's police administrators can expect to learn much of what they need to know when making intelligent plans for the future, including the facts about the amounts and quality of formal education needed by those police officers and police administrators who will come after them. 7| BIBLIOGRAPHY Freund, John E. Modern Elementary Statistics. Second edition. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., l960. Frost, Thomas H. A Forward Look in Police Education. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, l95 . Germann A. C. Police Personnel Hana ement. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, l958. Goode, H. J. and Paul K. Hatt. Methods-lg Social Research. New York: HcGraw-Hill Book Co., inc., l952. Kenney, John P. Police Hanagement Plannigg. Springfield, lll.: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, l959. Horse, Joseph L., Chief Editor. Funk,ggg Hagnalls Standard Reference Encyclgggdia, XXI, 7763-h. New York: Standard Reference Works Publishing Co., inc., l960. Scott, Sir Harold. Scotland Yard. New York: Random House, l955. Smith, Bruce. Police Systemsllg'thg United States. Second edition. New York: Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1559. Smith, Bruce. Police Systemsllg.£hg United States. Revised by Bruce Smith, Jr. New York: Harper and Brothers, Publishers, l960. United States Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract,g§.thg United States: l962. wilson, Orlando v. .Police Administration. New York: HcCraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., l950. _......_.- ELEM. Second edition. Springfield, m.; Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, l957, 72 APPENDIX A 3:. 4 in 3-03 la.- 5 Bl...- II— 4 I Bis.- I'd l 03:. In! his- Il- r III ll» 3.5.: I E his! Ell E bl... ll Inn—D3 , '33- ‘55»... 53s.. I...— 1 Ba...- ellu j a. 5 1.3:: .22:- laEa I! 6.3:. III 1 IIBI as Cat: In: lea! 8.9... IE! an II J .22... 5.3. 1 5:33 .52:- t.:».. I35- I33.- 3...:— 353 is :5! EU: I RIBS-ll 1 asl- la-I Dis- .I: 1 I8...- 3.‘ I 83:: I... I5»: 3:55 i 3.! so?! lull In. i I. i II. T L » I85- Ila! L .3 i .3030 38:03 «eat—00 ills-3 ~83 oldie-sea Cfla>fi=. Zghsgnuzfl 'Bckglaflquh Jagusa‘ag< .IO O‘HIDI .8 9:: sub; ho 9a.: .3355“. 8:1. I .36 I153 cones I .3813. _ _ 3320 ual-flan «ea-8.53 88:24: gel 100 so war—.3 ssSS so sun-u Ea agate 809.3 A .8010 53:0 33:0 4 a? so suns—o 3:20 .3520 '— nsults—.22.. 3.889580 mass 93 swung «tweak-ease nuance so and. so uHsso sup-so gonna Hunk Oh hikflloflu slur-R— uiz—ago Hun—OI to g _ IOZIH>OO ORGANIZATIONAL CHART, METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI :3.— ..m .- :3 .m-It-na: eu._e._ anion-3.! 73 APPENDIX B MAP OF ST. LOUIS POLICE DISTRICTS .\ i O \tl‘e “\o . Ins. a A \ . I. a . \\ \ v v.“ .. ..’ I . ~ \ \ . as . . e. .. 7.1.0.2.. .x., r. w as .Hm .mO h9g0 ,V m... ... bow .w 0.8- EsOh Gnu: _. E. \ 5%:me a We. .. HZHZHd “ °- .. «I s o . -§ 01 2 '5 a s 8 °- 0" ‘I m 5 :31, E I- '1- z- 3 .. In In on 8 In .. 1:3 .2:°2 :ésssss 0:3". h a .2 g I; L a - c: : Co- 3 I; In IO'O a on 3 .. 3 3: :2 'a ‘3 =3: ‘1: g 8 6:; a E s. .. a s u > a 51 3= 3 s 8 ° 3 113 9 14 2 9 33 5 703 3 0 o 77 60 102 h 119 10 12 0 10 16 6 1958 27 o 2 27 2 3o 6 115 12 6 0 74 lo 7 565 135 0 o 57 85 96 7 80 10 I7 6 37 s 0 351 93 2 0 3h 81 8 9 110 12 5 78 23 20 0 5168 66 0 o 51 155 180 16 iZi 9 6 0 i8 21 5 9950 i o 1 2b 108 il2 l9 llB l0 IO 32 l5 l8 l0 3033 9 0 O 6 6 6 20 150 10 10 o 25 15 o 3793 127 o 0 17 I 10 29 136 11 6 0 10 21 h 3983 5 o o 20 o 21 36 116 8 27 h 19 6 3 236 82 o o 60 32 26 A6 69 8 l7 2 l 1% 5 205A i25 0 0 7 Si 57 32 71 121 10 17 5 3h 16 11 378 69 o 0 19 28 as 72 150 8 16 0 61 5 a 8129 12 o o 6 12 16 90 l23 ll l3 0 Al 34 6 #375 30k 0 0 7h 85 87 9h #7 9 12 2 8 6 2 1760 0 2 0 12 I 11 96 106 12 5 68 37 7o 19 5216 58 0 0 229 159 315 97 116 12 18 601 32 7 2 593 105 0. 2 32 94 23 119 128 12 5 18 55 19 18 923 213 1 I 83 22 7 l25 78 ll 12 l5 l59 9 2 2437 53 0 O 9 6 l6 127 75 12 11 0 31 IA 9 1820 2 o 2 80 187 61 lSI 34 12 3h 0 5 0 0 64k 79 0 0 23 37 39 156 59 10 a 0 56 0 2 602 17 1 u 33 29 19 167 99 13 9 11 11 51 2 5300 13 0 o 58 179 105 a o a... M°Em$9‘3fi£ii§"ii§if 22.1111.t 1.13:: iiyciimm‘ P°"‘° TABLE XV (cont 1 nued) 76 PATROLTASKSE—l (191 (2;) {25) (271 (431 (4 (471 49) (511 (53 (551_7 '8 'U «u _‘g 6 «a E." 3 4. g e '0 o g 3 ‘5 3 3 g g 3 09- :: g .8 U.- 2 U '3 2 E .- b ">' :3 g g3 1: 33 ES 7. gvh— =— 2 us~~6a~u's=v"BH _ g :- 3 g: emInu- o 21 '53 3 g”. g- 3’ to '0 10 O u .. ”m8” .2 g :3 .2 u m to 2.2 a Q 3 f ““28 ° " w‘ 3 " 5 3‘ 266‘s 0. £8§333323‘“"‘g t.’ 3 3 m .5 1. 23210 g 3 «cu g .3 :3 ”a a In .1: 1... a: a) mu '3 .- .. .5": u. .2 m 2.2 3. a. £1 3 :5 .5 No- 1:.- us a wag I. .5 '3 03 o o :1: >- a. o £°§> 3 3 3 3 :- 8 if. 167 99 13 9 11 11 51 2 5300 13 0 0 58 179 105 172 147 12 II 1 12 9 41 3339 41 3 12 214 56 180 174 88 10 7 3 6 12 6 2199 19 0 I 23 11 17 175 124 8 34 17 218 123 28 3383 1 1 0 156 21 38 181 60 13 12 0 I 5 1 2409 7 0 2 44 34 28 191 98 10 8 7 83 44 29 856 3 0 1 124 64 151 206 102 8 33 0 5 10 2 1417 12 3 0 10 1 4 219 53 9 13 2 8 6 2 1353 0 0 0 46 31 43 238 133 10 12 15 49 63 10 5590 66 0 0 61 30 43 250 75 11 10 0 36 2 3 1757 0 0 0 2 0 3 262 63 15 11 1 125 14 22 128 1 0 0 3 3 9 303 44 12 8 9 35 16 1 195 23 0 0 20 9 I7 326 127 12 8 0 259 20 4 436 29 0 0 28 43 27 331 129 12 4 29 15 18 6 3611 118 0 0 51 46 58 334 26 10 10 0 3 1 I 627 21 0 0 I6 26 37 339 111 8 32 0 26 0 0 4580 334 0 0 0 0 4 344 28 10 12 0 2 2 1 47 11 0 0 3 1 1 345 126 10 21 12 30 48 15 4854 12 0 0 10 36 63 349 66 14 21 0 2 0 8 1544 123 0 0 36 21 24 361 27 12 8 91 106 7 1 462 67 0 0 14 4 9 373 97 12 12 49 22 35 2 2898 91 0 0 66 265 203 393 149 10 9 0 34 24 8 4587 51 0 I 74 27 54 394 26 10 17 0 2 3 0 935 2 0 2 31 10 23 396 39 10 10 0 I7 5 3 1302 10 0 0 15 13 12 397 93 12 6 3 6 31 14 3084 22 0 0 57 13 79 409 119 12 4 0 7 26 7 2288 33 o 0 106 54 91 éflurrbers wlthin parentheses are used to identify Individual pollce tasks on the Sumuary of DaHy Field Activity (mpendbc C). TABLE XV (continued) 77 PATROL IAsxsé (I9) (22) (25) (27) (93) (95) (#7) (49)(5I) (53) (55) ‘8 2 S '8 '8 .8 1g '8 :3 a '8 -3 5 '8 8 i» 3 .2 .2 '8’ § -6 = '3 °; :2 .2 .2 *3 m '- '3 g 0- .- L > “- 3 .2 g- 8 8 8. 63 2.? 5 3 § 2 :3 .§ " " 3 3:: 1:16 8 ’3' 76-6 "' '° '6 6' 3 0 8 U '11-“ H x. I. —g m g D 85 .— ° 2: " 2’ 8.2 ""5 8 3 .26. 8 °’ .. fl '0 E O 3 1; an g .1: : >In 0- u m :50 g .3 05 0' 8 I. In 3.5 o “- 3‘. g m 5 a", 2*;6'2 maaészagc‘s 82.53 t 8 a 5 2 2:22 8 c 32 3 B t: 68 :i 2: 25 8 If 1! 3:: '.2 '3 ‘3 =3'3 I: 2; -3 '3 ‘ 88§££3£°§>333‘3§£E3 uzI 98 18 18 I3 I8 0 2 232 52 0 0 6 I 5 636 I22 I2 I0 0 43 a 2 57 I7 0 0 95 I88 88 [+42 91 12 lI 2 29 17 1+ 33k 58 O O 9 20 21 101 103 12 12 O 108 M 7 299: 66 0 0 60 22 60 575 25 I5 2I 7 I7 I 0 II79 I 0 0 5 I I 485 37 9 35 0 11 3 1 225 II 0 0 8 12 15 12.86 151 10 8 0 1+0 19 11 53M 16 O 0 31 27 75 507 29 8 15 0 12 II 1 1290 1 0 0 5 2 13 5I5 52 12 10 0 2 2: 2 688 6 8 0 I02 26 35 523 12 8 21 0 3 O 0 526 2 o 0 6 1+ 4 533 99 I0 5 I5 26 20 9 2I87 233 I 0 56 3 22 560 II6 I2 I3 45 35 59 2I 2058 52 0 0 86 30 86 555 21 8 3I 3 3 0 0 124 a 0 0 I 4 0 555 25 8 23 3 7 5 0 8Iu I 0 0 II 5 7 565 Ins I2 7 35 I99 95 12 3966 279 I7 0 III I77 2I3 57a #5 I2 I8 66 79 0 I I86I 77 0 o 6 18 3 583 96 I2 I2 88 22I 63 I0 2677 62 0 u 84 3 23 593 82 I2 IA 0 AI 27 26 I565 u 8 2 55 50 I00 60I 130 8 I0 7 85 26 I 3382 62 o 0 86 52 55 6I7 25 I2 5 8 I0 2 0 75h 78 0 0 II 20 22 620 I0 7 30 0 3 2 0 39 I o 0 I 0 0 666 105 9 I8 39 25 II 2 I00 93 0 0 I07 I72 35 652120 I2 1I 7 98 45 le 395 178 0 0 66 I3 39 672 8| 8 24 0 33 I 2 2522 66 0 0 I7 32 3A 683 37 I2 6 0 3 2I u 623 29 0 7 50 36 37 685 72 12 5 0 22 I7 I 202I I8 0 3 57 28 76 Mars 111th"! parentheses are used to Identify Ind1v1dua1 police tasks on the Summary of Dally Field Actlvity (Appendix C). TABLE XV (continued) 78 PATROL TASKSE (19) (22) (25) (27) (‘13) (‘15) (‘17) (‘19) (51163165) 1: '8 I. 5 8 ‘6’ o '0 'U .. In '0 3 .n 0 01 u I» o '0 g .3 E; a 5: :3 °' :1 S 'o I: 4.1 .- In In 0 001 0- U '0 0 _. .2 a "' °- '; 3: S g’ I: g 5 .3 g 3 ”H '63 8 03 "5'5 0 g .9. 8 '5 E 8 u 6 3 3 1:3 1:3 .7. ‘5 ‘6-6 "' '8 ‘8 t; ‘” o .3 e m “5.3 6‘6 ‘15 13 '63 8 g 3 8‘ — 'U '- 0 I: 8- g 0 H 0—01 .2 1- 3 6 3 8. u 3 w» 1, g 5 .5 >12 .3 I; 8 86’ c: 3 c1 8 1- 015 50-- o 0 III pg 11) I. u— M 30- 10“ m 01 0111 C m -- C E o I» o In a. «u N m m «n c o I) L #- 1: 3 ”' c .. '8" “"3 2 3 3° 3 '5 ‘6’. ~68 996.6 33 28%??? 26822-828 3 6° 3': £2 6'; 2; £3 2 a a 25‘ 3 5’ 2 it” 687 58 12 8 3o 18 27 13 1077 I90 0 o 66 12 16 691 19 11 5 1 10 0 0 711 0 0 O 8 5 11 699 90 9 19 0 13 2 2 1658 1 0 o 3 4 7 708 100 8 29 38 19 29 0 1975 o o 2 7 6 17 731 150 9 15 50 86 55 8 32119 117 0 0 109 69 95 733 109 10 15 0 8 £1 10 22113 173 0 0 2 o 6 7311 I38 10 25 8 10 11 I 5117 210 0 o I 2 5 737 I8 12 18 2 17 10 9 61 2 0 0 12 2 6 71111 17 III 11 12 17 3 h 311 9 0 o 9 2 11 7117 211 11 15 o 1 6 1+ 1285 200 0 0 19 25 19 750 1119 12 £1 18 19 so 7 5255 66 o o 129 611 87 765 130 12 10 0 139 22 5 2627 2 2 2 73 6 138 766 62 12 8 AA 60 22 4 2683 ab 0 o 91 81 6b 769 211 8 17 o 6 0 o 72 23 0 0 0 MI I 777 117 10 17 11 II 9 2 708 211 o o 10 I1 11 796 £17 12 211 13 3h 36 8 1866 15 2 0 27 £16 31 812 118 10 25 0 13 8 h 1398 1111 9 o 15 1 6 818 127 12 h 2 13 103 14 h 6 0 1 218 71 225 83k 26 12 34 h 0 5 0 387 #0 0 0 2 5 8 8118 21 8 16 I o 2 1 11 9 0 0 3 0 5 851 62 10 18 12 39 10 h 915 100 0 5 13 9 17 853 50 12 s 6 9 6 2 1761 33 o 0 I6 19 21 862 117 10 5 2 27 3 0 2720 0 o o 42 23 £18 877 131 8 28 29 9 0 O 3186 379 0 0 12 166 88 878 30 9 3o 0 38 0 o 712 3 o 0 2 "I 10 902 132 11 36 1 33 311 2 £1290 1153 0 0 11 25 26 909 23 9 II 217 I3 15 0 7116 I6 0 0 19 37 115 tasks on the Summary of 031137 F1e1d Act1v1ty (Appendlx C). .ENUmbers u1th1n parentheses are used to 1dent1fy 1nd1v1dual poIlce TABLE XV (continued) 79 RATROL IAsxsé (I9) (22) (25)(27) (93) (95) (#7) (#9) (51) (531155 '0 9. s 8 3 g '8 ‘3 a: 8 '8 8’ 'U 0 3 3 m In a .9 8 .2 I: 8 '5 6- :2 8 1’ o t .. .. .. - m g. '8 g u- 0-- > 15.: a a .5 g I: 8. 8. 992.2 6 8 § 2 :3 § 0 u o 3 3 ‘23:: m " 3v " v 3 : U1 ” .2 L 11.111 U .x a 0—0 10 g 3 35 .3 _o -u .. o 2’ 2:2 g'a 8 £3 .2 3 8 " e In .3 2 8. '§ 3; ‘u1n-U 3 '5 £5 ’.3 73 ‘3 2 :5 g ‘- m ‘1- i g5 1‘5— 1» m 81» g «I .2 g 't S '3 ° 8' «at: 8‘8 8 11 g 8 5 .2 .3 "‘ 3. 9. .8 2 :52 8 118-1‘3 .5 .5 .3; ... .2 8 2 3 g g 3 8 5 gag; 8 3 22 5 6 '8 2 L> 0- O 0 to O U > C1. ll. 907 A7 9 18 0 31 10 2 956 1 0 0 18 11 10 908 131 12 7 1 313 32 17 3463 153 0 0 67 46 55 913 13% 10 1% 8 38 18 6 4232 121 0 O 62 31 50 91 1 10 0 s 2 1 7 7 0 0 3 2 7 915 110 12 6 0 8 2 5 1886 0 0 0 3k 335 393 928 126 12 12 o 33 12 9 2866 15 0 0 88 50 13 932 128 8 30 0 20 5 3 1620 22 1 0 9 0 0 935 65 12 5 6 66 10 0 2597 90 0 3 39 120 87 5:51:19; 3 37.213999913612231 951 12 8 1h 0 2 0 2 386 0 0 o 9 20 30 956 108 9 18 6 57 88 31 2636 288 0 0 163 13 19 23:31:12.1.17318993'131372 976 80 10 30 10 6 2 In 9017 65 0 0 36 59 55 9’33 53 g 25 23 8 13 0 1:153 6171 g g 6 i 15 9 9 30 2 3 o 13 f 1008 153 12 6 1 11 50 1 3096 69 o 0 17 6 16 1011 139 9 1% 2 57 1 1 3320 3 0 0 16 1 16 132213692 .2 12% 1223?? 3 3 3'32 1063 87 8 17 0 28 27 1 3651 68 0 o s 62 66 1071 88 12 11 23 13 21 S #811 #5 0 0 33 98 5h 1078 21 10 32 0 0 15 0 660 25 0 0 28 5 11 1089 118 8 38 37 38 15 9 2780 0 o o 8 2 23 1091 26 12 u 20 9 1 1 652 32 0 0 19 36 no 1101 33 8 17 o 3 I 1 573 231 0 0 11 3 4 211111182“: w1th1n parentheses are used to 1dent1fy 1nd1v1dua1 po11ce tasks on the Summary of 08117 F1e1d Act1v1ty (Appende c). TABLE XV (oontlnued) RATROL tAsxse (19) (22) (25) (27) (“3) (“5) (47) (49) (51) (53) (55) '8 '0 u 1.: 93 .3 § 5 99 9 E '8 8 a. a E 3 3 E- “ ‘3' 'E .2 :2 .2 E29; £3 0 'g '3 '3 '- 8 a m > 61-?) g g 8 3 .2 8 '1': g o 3‘ .2121, 3: u .3 '5 .1". 1: ‘0: '5 3 8 "' " 3:38’3 g z 0'3 o o 10 '- 0 z: i- 0) 111111 010-- 0 G1 .33 § § 3’ g o '0 .8 8. 3 .5 3’3” .2 g :3 .. u m :8) El 3 ‘6) g f “0'28 U 0- 0- U 0‘ C 0'0 2 8 8 38.». m m 86 8 .9 2 82 3 g 1; ° .9 .9281; 8 8 83 .2 ‘- '- I- In 0 :3 0; a 8.31:!- E C CO- 3 U .1; '03 §>~ '51 8 1. .1: a... .2 '01 .3 :33 “C .- 3 '3; 9352882°>223=3§220 1107 53 8 17 O 16 6 11 2331 80 O O 26 1+0 ’60 1112 167 12 15 o 53 30 2 6955 110 0 2 32 55 78 1167 33 12 10 0 6 30 2 659 17 3 o 50 8 26 1150 109 10 8 56 10 21 2 6269 60 o o 55 160 162 1151 90 10 8 1 11 25 6 1663 27 o o 21 6 16 1153 136 7 60 167 62 6 11 2986 12 a 5 31 67 83 1156 95 12 6 9 33 9 3 1976 3 o o 17 18 39 1168 33 16 12 63 8 0 1 1166 196 o 0 5 56 39 1176 10 8 18 2 O 1 1 ho O 0 0 6 0 1 1179 106 8 16 31 35 16 28 358 6 o 1 75 130 131 1182 19 11 18 33 20 2 o 381 0 0 0 1 6 5 1183 37 10 6 91 45 6 15 236 119 0 O 16 8 7 1196 11 8 36 o 0 o 0 63 o 0 0 1o 7 16 1210 13 12 9 0 6 1 o 295 1 0 0 1 2 2 1226 105 11 7 o 19 7 1 2526 15 o 2 1o 62 67 1227 33 16 5 1 2 0 3 1032 101 o o 1 6 6 1229 36 9 35 o 9 6 2 81s 2 0 o 2 7 5 1237 86 12 6 2 18 18 11 15 7 0 2 26 55 28 1267 122 10 25 2 20 11 2 3990 8 0 o 16 36 36 1253 18 1o 8 0 23 o 1 152 57 0 0 36 30 62 1256 61 13 10 700 3 3 13 2655 2 o 1 82 15 61 1263 128 10 15 6 7 18 2 6651 32 o 0 62 69 63 1271 139 8 h 2 19 19 11 #807 61 O O 7 22 36 1272 10 8 18 2 6 o o 479 3 0 o 1 s 6 1276 57 10 5 11 2 10 0 2050 23 0 0 22 61 35 1286 118 8 16 6 20 21 6 3160 o 2 0 69 66 93 ~3Numbers w1th1n parentheses are used to 1dent1fy 1nd1vldual po11ce tasks on the Summary of Dally F1e1d Act1v1ty (Appendix C). IABLE XV (continued) 3] . RRTROL TASKSE . (I9) (22) (25) (27) (43) (45) (#7) (“9’5” (53) (55}! r '3 s. . 5 '3 g .u o '8 ‘8 3 g ‘ 3 3 Q U c 3 .2 . s: a o u .2 § ‘8 .2 g a g 3. '3. 0'3 ‘5 g a E a :3 ° 3 ‘, € 9 m 3 '- '- £4 .. 'u m t: m 8 . +0 ‘0 a» an m z: «’1, 8. 0 m — -§ :2 ' " m m— '0 ‘§ 0 '3 g "0' 3 3- 3’ a 'u 8.; .3 .5 "un 3 J: t: I; 3 .2 +- n tro E' 3 :5, g .3. ”8 '3 o .- .- u a c or: t 2 m : s: a. Ii; 2! E 3 5 3 .9 :3 ‘- a om£3§§=:f._££:.§28”2 % 5‘ .9: 3 z .4 ° 0‘ " '° ° ‘- 45 v '53 a a :1: >- f a. o g 3 3 3 c 3 > a j: u I A I i IZSI 73 I2 2“ 28 28 8 7 27Ih I49 0 0 35 30 53 I29“ I50 II 6 0 27 I7 I0 3260 I30 0 0 GI 33 In I303 IOI I0 I“ 2 57 I70 96 262 II2 0 0 I96 I0 I2 I3IO I25 I0 5 0 II n 48 2 6 0 O 2h9 46 90 I3I6 II? I2 8 3 “I 3I 5 3lh8 92 0 I 86 3II I76 I330 IZI I2 5 “I9 I09 25 9 I996 I05 0 0 45 I8 25 I332 Ih8 I2 I6 0 I” 9 II I572 7 5 0 9 O 8 I337 I04 I4 5 2I 8I I6 5 923 93 I 0 37 74 84 I35I 88 I0 5 0 2 h 0 I99 9 0 3 75 75 76 I357 I2 I0 I5 0 6 4 I 542 3 0 0 # I 9 I366 II2 9 II I 3I 2I I I857 93 0 0 20 I5 27 I370 I59 II 20 0 33 7 3 4053 75 I 0 9 3 I0 137% 16 lo I! o 2 l o 265 o o o 6 6 9 I377 II9 I2 9 2 II3 29 2 2588 O 0 2 73 5 I24 I380 I33 I6 4 I I6 25 3 4268 0 O 0 I8 I6 6 I383 I30 II II 0 9 26 9 2690 69 I 0 20 2 I“ IhII 2“ I2 I2 0 5 I I 277 2 0 0 6 2 3 IuI9 I53 I0 I5 0 20 29 9 9523 222 0 0 39 II 50 I430 I37 I0 II 3 23 35 6 2880 I5 0 # I6 32 #3 I932 39 II I2 I 2 7 7 795 I0 0 0 2I 8 23 I443 I03 II I6 I 0 22 I 3922 0 O 0 I“ 2 I I999 2I I2 5 I0 I“ 0 0 253 I6 0 0 6 u 0 I450 I3 I2 7 0 0 2 I 229 0 0 0 Ih 9 I7 I978 98 I0 8 0 8 2I 3 3996 9 0 0 97 32 22 I980 97 I2 9 I 96 20 I2 I288 2 0 0 2I 22 28 Shutters within parenthesas are used to identtfy Individual police' tasks on the Sunluary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). TABLE xv (continued) 82 RATROL tAsxsa 7 (19) (22) (25) (27) (#3) (#5) (#7) (#9) (51) (53) (55] ‘U 0 e 5 '8 '5 .g 13 '3 t: a El -3 'U 0 3 3 0 W ‘9 c 5% 3 .5 5 2'; -°-’ § 5 al- on- > H- m C 'U 2 ga 8. ‘6‘. 0-0 5.5.3 3 .2 0 83.3 2. a «0 o 1.1.: m "' ‘51, "" E 3’ ”13 a 3 “ " HEa "3 8 E "" "' "' °’ .— 2 L 3’ 3.3 ”'3 o 3 .33 3 8' '0 1°- 0 .fi 0 '3 °- “ 3 '5 .E >.2 1: i: 2! 3-3 1; 3 g, 9- 8 ~15 v.3 1'18 .1. .7. g“, g .,, :2 752 g i u “5 m g. 8.9- g? to 13 :3 .3 j; “a 1. a .1. .5 . rat; a: 2 c 2.. 6 6 .1. 36 a .1: 1.. .3 a «1+» 00- .3 :53 a; .. 3 q,1. 3r. .9 8 1a 5 21'; g; 5 5 2.: 5 6 .1 3 O 2 >- G- O :1: m a: O. U > 0-f 1&82 28 8 29 o 1 13 3 382 1 0 o 31 14 28 1986 55 11 5 9 #2 5 2 1787 o o o 12 3 18 1490 123 10 8 o 19 96 22 9150 311 0 0 8h 8 30 1593 50 12 6 0 1 1 0 918 7 0 1 62 25 69 1595 107 12 6 1 28 32 4 2371 23 o 1 65 256 175 1096 78 8 20 98 100 0 1 3352 31 0 0 94 139 35 1597 13 10 17 0 5 2 0 88 3 0 0 A 6 6 1506 9h 10 5 2 31 10 1 3501 218 0 0 32 32 91 1508 135 12 6 1 8 18 13 5201 28 0 1 5 5 8 1511 22 11 19 0 1 0 0 850 8 0 4 5 u 10 1512 127 8 6 o 5 23 16 #360 5 0 1 31 89 85 1520 76 8 18 0 3 5 0 2165 8 0 o 93 1h 17 1561 57 12 12 0 26 17 u 248 89 0 1 59 30 25 1562 76 8 17 0 h 15 1 2672 u 0 o 18 6 30 1565 11 1h 9 o 1 0 0 127 5 0 0* u 25 8 1571 16 8 3o 0 5 1 0 437 1 0 o 3 3 6 1606 87 16 24 1 12 0 a 299 55 0 o 3 2 2 1618 123 9 16 0 138 #8 57 388A 21 11 2 191 73 A7 1683 69 12 12 0 2h 39 12 179k 11 o 1 53 1h 97 1665 136 12 12 0 43 12 17 2505 72 0 0 21 36 54 1690 127 8 18 0 17 2 2 9509 26 0 o 0 0 8 1705 15 8 29 1 3 0 0 1 14 0 o 0 0 0 1710 65 9 19 0 5 32 9 119 16 0 0 8 7 11 1716 106 10 13 155 39 5 6 759 37 0 2 189 551 57 1727 51 10 17 13 39 9 o 288 82 0 0 92 66 7 1729 116 10 5 0 13 19 16 1h 25 0 2 233 275 102 tasks on the Summary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix 6). 3Numbers within parentheses 'are used to identify individual police TABLE XV (continued) 83 PATROL 11351152 (19) (22) (25) (27) (‘13) (‘15) (‘17) (‘19) (SI) (53) (55 I '8 1- '0 u 8 I3 8 3 v 3 ‘3 8 a a a 3 «3 '3 c 8' °" 3 .‘3 :8 ”I '2 3 v 8 '6 " S 1. .1 > :5 §‘ 9 c 3 6 a ': g1 “ 31 I g! .g-u 2.- o 8 .9 3 1; .9 a 8 u u ta a: m "S 31, "' '3 g 1; fl ,3: 379361.26 6323°88 a 'U I “ 0- “. 30 d-l 0-." u 8' L. as 3 1. 8. 8 .8 “in u ‘8 .5. >10 "" "’ “‘ ‘-"-‘ L GI 1» L a c L 3 0'“ '3 W 5 [3'0 1% g ‘“ ° 2' 8. .go2 3:5 2 3 2 3 t g -: c 2 ‘- 0‘ - 1- a: £2 3 8 2.2 3 " *4 “W 8. ‘9. g» 5 '1‘. .2- 33.” '2 '3 m :33 ~19 3 ‘3 BE 1... m t— .1: 83:52:; o§>gi35=3g1§£8 I7 9 I09 I0 I2 2 #3 48 II 3342 50 2 2 7I 22 #3 l7 5 23 8 33 0 i 0 0 531 1 0 0 19 3 6 I798 56 I0 I7 8 I9 77 6 2692 20 O 0 I13 52 70 I768 I29 I0 I2 I S I 0 #59I I8l 0 0 9 5 I9 I769 I0 I0 I0 I“ 0 0 0 I60 I7 0 0 l 2 I I772 31 I2 5 22 I7 2 0 819 28 0 0 3 3 4 I773 I32 8 I8 6 22 54 I 3277 I08 0 0 8 7 37 18031112 11 8 3 31 11 5 3545 0 L1 1 10 211 13 1805 75 13 23 94 31 27 6 11176 20 0 o 33 18 311 I806 I32 10 I7 I5 8l #5 I5 5326 I72 0 0 70 I25 30 IBII I0 IS I9 0 0 0 0 691 2 0 0 O 0 0 1815 128 12 12 1 28 13 9 5264 8 0 o 32 21 66 I8I7 I5 8 26 3 0 0 I 509 8 0 0 8 8 17 I818 5I I2 II I0 I0 39 0 228 87 0 0 SI 8 8 I826 I0 I0 I9 I I 0 0 282 0 0 O 8 34 23 1829 100 10 16 o 59 19 5 2550 16 o o 81 78 35 I830 80 II I7 0 3 3 I0 I7I4 2 0 0 3 5 2 1890 98 14 16 2 18 2 h #69 149 h 0 0 13 13 I893 63 7 l7 2 I2 I 0 2675 9 0 0 I7 13 S l8#7 IIZ 12 4 3 5 22 8 308# S8 0 0 Sh 96 78 l857 73 I2 5 #2 80 I7 II 239 I2 0 0 105 I9 52 I86I 79 I0 I9 0 A II 3 2227 77 0 I 26 9 26 1862 88 ll 6 l2 II 80 9 2620 18 0 0 l23 0 0 186h 75 12 h 12 #8 l8 5 I709 #2 0 0 35 12 I9 1870 123 12 12 38 39 I3 40 420 25 1 1 86 157 1&0 1877 100 11 h 19 16 92 8 3903 74 0 0 96 16 50 tasks on the Summary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). -28uflbers w1thin parentheses eke used to identify individual police TABLE XV (continued) W PATROL TAsxsé (I9) (22) (25) (27) (‘13) (‘15) (‘17) (‘19) (SI) (53) (55) I '8 .§ 1: ‘3 :g .g 1: g '8 3 a a: a a :3 1’ c '" " ‘0 a '5 13" .2 § '0 - -‘-’ 3 “ "' '5: at“ g c 3 § In 0 0‘ a a; 5;§§ 2*“§§~§~23:§ m *' W- -H a In o'u .. 43 Z: t; g: ‘3 3 .,;3 15 E '3 3 8 8' 8- 8' 3 '3 g g g .— 13“ 3 ° .2 ‘5 ’; a .2 8 u. 1: c .x u: h e if a “*‘3 g 19 - -- .u m c 0-3 2 § 4H 75 I up a. 8,§ “:; 3 3 3 m 2 a .3 ‘2 a ‘2 8 m .5 ‘, 13".5 0 1g 3 5 3 a .3 .3 " n 3. g- '51 E I: .2 3;; :§ 1; 1; :51; 1t .2 8 :2.2 13 43 z: a» if a; :3 0':§ >. £3 ‘3 ‘3 8 ‘3 1E :E :2 3 L IL 1 I892 I38 I2 4 0 33 2 47 I2 49I3 38 0 I 66 0 35 I929 26 I0 I7 0 0 0 3 I59 23 0 0 I II 8 I95I I9 I0 BI 46 I0 8 0 443 88 0 0 0 I 0 I954 76 II 8 5 I00 8 2 2897 I0 0 0 I0 I7 29 I958 I07 II 6 I 34 24 7 234 I76 0 0 32 3 I6 I974 I3 8 I7 2 5 0 I 52 3I I 0 5 4 I3 jI984 I36 8 IS 8 40 35 6 2747 58 0 I I8 36 61 I992 I22 I2 I9 72 26 27 44 3I67 26 0 5 82 79 I78 I993 I4 I2 6 0 7 5 5 I7I 0 0 0 27 I0 I7 I994 140 I0 .5 I6 92 29 8 2850 4 0 5 45 I49 I58 1995 96 12 11 8 18 9 I 6656 108 0 0 39 253 129 I997 II I0 8 I 2 O 0 222 3 0 0 5 8 8 2032 I6 I0 I8 0 9 II 0 I27 I 0 0 6 I5 22 2040 I29 I2 4 4 26 23 I0 3280 29 0 I II 4 27 2054 I24 II I3 0 29 28 7 437 I29 2 0 44 I8 39 2°59 34 II I2 0 II I 0 708 0 0 I 0 0 2 206I 3| I0 5 0 0 3 0 564 II 0 0 7 9 I4 2063 I23 I4 I5 0 8I I3 4 435I 8 0 0 I0 2 3 2070 II II 30 0 I 0 0 4I9 24 0 0 3 5 2 207I I4 I0 4 0 5 23 I 98 2 0 O 36 24 49 2078 I0 7 28 3 I0 I 2 I5 6 0 0 2 5 5 2087 I0 I2 5 4 2 4 I 593 8 2 0 I6 I5 20 2939 9| I3 5 35 58 I9 22 305 79 0 0 43 7° 74 2098 90 I2 4 47 I05 25 3 338 63 0 0 38 63 87 2099 22 II I2 0 2 I 0 I94 0 0 0 I5 I9 I9 2I26 22 I0 30 6 0 0 0 320 I 0 0 0 0 0 2I27 I50 II 14 I2 5 33 4 2426 53 0 0 24 23 55 .fiuumbers within parentheses are used to identify individual police tasks on the Summary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). TABLE XV (continued) 85 RATROL 145x92 (I9) (22) 25) 271143) (451017) 52555121531525) , 1 1 ‘ 3 l 'o '0 .§ E 'u :13 ‘- 0 0 H In 0 'U '8 0 3 3 Q G U 3 i a: '3 5?: E 3': .2"; 3 ° 3 g :3 "§a*36“"£§§3§§ :2 .1 g 0 g, 0-0 LU 0- d-l 0- ” U z 3 7 u 3:: “3 3 z .23 .. E 3 g. a .2 2: 3 2' 2.: 2°; 8 3 £3 8 8 V .. 'U G a H - U 3 a: C >40 0- H In 8.0 ‘5 3 ‘6. 2 '1‘. a“ '28 “ " o" “ "' 5 3" §~63328§823222231223 .¥§2522:22222§33368 G n I. x 0 08 IO 0- -- 0-H I!- 0- O --L 8' 6‘ 5.” 8 :6 {3 8'3 “'5' 3 3 ES ‘5 '5 '8 .28 O O 2 >- 0- O I 2 m 0 O U > 0- ll. 1 I 2129 146 12 5 176 66 26 2 5426 230 0 0 46 31 21 2130 136 16 10 2 12 8 3 567 202 0 0 5 9 2 2143 79 9 21 4 25 72 12 2332 84 0 0 144 20 84 2145 10 12 30 6 3 2 0 0 8 o 0 4 0 0 2146 25 9 5 0 3 1 2 955 27 0 0 20 49 43 2154 46 11 8 4 9 5 o 1560 8 0 0 20 9 11 2156 140 14 4 15 58 43 6 716 87 0 0 85 69 60 2161 126 7 32 3 330 1 7 440 25 0 0 4 24 24 333?? '1'; 3 3 3 3? ‘1‘ 3§2§ 8?. 3 3 5? ’3 ‘23 2184 61 8 17 18 28 i4 3 2010 35 O O 30 22 45 2189 140 12 11 6 14 o 0 5412 33 8 1 11 26 24 2190 42 13 6 5 19 14 5 210 46 o 0 8 5 10 iiiiii'éi‘g‘fiifi 33%??i333'23'? 2225 127 12 7 1 145 48 63 3309 125 13 1 162 106 68 2234 130 11 9 7 26 3 o 378 137 0 o 39 67 63 2244 134 8 24 1 45 4 3 3605 195 0 0 22 43 53 2246 122 12 7 i4 67 21 o 834 67 0 O 69 86 66 2248 152 11 7 12 44 52 3 1638 128 0 0 so 90 77 2252 114 13 5 0 56 37 7 5044 99 0 0 39 146 187 2275 93 10 8 80 62 59 30 2936 135 0 0 161 75 149 2288 125 9 17 0 7 1 3 5042 19 0 1 53 9 11 2289 102 12 6 0 25 14 i 3335 1 0 0 56 24 58 2290 129 8 17 272 34 6 12 6210 69 0 0 11 2 9 2292 87 10 24 9 71 5 2 1418 135 0 o 20 18 5 .gflunbers within parentheses are used to identify individual poiice tasks on the Summary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). TABLE XV (continued) 86 PATROLTASKSE A (19) (22) (251127) (431145182 (4 1) 1531551 3 8 1, 1, .3 3 1, 3 3 3 .. 3 3 t; 2 3 7 1'" g 6 .2 2 2 “a 87 .2 § 8 a .2 z '- 7 °; :2 g m 3 E .. gas '2. 2. 6613.2 0 3 .§ 7 7 3 C Q 0 0-01-41 "- m «H .- 2 3 7 7 3:373 31 z 53 I i '3 3 a 3 :: z; 2 223°; 8 3 .23 3 8 3 3’ a 3 2 a g :2 7 8 5 .5 >2 '3 7.; 7' t g 7 ... i g 8.5 a 1. 8... 2 .. E 3 2 § :1 ° 2' 6:118 7 :1 =8 7 ‘- 5 m 2 a o; 1.. 1.0.2:— 8 I: 2o- 8 '5 1: ‘0 g: 3. 3 1. .2 g: 2.9. '3 '3 :58 ‘1: :2 3 " a .5 2 ,. 2 a; z 2> 3 3 3° 8 3 a: 1?. L___L_1 e 91. 2295106 8 17 44 2 2293 145 12 5 1 38 3g 28 :23: 86 0 0 4 22 22 2324 118 12 7 85 159 52 6 6 7 O 0 '89 65 ‘9‘ 2338 127 12 12 20 22 2 1 II 70 o 0 7° 3' '0' 2349 39 10 10 1 1 1 1 ??35 52 0 0 ‘09 ‘93 90 2350 93 10 5 0 8 24 3 172 '8 o 0 2 3 3 2357 41 8 30 2 19 9 0 160 272 O 0 “3 6h 85 2358 97 9 18 1 ‘2 9 O 90 11 0 0 21 25 43 2362 129 8 17 1 48 8 14 2‘12 ‘0 3 0 I] h ‘5 237] S7 '2 5 O 25 1 1 3871 1 0 2 128 72 152 2378 112 10 6 2 11 9 21 4313 0 0 0 '29 44 88 2384 88 12 4 3 22 13 6 437 0 2 0 7h ‘6 44 2386 108 12 12 23 5 27 4 4 '6 70 0 0 '6 25 26 2387 117 10 8 3 35 22 21 484 25 o o 6 2 ‘0 2390 130 12 4 0 7 15 3 601 '88 0 0 8h 8' 11° 2399 145 12 18 1 11 4 7 0 0 2' 27 3A 2408 '3' '2 '5 1 ‘5 ‘5 3 5193 301 0 1 50 200 22 2431 143 8 24 6 55 41 6 5284 #3 0 0 I1 9 ‘5 2450 54 12 4 5 28 29 34 2859 19 g 8 '23 I“; 269 2460 1 24631;: 11 3 3 22 13 9 22” 4 ° ° 33 57 79 2475 95 10 15 8 48 6 18 2698 377 5 0 “6 ‘8' SS 2476 35 10 7 110 61 1 0 720 4g 3 0 #2 76 5 2482 121 15 8 27 11 63 16 1 0 h 1 3 2485132 13 z. 39 37 80 15 2333 33 3 6 113 13?. 1%? 2 2432 1?: :2 g g 5 9 12 913 13 0 0 103 19 24 9 2 2 2012 27 0 0 33 363 432 -§Numbers within parentheses are used to ide ntlf 1nd1 ldu 1 tasks on the Summary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix c). v a police TABLE XV (continued) 87 PATROL tAsxsé ('9) £22) (25) 27) (43) (45) (.47) (49) (51) 53 55 , '0 s '7 3 0 0 L1 2 a 1 7 o 13. .§ 3' 3 25 1:"' ,2 g '0 ‘E E 7"" "- " " 3 E§ 6 7 8 § .2 6 " E 3 8" 3' °'° 7" " .2 a: .216 t: 1: .2 u 8 u 3 C3 :31; 321 E .23 m a g 10 .1.) O '- 1- 0'1 “5:1 111: 0 0 O: 0 8. 0' g. 171 “g '- 0 E :3“ 3° _g ‘E :3 .2 u a 1-0 '0 8_ ‘“ .3 m .. ._ .u m c «70 “ 3 '61 2 s «3 45 3 ° .2 23 ‘i " ‘“ EL 3.. "23 3 3 c 8 ‘= :1 h - 3 ‘2' ° 3’ 77 ”7 2 2 2.9. 1 7. ‘13 6:; 5 m 1; L’ :13 '3'; - .. -a- ‘h .. o - u §§5§»£—§—922255320 i5 5. a! E; :g10 > In in c: c: :1 lb 1 2501 41 8 21 0 1 0 0 443 13 0 7 12 26 22 2502 124 12 6 o 9 46 27 756 27 0. 4 262 74 322 2519 140 12 18 11 50 76 7 5486 113 0 0 115 49 105 2524 20 12 8 2 1 3 0 414 32 0 0 17 67 7 2537 67 12 4 0 27 12 1 1725 50 0 0 20 18 31 2600 78 13 3 o 1 15 0 2602 101 1 0 14 6 6 2601 30 12 3 O O 5 1 526 13 O 0 3 2 4 2605 23 13 3 10 8 11 0 938 54 0 0 21 35 11 2606 127 13 3 0 5 67 2 2414 88 o 0 85 10 77 2608 104 10 3 0 43 18 7 2006 6 0 2 48 7 66 2609 128 12 3 0 79 85 15 4391 26 19 o 128 6 55 2610 129 12 3 6 2 27 3 2837 5 o 0 27 22 52 2612 122 12 3 11 66 14 8 2911 12 0 0 37 97 102 2613103 12 3 37 19 9 9 3093 259 O 0 8 31 32 2614 107 11 3 0 19 12 7 4318 135 0 0 34 76 84 2615 132 12 3 0 11 22 19 2987 191 0 1 69 57 28 2617 123 14 3 0 28 31 7 3182 19 1 0 39 16 74 2618 62 12 3 0 13 30 1 2525 10 0 0 70 44 63 2619 111 12 3 2 28 25 7 3197 1 o 0 66 49 78 2020 78 16 3 11 36 38 8 358 86 o o 87 30 43 2623 129 12 3 29 162 23 16 2725 55 0 0 47 16 59 2624 122 12 3 10 20 25 1 4649 418 8 0 52 115 49 2626 58 12 3 0 9 8 0 2703 4 o 0 45 62 62 2629 25 11 3 0 3 6 0 403 7 0 0 13 7 8 2634 72 12 3 43 56 141 81 2227 70 0 0 234 188 312 2637 125 12 3 15 66 20 9 246 106 o 1 81 439 152 2639 119 10 3 2 68 36 14 403 89 o 2 78 64 58 2640 132 12 3 o 7 26 34 O 9 3221287 alunbers within parentheses are used to identify individual police tasks on the Smary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). TABLE XV (continued) 88 1 PATROL tAsxsé 1 (19) (22), 2 ) (27), (43) (45) 47) (491_#51) (s3) (55,)_1 '8 .U S 13 '8 4‘ ‘3 '5 a B = 0 '3 0 g 3 Q on H .8 'g 1a -3 3 3 15 0°. .2 3 '0 '3 1: 3E "- .- ; 11ng on 5 g 5 3 1; 391?.“ 5?": 27?: ° 5°: 3 7‘" -: ° 8 ~ 1* t§“3 9 E2822 E 323. a 8:: :3 2’ 2.258? 3.251 8 8- 92 “ 'o 2 8- “ 3 “av '5 .5 >33 '5 "‘ "‘ 5° C: 3 0'! g 1- ust-8 0 2 m g 35 2 ‘6 u “a m a 8...:3‘; 3 a 23 3 “c .E t 3 ’6‘ .1. .E .. 222.2 8 8 3.2 5 3 t; 6% 33%“f23362:°;;“tz%'5“ 0 Q ’- 8 C! U U > 3 3 be 3 0 0-8 O c: I >- O. 0 g 8 O O O U > 33 U. 2641 9 12 3 0 4 3 1 1 5 0 0 8 16 25 2642 1 3 12 3 0 12 39 21 3 74 95 0 1 167 98 80 2644 78 10 3 0 42 17 3 639 26 0 0 77 62 5 2645 113 12 3 84 52 26 4 3459 95 o 5 31 47 69 2650 22 12 3 29 5 10 1 1071 18 0 0 10 13 8 2651 113 12 3 0 64 35 16 1254 2 0 0 153 18 41 2653 127 12 3 o 16 7 7 5472 13 0 2 38 67 91 2654 105 12 3 60 51 81 42 3124 89 0 0 175 49 128 2655 136 12 3 0 15 33 7 3814 188 0 0 82 141 100 2657 142 12 3 0 4 29 10 989 612 0 2 143 495 6 2660 122 10 3 0 16 24 17 982 5 0 3 195 34 214 2661 61 12 3 o 2 18 4 1959 42 0 0 63 75 67 2803 36 12 3 5 19 9 5 1554 40 0 0 11 51 29 2850 57 12 2 2 17 31 6 2317 15 0 0 50 32 30 2854 I35 10 2 0 8 33 6 2 27 0 0 186 4| 278 2855 42 8 2 1 49 21 2 270 3 0 4 31 82 74 2856 71 9 2 100 23 19 5 1054 86 1 0 27 17 32 2860 54 12 2 5 27 24 6 106 8 0 0 8 2 1 2861 116 12 2 1 49 22 18 3643 19 3 0 36 39 22 2862 17 13 2 7 7 2 6 50 3 0 0 22 10 30 2871 25 12 2 0 1 1 0 540 0 0 0 9 9 13 2872 143 12 2 32 67 33 1 671 274 35 0 63 72 35 2873 150 12 2 0 39 28 8 4457 60 0 0 76 13 55 2875 151 12 2 18 19 14 10 2561 169 0 2 27 87 85 2880 112 12 2 0 73 18 9 2597 19 0 0 114 28 53 2881 103 8 2 0 93 25 1 3665 50 0 0 83 83 63 guumbers within parentheses are used to identify individual police tasks on the Sumnery of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). TABLE XV (continued) 89 PATROLTASKSQ (I9) (22) (251(2)) (43) (45) 147)149)_ [1551) (53) 155) '0 6 '8 13 9 . 3 8 a: a '8 g f} 0 '0 a) 3 :l 0 1» U U '2 .3 .2 3 8 '3 0" .2 8 2 1: ‘° 3 .2 a - '- '; :3 g a. 5 3 6 c 01 «a 1n u—m 5 £- 2 0; 2 a; 3 1" 3' 8 .2 2., ° .. 6 .. 6 .. .. ‘: ° 8 " " 3: '”.3 .3 E 12 6 g: 3 g; 0 0 9- ‘- 0'1 10 In.- 0 0 2 8 U s. “ 'u '8 '§_ 13 £5 :3 3 ° .2 ‘3 > .- .8 «n c u u 3 ~ g '1‘. ... '26 ° - .. r '1 6 3" 5 1.. 0'1 '4- a 3 Ibo- «n m 0 8 1n «- cg a g “ o 2’ '0 '33 m a 1:3 .2 h "a. t u § 2 3 3 3 ‘3 g E E3 § 2 8 22 > 01 1- .1: -- m m “an L o §32528§§>3 ale-~83 31:3 _ e _ 1 2882 130 12 2 0 83 14 10 2993 121 0 3 13 19 64 2884 123 15 2 3 12 22 6 3016 27 0 0 90 7 83 2885 68 13 2 103 100 8 5 1363 86 0 0 21 1 8 2893 139 12 2 5 30 74 17 4942 45 19 5 138 64 27 2973 114 12 2 1 24 28 2 2553 34 1 6 66 51 60 2976 35 12 2 S 7 3 5 1568 25 0 0 9 9 14 2977 60 12 2 3 15 9 1 608 40 0 0 3 0 5 2978 53 10 2 0 16 4 3 972 14 0 0 2 2 4 2979 144 10 2 34 248 24 26 4068 147 3 0 59 41 47 2980 119 12 2 4 48 48 6 3809 199 0 0 109 217 146 2981 138 13 2 18 13 23 4 5451 26 0 0 25 0 10 2982 145 10 2 1 111 36 13 4603 152 1 3 56 8 39 2983 10 12 2 0 0 1 0 540 1 0 0 5 0 1 2984 131 12 2 3 9 11 6 3896 11 0 0 18 19 48 2985 154 10 2 0 20 27 13 4174 2 0 o 31 1o 25 2986 115 12 2 5 107 14 10 480 189 0 o 32 33 44 2993110 12 2 0 8 12 7 5139 134 0 0 17 14 26 2996 140 12 2 25 36 8 1 2 449 258 0 0 9 10 10 3003 111 10 2 2 21 32 14 319 148 0 2 133 163 189 3005 51 12 2 3 31 31 2 1483 205 26 0 25 17 32 3013 131 12 2 0 16 54 43 377 231 0 0 172 20 44 3015 70 13 2 0 56 5 35 392 3 0 o 45 30 57 3016 62 12 2 0 4 3 2 134 26 0 0 28 27 41 3018 139 12 2 11 31 50 12 4289 76 1 0 54 59 79 3022 146 10 2 19 36 64 15 4953 187 0 0 212 107 108 3055 87 12 2 20 34 21 15 217 92 o o 33 38 52 3056 89 13 2 42 21 55 15 4232 138 0 0 143 165 201 tasks on the Summary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). .éflumbers within parentheses are used to identify individual police TABLE XV (continued) PATROL TASKSE 191 L22) 125) Q7 (43) (451 (4]) L49) £9,715.2— '8 8 ‘8 m .. 6 '6 2: .3; 3 .6 .23 0 'U 0 3 3 D a «H a Q, U 01 a — e- 0 o I; t; '- 3 .2 O U 0- § I: 'D .3 = - S .. .. '5 :26 3 § 6 § .§ 6 1; § 1" 3’ 8’ .28 2: ° .- a: .2 ., 9 ~.-. : 0 3 «U «H “'11:: H3 3 a a o g 31 o - 1. m an mo- 0 o '3 3 § 3' 3 v 8 g 3 E :r'§° 2 E 3 2 8 m t. z 3 a 8 2 mg .8 ° ” 6 “ ” 5 3‘ §§36626_§:822638:.53 :- .5 V“ ,3 g o 03 i -- u m 0 In ‘- LG 6 C O m LO'U 3. 31 2% " 'f .2 “'2: :2 '3 1; =6'3 ‘t :E ‘ '3 ‘ 2.3223 26 §°§>6 33"3§ 311:3 3058 131 12 2‘ 0 25 35 10 3524 3 0 0 64 47 53 3059 150 12 2 0 3 41 5 2613 84 0 2 77 43 81 3060 123 12 2 0 5 27 22 4710 124 0 1 137 108 65 3062 150 12 2 0 14 13 7 4203 21 0 0 25 7 13 3064 63 12 2 21 18 10 9 973 27 0 1 19 7 8 3066 113 12 2 0 27 13 4 299 2 0 3 115 70 68 3067 152 12 2 0 27 14 10 2872 48 0 0 32 5 7 3072 49 14 2 0 20 12 3 234 84 0 0 49 123 52 3076 125 12 2 0 32 18 9 3857 0 2 2 165 143 220 3078 130 12 2 21 39 72 24 5245 180 0 0 185 209 310 3080 139 12 2 10 69 116 13 4701 126 0 0 213 7 48 3085 122 13 2 39 34 147 25 6161 123 0 0 289 235 379 3086 143 12 2 54 52 87 9 6382 69 0 0 161 223 250 3087 68 12 2 0 54 11 4 2128 12 0 0 25 12 29 3089 131 12 2 6 115 27 4 2047 41 0 0 22 32 52 3090 128 15 2 0 87 112 8 23 16 0 0 377 249 412 3091 17 10 2 4 1 7 0 412 15 0 0 5 24 10 3093118 12 2 BB 72 20 4 4834 63 5 0 56 126 l55 3094 116 13 2 5 168 42 8 3387 39 5 4 87 67 127 3097 145 12 2 0 121 34 4 5012 2 0 1 12 13 24 3103 132 12 2 0 49 58 16 4 10 0 1 315 221 401 3105 118 12 2 30 72 28 4 2882 153 0 0 38 36 21 3132 62 9 2 5 41 16 8 342 50 o 0 49 27 49 3139 95 12 2 7 30 5 2 339 7‘ 0 0 13 59 SI 3141 110 12 2 0 73 16 9 3127 25 0 0 21 49 53 3142 48 15 2 0 14 6 4 1218 8 5 4 15 16 28 tasks on the Sumnary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). Slumbers within parentheses are used to identify individual police TABLE XV (continued) 9| PATROL tAsxsi (22) m (21) (£13) £1 ) (£17) (£19) 1 15111193- ; 1 B 5 “g ‘6 8 8 6 .1 E 3 E 8 Ti: 72' :‘3 g +3 '3 E E E .227. 3" 3 3 '8 3 : 233131533363 ~§§ 12 § 1. 8 :3 1:2 1:11: .1 E :1: - g g 1.; 1- .2 1. """ 3: “ '6 3 v 3' :1 8 .. .1 2 8.2 3., 8 s .. 6 8' 1. '0 e O U 0-- U .l: E > 11.: t; g :38 3 3 9 °‘ 3 ‘1‘- 3%” ° 8 2 .1 .2 22 8 3 u "a 21 2. 3... 3'5 '8 8 53 o :3 “'11 1:38... .. 1.1128222225313133 2 "5’. 81 5 3‘. .2 g: 2.2 '7. '1'. =32: ‘t :g 8 113 8 8 E >- 2 3 2° 2’ 3 3 3" 3 5. 6‘3 '1: 31113 3£1 1£1 2 23 16 10 1 £16 1£1 0 o 23 26 3o 31£1£1 36 12 2 0 0 £1 0 632 0 0 0 13 7 22 31£15 85 12 2 £1 6£1 11 17 2£16 92 2 0 2£1 26 30 31£17128 13 2 2 20 33 6 3523 20 0 2 103 65 £18 31£18 95 12 2 2 7 7 3 35117 0 o 0 8£1 18 52 31£19106 12 2 0 16 6 3 2882 15 0 o 25 12 38 3151 129 12 2 112 274 60 6 1757 113 0 0 100 28 62 3152113 15 2 17 51 £15 6 285 2£1 0 0 8 10 10 3225132 12 2 9 33 35 2£1 £150£1 8 0 0 52 28 108 3226123 16 2 £1 8 9 6 £1109 9 0 2 23 17 2£1 3227123 12 2 179 26 £17 £1 5£121 171 0 o 59 30 90 3233119 12 2 0 18 9 2 2939 70 o o 25 10 15 323£110£1 12 2 £1 7 £16 88 39311 101 0 0 180 £18 52 3236 10 H1 2 o 8 o 7 62 o 0 l1 7 H1 17 3237118 10 2 1 177 16 8 3677 71 0 0 £12 35 £10 32£13 10£1 12 2 1 27 11 11 50£1 54 0 0 £13 30 38 3250115 12 2 0 79 18 13 331£1 113 0 0 51 67 £12 3251136 15 2 £18 1£15 39 15 £11£1 225 0 0 £19 12 35 3252129 12 2 81 67 75 181 266 27 0 £1 £171 89 109 3260 85 lo 2 l 116 13 22 I91 62 0 0 91 in 76 3283131 12 2 0 88 13 3 3835 5 o 0 23 10 £15 328£1 36 12 2 1 £1 £1 1 883 5 0 0 10 £1 13 3285 37 12 2 2 1 5 3 700 31 0 0 8 8 13 3286132 12 2 0 12 57 £19 £161 93 0 0 193 £10 51 3287 73 12 2 0 2£1 9 3 2382 5 3 1 9 8 10 3288115 12 2 0 11 18 12 713 8 o 3 57 79 126 3293102 12 2 69 57 18 11 5533 119 o 0 63 3£1 30 fiflmbers within parentheses are used to identify individual police tasks on the Sumry of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). TABLE XV (continued) 92 PATROL TASKSQ (191 (22) (2511271013) «151817) (3911511153) (55) 'u 0 s 8 :3 3 “U “U °- 3 'U 3 U ’5 3 3 .1. 3: E 3 3 E '5 1. g u .. 1n 1» O 0.- 2 u 8 '0 2 c -2 Z °- .. E: i: g g‘ 01 s g o» c _ “ °‘ "' “a- B .. a '5 .2 1. 3 m 8 8 232.. ° .. .. .. 1. .. .. '1: 3 3 3 ”11:1.“3 .2 z .2 .. a 3 g. 8 8 z: :1 2’ 2.2 g8 11 3 .2 3 8 3 .. .1 '° ° ° 7 '- 3 8 .s > 3': z; 2 :18 c 3 ‘51 a. g f. «1235 O 10 u g *- ‘I— 10 3013- m m 8 I: a .. :2 O H O O) a. O~NH 1n n C'U 0 ‘- '- 2 3 “ m 5 2 2822 2 2 23 3 8 a 68 3285*.21‘33'33'5‘63‘tg-8'85 88435.5. 8 2; 29§>3 3.3"35. 21: 3295 1#0 12 2 9# 61 27 7 2929 782 O 0 22 20 28 3301 122 12 1 O 67 68 #9 I # 10 27 312 103 223 331# #7 12 2 0 8 36 17 1782 101 '6 O 35 1 I 3315 13# 13 2 O 1# 17 S 3798 6 0 0 28 7 36 3322 133 10 2 1 #3 #5 15 1569 ## 0 O #6 11 28 3325 90 12 2 O 27 7 1 2696 0 0 0 13 5 12 3327 125 13 2 0 SO 36 7 #285 138 0 O 113 71 #2 3328 1#9 12 2 0 6 7 22 2328 # 2 O #8 2 27 3378 118 12 2 O 11 77 7 9 3 0 0 201 5# 180 3380 55 12 2 0 6 16 3 1702 2 0 0 29 11 17 3396 78 12 1 #8 #1 65 29 1889 70 O 0 150 72 155 3397 125 12 1 O 32 9 3 5 #7 O 0 89 180 10# 3#17 21 12 1 0 3 7 # 9#7 21 0 0 13 28 35 3#26 121 12 1 # 38 61 29 912 2 11 12 300 87 266 3#28 1#8 12 1 21 69 69 12 310# 6# 0 0 27 33 #9 3#29 116 12 1 O 10 15 1 5329 59 0 O 30 12 22 3#31 116 16 1 1 105 #7 5 2351 89 0 O 82 101 66 3#50 116 13 1 1 11 8 8 1826 6 9 O 12 # 5 3#51 12# 12 1 0 106 13 3 2#23 2 0 0 2# 30 61 3#5# 123 9 1 1 6 25 7 295# 62 0 O 10 13 22 3#55 90 12 1 2 #6 56 #5 2066 37 3 # 103 21 16 31156 93 12 1 0 61 111 3 2926 168 0 0 #8 35 56 3#58 39 12 1 17 ## 8 # 3#1 50 0 0 26 37 6 3#60 23 12 1 8 0 1 O 192 20 0 0 3 18 15 3#63 1#2 12 1 0 32 22 2 5#38 265 O O 16 10 22 tasks on the Sumry of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). .Qflumbers within parentheses are used to identify individual police TABLE xv (continued) I 93 4 PATROL TASKSE (191122) (25) 27) 4113) (55187) #9181) (55165) 1 1 'U c :3 m 2 1. . 2 2 1; 3 g a: '8 .3 .2 3 3 '3 1. £3 1, 2 'q '2 E .2 E: '7 "- 3'- 1: g" m g g 8 ° " ” “‘. i .. 2 1: .— 7; E m 2' 2 .2 c .. .. .. 1. .. .. .- u o u a ‘1' u .3 Z .2 1.0 g. 3 go 1:1 0 2 1- m “I; 1n- 0 11 O 0 9). O 2 m .5 '3 '8'. 3 .5 13 § .3 ‘5 3 .3 +3 m 133 ‘E .3 3: 2 '5 m 1. " "' 0 '3 m 5 '9 a 8 3 .u ‘3 01 3. 3 :1“ 3 12 8 c 8 I: .5 = 't 3 8 m :5 :5 'g 13 8 E! 2 .§ '3 '§ -o-§ m .2: t- L g N {_._ ‘5', "J. 1‘6 1. E 'U '35) 25.” E '3 31 2 s 2 2 2 a s a 2 2 a;u 3#98 56 12 1 0 # 3 2 686 15 0 0 2 0 0 3500 70 12 1 #9 72 8 1 366 52 0 0 17 33 38 350# 131 12 1 0 39 i# 1# 3#08 22 0 O 39 #2 21 3505 20 12 1 6 12 3 3 617 0 o 0 5 1 10 3507 11# 12 1 #2 80 93 185 281 #8 o # #02 5# 75 3508 102 12 1 0 15 6 7 2373 71 0 0 28 2 10 3509 97 12 l 1 1# 15 # 2360 23 1 0 #7 # 13 3516 125 9 # 0 23 13 # 2#91 5# o o 19 8 13 3522 125 11 1 # #2 37 12 #979 32 0 o 10 9 29 3523 90 12 1 o 8 27 3 2980 18 0 1 #7 # 21 352# 131 12 1 3 11 30 8 #159 131 0 0 65 17 80 3525 11# 12 1 # 57 #8 2# 7759 7 o 0 130 183 83 3527 73 12 1 10 20 15 8 99s 15 o o 35 22 #9 3535 1#2 12 1 0 6# 50 #2 3593 67 o o 107 1 23 3536 58 12 1 0 1 2 1 15#1 1 o 0 3 3 # 3537 66 13 1 6 9 15 5 5068 11 0 0 51 121 51 3538 79 12 1 6 7 17 6 215# 38 0 0 #8 15 21 3567 126 12 1 5 3# #3 9 #313 22 0 0 60 288 39 3568 MB 12 1 l 55 39 21 #67 75 0 O 57 l# #7 3571 116 12 1 #8 21 2# 2 #790 228 0 1 62 109 #5 3572 66 12 1 I 9 7 2 13## 15 0 0 92 10# 51 3573 126 1# 1 5 115 55 2 #65# #3 0 0 39 i 7 357# 120 13 l 2 11# 27 8 5032 175 0 0 #0 30 #0 3575 133 12 i 9 77 11 9 1752 20 0 0 27 5 1# 3580 36 1a 1 13 3 23 7 17#3 5 o o 58 71 115 311mb“: within parentheses are used to identify individual police tasks on the Sumry of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). TABLE XV (continued) PATROL TAsxsé (19) Q2 (25) (21) (1131 (1151 (1111 (119) I 553111 (552 U c -6 23 m 'u 'u .3 3 -6 8 8 :5 ‘0 o g g ‘5 3 3 g '5 3 +2 E E E 32' .22; -°’- ° 3 3 E = - z.- ... a. > 3:8 g g s a. .2 6 ~ g "' 8 3‘ 2'8 8: ° .. a: .2 1! 1:. a: .3 u 3 ‘3’ “’ 3:3, “3 3’2 2 m 3. 3 m :5 01 «- t- a cum mo- 0 o '5 3 8' g- 8’ m '0 0- 0 C L— DU 0 +1 0- 0 I- 'D G O U 0" U 0 .C c > .— «H In kg) ‘3 .3 ‘6; a 2 if «.2 3'18 ° “' o ‘6 "' 5 3g 8 3 u “6 a» 3 3.9 3: 3 3 2-6 ‘3 8 2'. .E u 3 In .5 15+: com 01 o no a .- a In " .7. 2 .‘2 .2 3 :53 {"3 .E .E .53 u. .E.’ 3 2'8 3, >. m a; I- .r: N- c.- m m 130: I- .c '0 03 .g .‘g a; :2 a! 2; £3‘9 :2.) .3 5% é;“' 13 £3 :2 i: 3581 131 10 I o 11 27 15 3600 89 I 0 191 50 69 3583 I21 10 I 1 11 10 4 3233 27 0 1 33 21 46 3589 131 10 I 1 13 I3 35 0 2 0 0 229 60 38 3585 97 19 I I 8 35 II 3150 62 0 0 #6 5 30 3586 127 12 I 14 193 #7 36 298 109 o 0 123 21 43 3592137 12 I 0 511 37 2 4557 1+7 0 0 85 37 87 36le 22 12 I 22 9 3 0 M3 15 0 0 28 52 7 3625 28 I3 I 13 13 18 I 986 59 II 0 58 171-1 ho 3626 126 12 I 79 #0 32 5 #028 87 0 I 59 12# 136 3627 29 12 I 5 I 19 2 1292 211 o 0 I7 31 I9 3628 124 13 I 51 80 34 12 2007 I57 67 I 199 #33 63 3629 109 12 I 0 10 39 7 I 8 I 0 171 19 I9 3632 152 12 I 5 142 18 I9 9398 37 0 0 33 6 34 3633 II 12 I 0 0 6 I #96 3 0 0 1h 34 10 3660 A6 12 I 2 7 I9 13 782 8 0 2 58 30 66 3661 51 12 I 0 27 19 0 I668 33 0 0 72 55 52 3662 33 12 I 29 I3 2 I 1399 26 0 0 I3 28 35 3663 69 12 I 32 27 I9 0 I358 21 2 0 75 27 21 3666 99 19 I 0 8 16 I2 #973 99 I I 89 72 121 3669 75 12 I 0 3 12 I 1372 8 0 0 60 31 29 3671 127 13 I 0 25 26 II 4703 167 I 0 183 69 199 3672 135 I2 I 0 17 27 2 3925 6 0 0 39 5 33 367A 108 12 I 32 28 29 8 2993 119 0 0 46 25 47 3712 117 12 I II 95 25 7 359 159 I '0 71 116 185 3719 BI 12 I I 9 8 7 2023 32 0 h 85 32 69 3716 III 12 I 0 11+ 37 9 3061 13 LI 1 57 5 32 37I8 96 12 I 15 29 5 I 2767 I 0 0 17 23 51 Eflumbers within parentheses are used to identify Individual police tasks on the Sumary of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). TABLE XV (cont 1nued) 95 PATROL TASKS2 021 (22 (25) (27) 11 (‘15 1‘27) £22715!) (53) '8 8 '8 '8 8 L '3 '8 I: 2 '8 -8 .2 -3 '0 3 a a 10 U c H L g 3 2 2 '5 r .2 3 2 8 3 3 c .2 8 .- .. "a: I: m g" I» g g a. .. m In 11- S a 8 In .- g '5 8 a an 8" .313 8‘5 o .. .5 .2 '0 :1. '3 '- ° 0 1* u "- a. u 1' "I z .2 I. a 3 2. 13 o ” L ‘8 m u.:! '5 o o o (L a' o In '0 0 9 Lo- 0 0 U 0- 0 O I. ‘U 0 3 0-0 0- H 8 J: C > 0- ” 0| 1- ‘E .3 8. :: E2 '5 m g “E 8 ° " 0 § “’ 5 .3 l- g- I. 8.- 100. U! 00 0 In 0: E g 2 I; 2‘ a u .. a I; 2 I" 52 .2 .. I- 2 In -- t- L C .CO- C 3 3 g 0 10 fl 0 2 ”9. a. 53; '15 .2 33: 3.2 a: '3 =33 “I: E 8 TE .8 13 SE :» IE 43 éé" ’ IS IS 25‘ £3 £3 £3 E: 3719 80 12 I 20 27 I4 9 3574 53 0 1 40 54 47 3720 I39 12 I 0 66 18 2 2962 36 0 0 12 I3 15 3721 97 12 1 0 51 36 9 2201 16 0 0 I35 60 80 3722 85 12 1 0 7 12 6 580 3 0 0 103 27 37 3723 87 10 I 24 21 7 8 3085 0 0 I 13 9 45 3728 15 8 I 15 6 9 I 108 24 0 0 20 7 3 3729 54 12 I 16 14 I4 3 2362 34 0 0 23 10 I7 3730 39 I4 I 6 18 24 I 1262 23 0 0 51 43 27 3790 48 12 0 0 9 26 6 1067 0 0 4 27 9 15 3791 64 12 0 0 34 7 2 I773 52 I 0 12 26 35 3793 50 12 O 1 9 11 0 10M 2 0 0 4 6 5 3799 33 12 0 8 10 2 6 63 21 0 0 42 29 52 3801 III 12 0 o 20 2 2 5263 0 o 2 21 37 47 3802 103 12 0 I 13 45 8 512 II 0 2 206 30 205 3803 64 12 0 26 16 II 0 171 94 6 o 20 35 13 38011 118 111 0 0 59 35 12 483 167 O 0 159 165 106 3842 10 12 0 o 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 2 3 5 3878 29 12 0 76 I3 13 4 433 8 0 0 29 7 60 3879 62 12 0 0 62 42 8 1914 13 0 1 69 27 48 3880 37 12 0 18 9 25 5 I434 34 o 0 44 30 37 3881 50 12 O 15 37 9 3 1591 6 0 0 32 21 39 3899 15 12 0 0 2 4 2 300 5 0 0 12 4 12 3902 73 12 0 22 75 10 6 468 102 0 0 19 15 26 3823 53 11 0 6 40 8 6 1811 15 I 0 24 13 36 3924 77 15 0 0 14 8 4 1888 0 0 0 28 99 115 3925 32 8 0 7 I7 2 0 1516 II 0 I 10 24 22 3926 88 8 2 7 41 58 I 502 92 3 0 119 65 47 -a-Numbers within parenthes1s are used to identIfy 1nd1v1dual po11ce tasks on the Summary of Da11y Field Activity (Appendlx C). TABLE XV (cont inued) PATROL I'Asxsa. 19) 122) 125) (27 1113) (£15) (‘17) (49) l (531 PL '5 5 'u 3 m .. '8 '3 :3 § 11 3 3 .. g 8 a a .2 .2 ‘8 E '8 '3 c 3 3 ’- 3 E 55" '3 .. ‘ E 1% 3 _ a. .. In In 11-5 ‘ 3 In .. 5 ': ° 8 “ “ t3 "3 t .2 I. g 1' :1 g o I; 2 2.2 2'; g 2 .2 3 § ‘7 3’ 'u u u .. u g c > «- a In t 2 .33 '6; Z 8 '1‘. mg 1.8 .- 3 § '0 5 3 g g u 8. 01 8. 3... a: 3'. 3 1:1: 3 '1': .5 t g a .5 s. E: 4:3 g g 33 5 '5 )7: "no 2 2 m 5 i‘ 3 53: 3:2 '3 '3 363'. ‘t :5 -3 “SE 8 8 E 5. 8 3 a” 5’ 3 3 5" 3 > a! i: 3928 89 12 0 2 10 3 0 3518 49 0 I 10 I7 23 3931 54 12 0 12 18 9 3 1845 5 0 0 20 24 32 3933 25 10 0 6 42 5 2 55 23 0 2 10 4 7 3959 63 12 0 0 31 8 6 637 7 0 0 59 68 110 3960 63 12 0 14 29 21 7 223 27 1 0 53 39 31 TOTALS NO. OF DAYS Mm .119). .133.) .122). .131) .152). 1&2). 556 48,775 8,197 18,315 11,609 4,488 1,168,212 32,631 .91) £12). .15).). .152). .155). 429 296 29,294 25,212 28,945 EMeI-s within parenthesis are used to identify individual police tasks on the 5mm of Daily Field Activity (Appendix C). r ,I) 1' 5“ :22) L33: ‘p; 51;; _, - .anF. 1fr-7‘~>“3:;"!99€ ” ‘ffti'ilrff'I—‘J ‘ r ’ HICHIGRN STQTE UNIV. LIBRRRIES 31293102773284