\

I“ :1.
$2.93}
I 951*

701‘
..‘,‘J

-u '.
3‘33 .

‘4’," _ ..
_ -- I. 0~ - -
'.- . M; ‘1.-.r ..
d ‘ V . _ . o o"‘ .-
. ova]! “0 . . . o ' O . , ‘ ’ "."\ ,.| 't‘ ‘ ‘
: ‘2 ‘ 3“ 0- ' . ' ' -- ~ ' ‘ ' . ,. . I. . I .‘.I 7"..(“q' f"-
. 'n . I

.C I“ .- .0
“'.4‘ 4 h

In
‘.

A V

(WE‘-

' u._-
; "an '.. ‘ , ' -,2 (‘5. o.
n . ‘ ’ T ‘ o , ' - ‘ _ - ' - ‘
HfQJHJvas.JC£H - - - . ~ :* ;. - ‘ - ~ - . .'. ~ Ic
. ’ u .- - ‘ _ . _ c , ' ‘ , ‘ V.
‘ .~..‘- .‘H‘ - - c.‘-‘-‘ - .
-' ‘5 . 9 “.{l ‘ . . a uni-{.1}; ‘14...“‘0
-‘-" ‘ 'A . I
, n . 707 .i
I 0‘ ' ‘
o .‘W . ‘1.’
“t- »..‘,.n.l.

Q 5&1.

J"...

ti

”.0;
t\~J—;
-| J .
1....
¢
.w .2 ..
(5'

r2 .2

fie‘o"

4..

. : . 6. -. '
L fv ‘5'! «h

:err.‘

. . ..
""".1'.. A
9'5"."3

‘
.{1 ‘_“H r
'54:“‘333'
“I 3

U

- ~.
_. ‘ - \ a -.
_ ...°-' Raw-:31.
Hus". 'fi'fi’" ‘
‘ ' ' .4
.' t ~

0
‘.

~52}?! -

:131“£L
.1 A .
"......LV

'W'v
..‘
A,
db. 0
'1:

‘ .L‘

.1 t
_ “a ...-- _ s.-r;"‘-.:......;
via-4r ' . ‘.-- '1,;V.‘ flu"! 1-6:.1‘ °‘9

C ' Q

21?}

‘-
<'\

z‘

“"7.

am»

.> M
J " 4“”:5.r:
‘m‘n‘ fut-51

c‘l-. '

.v .. .._
“0'1
.‘2‘.

uh
I

5... 33's:
5.: 5:13.
:9‘

'1‘}: " s.

0
.45!

i>i
‘ a
{‘5
‘1

«2

3'
94.0"
:6 no r.

Q’O‘.
OI ‘ ‘
v'u'.u -
4"
I..
.
«A.

1.}- ; 1
W9-

mil“
"‘3 0'"

I

V.‘ .

f _.;
5*. n‘
'x

}_
34

l. '.
‘0‘ 4‘”
V J
" r”.

D I.
n

a . '_
a} '.‘"")‘:-€
‘ V‘v‘ ° ‘ . 5'

.Q‘.‘: s 3"~

H2".

g4
u?‘

Q-‘
M“
.V- I
.col-
on?
. .<‘

p-I.
<.-.
I. ' 6
3 ‘J‘
"J
'n .

W -‘ . . _
1 .31: . .
1' | t

'Q’ T“;

.
a
A:

Jq‘ “J.

_, 43L”
. ‘ ‘-—~ (3

.

. _ . .g 'u‘
3": - ..‘.'1 ‘
x ‘ 9' " 3

o

‘v

I
._..‘

t.“

{2“Eg‘i0
3:]: .1 i 'o

‘—
1“Cl7‘:;1:::ZJV; .
*5“ T.‘.‘" '-
6' 44,59“

;-;

I .-
r'l'q

{.45 "'3‘;
A. :M..Q_: '5‘ ‘*.'If I".
,1“; ”b ~73.- ; .

'-
.

5.0.“
‘..

.5

.L
l
.3...

51‘“
.Q 9-.

. .A\O'.‘-“ ""!"
. ......J.'- .
" ”the” ‘ A 5
out"

’91:" r

,. .
9.. .00:-

O

0
‘3'.

 

9 v"
'W‘X .V‘ "-
. .. _ .
"«-1~. “J",’.';‘ H '
7' Q . n

" .
“Q'
_ v -

>2. 43‘}

h?’
’-

infra

H. u m
.n i“.
‘mgi.

Q
4a
I

'.I
I"
H“

o“ L"...
U 1%

J
a

'v...
‘

f "' . ,
’"f,. I ‘ns-o"
'. ¢.'¢f O

. s

 

ICHIGAN STATE UNNER ITY L BRARIES

Illllllllll\lllllllllllllMillWI

3 1293 01046 1774

A.

 

 

 

\

a

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

COMMUNITY POLICING AT MSU: COMMUNITY PREFERENCES,
COMMUNITY SATISFACTION AND POLICE/CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT

presented by

Elizabeth Ann Jones

has been accepted towards fulfillment

. . of the requirements for
lazudfiol' LX221H¢¢<LJ ‘/‘:;’
/ degree in M

 

 

Major profes or

Date /‘2/ /;9?

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

'1 “E N RETURN BOX
'0“) FINES Mum

bnmwolhbchook

”WWW
onorbdorodatoduo.

     

'E DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

T fi'_ fi

 

COMMUNITY POLICING AT MSU: COMMUNITY PREFERENCES,
COMMUNITY SATISFACTION AND POLICEICITIZEN INVOLVEMENT

By

Elizabeth Ann Jones

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

College of Social Science
School of Criminal Justice

1 994

ABSTRACT

COMMUNITY POLICING AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: COMMUNITY
PREFERENCES, COMMUNITY SATISFACTION AND POLICE/CITIZEN
INVOLVEMENT

By

Elizabeth Ann Jones

The purpose of this study was to determine whether community
preferences, community satisfaction and police/citizen involvement at Michigan
State University (MSU) indicate a community preference for community policing,
currently being practiced by the Department of Public Safety.

The objectives of this study were to determine the following: the MSU
community preferences for services, community satisfaction, and preference for
police/citizen involvement, in relation to community policing.

A questionnaire was administered to a sample of the community at MSU.
Eight hundred and fifty-four questionnaires were returned - a 27 percent
response rate. Percentages were used in the analysis portion of the study.

The data indicate that the MSU community prefers services which are
practiced by community policing, the community satisfaction with their police is
partially due to the practice of community policing, and the degree and type of
police/citizen involvement encouraged by community policing is desired by the

community.

Copyright by
Elizabeth Ann Jones
1 994

DEDICATION

To my husband Paul -- for all of his patience, support and encouragement.
Also, to my daughter, Shauna - for her patience and love. I couldn't have
finished it without you both.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This thesis was completed with the assistance and support of many
people. In recognition of this, I would like to thank Bruce L. Benson, Andrew P.
McEntee, David L. Trexler and the men and women of the Department of Public
Safety at Michigan State University, without whose support the collection of the
research data would not have been possible.

I would like to thank Dennis M. Payne, my committee chair, for his
continued support and interest in the completion of this thesis. I would also like
to thank Ken Christian, my advisor, and Jay Seigel for their encouragement and
guidance.

Lastly, I would like to thank my father, Mahlon C. Smith, for his insight and

wisdom.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Ease

Listing of Tables .............................. vii
Introduction ................................. 1
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Types of Services Community Policing Can Provide .......... 5

The Effect of Community Policing on Community Satisfaction ..... 13

Degree and Type of Police/Citizen Involvement "Encouraged" with

Community Policing ......................... 16

Summary of Review of Literature .................... 28
Methodology ................................ 29
ANALYSIS OF DATA

Introduction ............................... 31

Comparison of Survey Results for the 1987 & 1992 Surveys ..... 32

Discussion of Research Questions ................... 54

Summary of Analysis .......................... 65
Conclusions ................................ 66
Recommendations ............................. 69
APPENDICES

A. Survey Instrument .......................... 71

B. Responses to Open Ended Questions from the 1992 Survey. . . . 75
Bibliography ................................ 90

vi

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

LISTING OF TABLES

Respondent Preferences for Public Safety Focus ........ 33
Respondent Preference for Investigative Efforts ........ 35
Respondent Prioritization of Service Types ........... 37
Respondent Responsibility in Dealing with Crime ........ 38
Respondent Prioritization of Services .............. 40
Respondent Victimization Rate ................. 41

Respondent Comparison of the Department of Public Safety. . 41

Respondent Familiarity with Campus Police Officer ....... 42
Respondent Perceptions of the DPS Strengths ......... 44
Respondent Perceptions of the DPS Weaknesses ....... 46
Respondent Recommendations for DPS Change ........ 48
Respondent Knowledge of Community Policing ......... 49
Respondent Preferences for Police Requests .......... 50
Respondent Preference for Police/Citizen Involvement ..... 50

Respondent Perception Regarding DOS Officer Availability . . 51

Respondent Perceptions Regarding DPS Officers Availability . 51

vii

17 Respondents Rate Department of Public Safety Effectiveness . 51

18 Respondent Recommendation to Improve DPS Effectiveness . 52

viii

INTRODUCTION

This study is designed to determine 1) if the types of services the
Michigan State University Community prefers are commensurate with services
that a community police force provides, 2) if the level of satisfaction of the
Michigan State University community with their police force is related to the fact
that their police practice community policing, 3) if the degree and type of
police/citizen involvement which the Michigan State University community
prefers, correlates with the degree and type of police/citizen involvement which is
provided by a community policing force.

In June 1987, a survey was conducted by the School of Criminal
Justice and the Department of Public Safety at Michigan State University. The
survey consisted of a questionnaire whose focus included such topics as types
of services the community would like their police to provide, the satisfaction level
the community has with their police service, and the degree and type of
police/citizen involvement both experienced and preferred by the community. In
September 1987, the Community Policing program was implemented at the
Department of Public Safety at Michigan State University.

Another survey was conducted at Michigan State University (MSU), in

2

March 1992 (Appendix A), which is identical to the aforementioned survey up to,
and including, question number 11. Questions 12 through 18 are new and
include a focus on the same three areas as the survey of 1987. The following
three areas will be concentrated on here: the types of services the community
would like their police to provide, the satisfaction level the community has with
their police service, and the degree and type of police/citizen involvement both
experienced and preferred by the community.

The distribution and collection of the two surveys was done in the
same manner and the format is the same; therefore, the results of the surveys
can be compared to each other. As the methodology was the same as that used
in the 1987 survey, and as 11 of the questions are identical, the research can
also be used for a longitudinal study of a community which experienced five
years of community policing. The results of the two surveys, given five years
apart, are tabulated with the findings.

The unique nature of the campus community may or may not be a
limitation. There are many ways in which the MSU community differs from a
non-campus community. The characteristics of the student population differ
greatly from the characteristics of a city or town population. The age group of
° the student population is very narrow in range when compared to a city
population. The city will contain many more people who are elderly, middle aged
and under 18. Citizens of different ages will have different ideas on police

prioritization. The city will have greater focus on factors which affect the very

3

young and the very old. The student population will have a greater focus on
factors which affect the young adult .

The college mentality will also be a factor here. Not only is the student
population relatively limited in age variation, this population also consists of
single men and women who are in a transitional stage in their life. This is a
vulnerable time for them and they need to feel that they have a caring police
force. For the first time, they are free of the immediate influence of parents, they
do not yet have the responsibility of career and family, they are in an exploratory
and experimental stage in their lives where the transition between teen and adult
takes place. There is likely to be more experimentation with drinking, drugs and
sex than would be found in a city community. There would be less focus on
making the neighborhood safer for children and the elderly than there would be
in a city.

The campus population needs their police to emphasize programs
specific to the needs of their unusual community. A campus community has a
greater need for educational programs regarding such matters as drug and
alcohol abuse, date rape, and specific areas of crime prevention. The programs
on crime prevention would focus on different problems than would be focused on
in a city. There is a greater incidence of property crime on campus, calling for
specific crime prevention practices. There is also a greater incidence of sexual
assault, also calling for specific crime prevention practices. Maintaining security

is a completely different situation on campus, with residence halls and

4

classroom buildings, than it is in residential areas of a city or town. Here, again,
the police would have to alter their methods to meet the needs of the community.

The campus population is very transient, therefore, the students don't
have a feeling of permanence while living there. The long range view of working
with their police to better the community may be lacking when compared to the
city population. In the summer, the campus population is almost nonexistent.

In spite of the differences inherent in the campus and the city
communities, the basic needs remain the same. Both communities need to feel
that their specific needs as a community are being considered and met by their

police.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Types of Services Community Policing Can Provide

As community policing becomes more widely used, more and more
emphasis is being placed on the specific types of services a community can
expect from an agency which practices community policing. There are general
types of services, and many specific ways in which these services can be
provided.

Some of the more general types of services have been discussed by
Fulwood (1990). A look at this discussion shows us the following: The police
organize community-based crime prevention activities which are neighborhood
specific; neighborhood level input in the development of police operational policy
is encouraged, which allows the community to have some influence over the
types of services they receive as well as on the prioritization of services; the
police also help to focus city resources within each neighborhood to address the
identified causes of specific types of crime; police develop juvenile delinquency
prevention and intervention activities; and finally, the community policing police
would keep the community updated on the results of police operations in their
neighborhoods.

Goldstein (1987) also mentions the organization of community based

crime prevention activities as a community policing service. The police educate

6

citizens on how they can avoid becoming the victims of crime and initiate crime
watch programs where citizens report suspicious circumstances. Trojanowicz
(1982, 80) states that the foot patrol officer's general responsibilities and duties
include maintaining "a high degree of contact with the existing citizen action
groups operating within the neighborhoods and involving them in planning,
designing, and evaluating neighborhood crime prevention programs."

The encouragement of neighborhood level input in the development of
policy as a community policing "service" is brought up again by Trojanowicz
(1990). Average citizens nominate the problems and cooperate in setting the
police agenda in community policing. Bradshaw (1990) provides an example of
such a practice in Reno, Nevada, where the city was divided into separate
geographical areas, each supervised by a police captain. Each captain formed a
neighborhood advisory group (NAG). These groups consist of citizens who
represent their geographical area, the area captain, and other police department
representatives. At these meetings, neighborhood problems are discussed
along with possible strategies; thus, citizens have direct input into the manner in
which problems in their community are dealt.

A NAG group in Reno also provides an example of a situation in which
the police helped focus city resources to help deal with a specific type of crime.
In the desert surrounding Reno, there are vast areas which have historically
served as dumping grounds for inoperative vehicles. These can be dangerous

for children and are unpleasant to look at. A senior police officer was assigned

7

to work with NAG groups to remove the abandoned vehicles. This was
accomplished by using donated towing equipment (a city resource) to remove
more than 100 abandoned vehicles. As a result of being involved in the solution
to this problem, the community viewed their police very favorably and showed a
positive reaction to the community policing efforts.

Media can also be recruited by police leaders to become actively
involved in the campaign against crime and violence. In a newfound freedom to
look to all sources for aid in crime prevention, the community police officer can
enlist the help of social agencies, local experts, and any other source the officer
can think of mobilizing.

Another example of a community policing effort in which community
resources were used to address identified causes of a specific type of crime is
presented by (Hageman, 1990). The metropolitan area of Richmond, Virginia,
has three major police agencies as well as police agencies for the colleges and
universities. These policing agencies, along with crime prevention specialists
and other community based professionals, put together a task force on sexual
assault without using any special financial funds or grants. This task force was
put together in response to the growing problem of sexual assaults against
students at the various universities and colleges in the area. From the
community of Richmond, as well as Henrico and Chesterfield counties, the task
force included an author who teaches crime and delinquency prevention courses

at Virginia Commonwealth University, as well as citizens from the community

8

who were recommended by police officers. The officers recommended people
who had some expertise or power base that could assist the task force.

The YWCA lent support to the sexual assault crisis center, and worked
with others to research and affect the problem of rape and its prevention.
Administrative support and sponsorship was provided by the Center for Public
Affairs at Virginia Commonwealth University during the first year (the YWCA
Rape Crisis Outreach Program took over administrative support the second
year). The task force analyzed the previous year's rape reports to determine
whether any pattern of rapes and their incidence could be established. They
also looked at current services and prevention strategies. At-risk target groups
were identified and crime prevention strategies were developed. To best serve
the community, the police used community resources to identify the causes and
work toward the prevention of a specific type of crime. In serving the community,
the police worked not only with the community, but also with other police
departments.

Community police officers also use public resources to identify the
causes of specific types of crime when they enlist the help of public health
professionals and learn what they are doing in terms of research and
development (Brown, 1992). One such public source would be the Center for
the Study of Interpersonal Violence at the Texas Medical Center in Houston,
Texas. There are a multitude of ways in which public resources can be utilized

in policing. Each community has its own needs and its own set of resources

9

available to the police. Therefore, the practice of community policing, which
molds itself to the specific needs of each community, can well utilize and focus
these resources.

The community police officers can also develop juvenile delinquency
prevention and intervention activities. These activities can vary from community
to community so as to meet the specific needs of each. Such activities often
include the introduction of conflict resolution training in the elementary schools.
Another type of activity could be a sports league organized by a community
officer for inner city juveniles, who have much idle time. Trojanowicz (1982)
mentions the Police Athletic League (PAL), of Flint, Michigan, which is an
ongoing juvenile delinquency prevention program which involves young people in
field trips to museums, art fairs and the theater, as well as providing them with
sports activities. This is an example of a rather extensive provision of
delinquency prevention and intervention activities.

Feedback and assistance can be provided in various ways and the
community can be kept updated on the results of police operations. The chief
executive in Reno, Nevada, created three groups to provide feedback and
assistance. These three groups helped keep the communities updated on the
results of police operations in their neighborhoods (Bradshaw, 1990). The
groups were: a media advisory group, a citizens advisory group, and a technical
advisory group. A new "open press" policy was developed and a public

information officer appointed, allowing the media access to one person who

10

could communicate crime and community service information. The citizens
group consists of persons selected from each NAG in the four areas of the city,
who provide an overview of performance of Community Oriented Policing-Plus
(COP+) throughout the city. The technical group consists of representatives
from the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) and other individuals from
across the country, who make on-site visits to evaluate the operation of COP+
and make recommendations as necessary. As a result, the community was kept
abreast of police operations, performance and effectiveness, and the police had
constant feedback, which enabled them to alter operations as necessary to
better suit the needs of the community.

The services provided by community policing are general services
which can be provided in various ways to meet the specific needs of a given
community. These services are: the organization of community based crime
prevention activities; the encouragement of neighborhood level input in the
development of policy; focusing city resources to address the identified causes of
specific types of crime; developing juvenile delinquency prevention and
intervention activities; and keeping the community updated on the result of police
operations (Fulwood, 1990). Where these services are present, community
policing is at work.

A community which receives community policing should find that their
officers police a specific geographical area, and that the officers are permanently

assigned to those areas. This is indeed a service to the community in that with

11

permanent assignment, an officer can get to know the community, and as such,
would be likely to notice a problem developing more quickly than an officer who
is unfamiliar with the area. Staying in the same area also enables the officer to
organize various activities such as citizen/police groups for discussion of various
community problems, solution seeking and prioritization as well as organizing
community education regarding drugs, crime prevention, resource centers, and
other needed community services. Possible intervention activities such as sports
activities, aimed at the young people, can be better organized by a police officer
who is familiar with a specific community and its needs and available resources.
Permanent geographical assignment also allows the community to get to know
the officer better and to encourage a relationship of trust and cooperation.

Along with the actual "beat" being geographically assigned to a
specific officer, mini-stations or some kind of a site out of which the officer can
work can be assigned to the officer. This is located right in his/her assigned
community. This is advantageous to the community in that the officer is readily
accessible even when helshe is not patrolling. The frustration of going through
various operators, being placed on hold, and finally making contact with
someone who is only vaguely familiar with the neighborhood or the problem is
greatly reduced if not eliminated. Trust, accessibility, and communication are all
increased with on-Iocation work sites.

It would be very difficult to determine all of the specific services which

community policing provides, because the very nature of community policing so

12

customizes police activities, neighborhood by neighborhood, that specific
services vary. This is to the advantage of each community, since each
community has different needs. The general types of services mentioned here
can be provided by community police in various ways, thus, giving the
community policing officer an opportunity to be innovative and to become more
personally instrumental in servicing the community. The community, in turn,

receives more specialized service and has more opportunity to influence policy.

The Effect of Community Policing on Community Satisfaction

A police force must focus on more than crime prevention and criminal
apprehension. A high level of community satisfaction is also an important goal.
There is little literature available which focuses on the satisfaction of a
community with their police force. This is, no doubt, an area of study which is
often undertaken by police departments for the primary purpose of self-
evaluation and as an aide to be used in future policy making decisions within that
specific department. As such, much of the research in this area is likely kept for
departmental use and is not readily available for review purposes.

The University of Houston-Victoria, however, has made public the
results of a telephone survey conducted in 1989 asking residents to rate the
Victoria Police Department (VPD). In Victoria, from June through December
1989 there were 129 victims of burglary. Seventy-seven were contacted by
phone and responded to a telephone survey. Ninety-seven percent of the
respondents said the first person they spoke with was courteous, 93 percent said
the investigator was courteous, 61 percent said the police showed an interest in
working the burglary, and 87 percent said the police answered their questions
(Nichols, 1991). It can be concluded from these responses that the officers
demeanor and self-presentation, the degree of courtesy shown by any police
personnel contacted, and a display of respect on the part of the officer were all

strong determinants of how the citizen rated their satisfaction with police

13

14

performance.

Twenty-two percent of the burglaries were solved (a clear minority),
yet there was a clear majority of favorable responses regarding police
performance. It seems that, in this instance, whether or not the crime was
solved was not a significant factor in influencing the civilians' attitude's toward
the police department. Though it is not indicated whether this department was
practicing a form of community policing, the results of the survey do indicate that
some aspects of police performance, which are emphasized in community
policing (officer presentation, courtesy shown, etc.), have greatly influenced the
satisfaction level of the community with police performance.

In February of 1990, Nicholas Pastore took charge of the New Haven,
Connecticut, police department. The department began a new proactive
approach known as community policing. In 1990, this city stood sixth in violent
crime per capita among cities of 100,000 people or more (Worsnop, 1993, 99).
The number of murders, reported robberies and aggravated assaults had risen
50 percent over the last three years. By 1992, after two years during which
community policing came into effect full swing, the reported crime fell by 10.3
percent from the first half of 1991. (The nationwide percentage during that
period dropped about two percent.) Though this does not specifically
demonstrate that the community of New Haven has a higher satisfaction rate in
regards to the policing practice of community policing, it would certainly point in

that direction.

15

In Portland, Oregon, a five-year transition plan to shift to community
policing was adopted by the City Council in January 1990. Also in that year, the
Portland Police Bureau reported:

Citizens saw the police as special responders who
could be called upon only to deal with major
problems... Officers came to regard citizens as
complainants who called the police and then got out
of the way so the police could fight crime alone
(Portland Police Bureau, 1990).

Worsnop (1993) states that Portland residents, city employees and
police officers regularly got together to solve crime and livability problems. He
has depicted various instances where this has been done successfully
subsequent to the shift to community policing. Again, this does not specifically
demonstrate that this community is more satisfied with their police now that their
police are practicing community policing, though it certainly appears as though
there is a better working relationship between the police and the community
members.

The area of community satisfaction as related to community policing is

an area sorely lacking in readily available research. This study, done at

Michigan State University, may help in providing some much needed data.

Degree and Type of Police/Citizen Involvement "Encouraged" with
Community Policing

For the purposes of this paper "citizen" will represent anyone who is
not employed by a law enforcement agency. Some amount and type of
police/citizen involvement is incorporated into all types and styles of policing.
Community policing, however, focuses very strongly on police/citizen
involvement. The degree to which the different types of involvement are
emphasized and practiced vary according to community needs and community
and police resources. To provide a more specific view of police involvement with
citizens, citizens be divided into different groups that interact with the police. It
will be useful here to look at the different groups as presented by Trojanowicz
(1992): community agencies, the media, elected officials, and any other citizen
who may or may not be in any of the above categories.

Police/citizen involvement, as well as varying in regards to these
groups, also varies in regards to the purpose or goal of the involvement. Each
type of police/citizen involvement is more effectively geared toward specific
goals. The degree of police/citizen involvement is often implicit by nature of the
very type of involvement practiced. Sometimes, however, very specific attention
and control over the degree of police/citizen involvement Is required to fully take
advantage of this aspect of community policing. This will be addressed later.

There are many advantages of community agencies becoming

involved with the police. The police spend a great deal of their time doing a lot of

16

17

the work that many community agencies are designed to do (counseling, giving
referrals to other agencies that are designed to meet specific needs, providing
information, animal control...) As Trojanowicz (1992, 11) mentions, by involving
community agencies, police can "emphasize teamwork and eliminate duplication
of services." Also, this would increase "officers free patrol time so that they could
work on more serious problems".

In Portland, Oregon, in preparation for a transition to community
policing, the Portland Police Bureau (PPB) found that a great deal of a police
officer's time (50 percent in one department) was spent providing information
and referral to citizens (Austin and Sweet, 1992). Thus, they hired two
professional information and referral (I&R) specialists to create a problem-solving
guide to identify community resource information. Using this Problem-Solving
Guide, Portland officers have been better able to develop

a written agreement with citizens, business owners
and other service providers to share responsibility for
solving community problems. Applying this procedure,
officers work with citizens to identify a problem area,
such as a particular street corner where there is
ongoing drug traffic. Using the guide, the officer may
contact the water bureau to turn off a water fountain,
the telephone company to restrict calls from a nearby
phone booth so that drug dealers cannot be
contacted at that site and city building inspectors to
condemn buildings or order a vacant lot cleared of
debris that had provided cover to drug users.
Working together, the police, the community and
other service providers help eliminate the factors
contributing to the problem (Austin and Sweet, 1992,
65).

In Richmond Virginia, law enforcement got together with crime

18

prevention specialists and other community based professionals to start a task
force on sexual assault. The YWCA is a community agency whose support was
extremely helpful in developing this task force. Representatives from the crisis
program at the YWCA were involved in training local law enforcement officers
and in working with others to research and affect the problem of rape and its
prevention. The Center for Public Affairs at Virginia Commonwealth University
provided administrative support and served as a sponsor (providing a place to
meet). Nearly 20 representatives from "law enforcement, security, environmental
health and safety, mental health, emergency hospitals, sexual assault crisis
centers, junior colleges and universities" (Hageman, 1990, 80) combined their
efforts to prepare for the opening session of a sexual assault workshop first
presented in Spring 1988. The closing session of the workshop was used to
develop a community-based resource network. As a result of this task force, the
concept of community agencies cooperating with police agencies in an attempt
to develop prevention strategies and education appears to be a viable alternative
to agency separation.

In 1987, the Reno Police Department (RPD) initiated a new community
policing strategy. As community policing took hold in Reno, community agencies
joined in to work with the police in an effort to rid the city of crime. One example
of the way in which an agency helped has to do with a local convenience store
which was a popular hangout for drug dealers. Pay phones were used by the

drug dealers to receive calls from drug users. The RPD in concert with the local

19

telephone company arranged for the phones to be programmed to receive no
incoming calls. At the very least, this displaced the problem from an area heavily
frequented by children (Bradshaw, Peak and Glensor, 1990).

Another example of community agency involvement in policing
provided by Bradshaw, Peak and Glensor (1990), is that of a neighborhood
group, police agency, and a city planning office that worked together and
identified a 19-acre, state-owned, parcel of land which was not in use. They
began negotiating for its purchase in the hopes of using it for a park for
neighborhood children who lived primarily in apartment buildings and had a high
need for recreational space. The city parks department allocated seven million
dollars to build a park. The city zoning department officials worked on revising
the city's master plan to allow a local boys club to construct a building on the
property. Thus, community agencies can work with the police in a multitude of
ways. These examples show how the police can work with community agencies
in an attempt to accomplish a specific goal, such as building a park for the city's
youth, relocating drug dealing activities, and opening a sexual assault center.

It is important to note that the police can also work with community
agencies toward more general goals such as education. Civic and government
institutions including churches and schools can work with the police toward
educating citizens about the often irreparable damage that drugs can do, as well
as teaching the city's youth to resist the temptation of drugs. Education need not

stop here. Alcohol abuse, sexual assault, crime prevention, etc., are all topics

20

which community police officers, working with community agencies, are
addressing in an effort to prevent crime.

Community policing agencies can work with the media in various ways.
One way is to keep the media updated on the results of police operations in
specific neighborhoods. The media in turn can keep the communities updated.
In recreating their police department to encompass community policing
strategies, the RPD created a media advisory group. "A new 'open press' policy
was developed and a public information officer appointed, allowing the media
access to one person who could communicate crime and community service
information" (Bradshaw, Peak and Glensor, 1990, 62). Trojanowicz (1992, 11)
points out that "Police administrators should use every opportunity to provide
information on community policing to the media". This includes holding press
conferences, inviting media representatives to walk the beat with community
police officers, issuing news releases on recognition and awards programs, etc.
The idea is not only to familiarize the community with the concept of community
policing, but also to let them know how they can get involved, and to keep them
updated on important activities.

To promote community policing in New York City, the Deputy Police
Commissioner for Public lnforrnation, noted that there would be a radio public
service campaign (James, 1991). Again, the police would be using the media,
though in a different format (radio), in an effort to familiarize the community with

the concept of community policing.

21

Brown (1992) suggests that the police could do more with the media
than working together in an effort to disperse information regarding community
policing in general and information regarding different projects within the
community which are relevant to policing. The media could be recruited to
become actively involved in the campaign against drugs and violence, though
this may require quite a bit of assertion on the part of police leaders.

Elected officials represent another group the police can work with in an
effort to prevent and control crime. Trojanowicz (1992) stresses the importance
of police administrators carefully explaining the tradeoffs implicit in community
policing to elected officials. Politicians and community officers should work
together on initiatives and share the acclaim, thus affording an incentive to the
politician. Trojanowicz (1992) warns that the community, not the politician
should set the priorities. Politicians whose jurisdiction is over a community,
which may just be beginning community policing, need to grasp why community
policing will improve the quality of life so they can explain the rationale to their
constituents. The police can help out by first explaining the rationale to the
politician.

In 1979, Mayor James Rutherford and Chief Max Durbin initiated the
Foot Patrol Program in Flint, Michigan. This is a prime example of an elected
official working with the police in a community policing effort. Without the
support of the community and of the mayor, this experimental program would

never have gotten off its feet (T rojanowicz, 1982). This is a major way in which

22

an elected official can become involved. As the trend toward more violent crime,
greater drug use, and an increase in gangs continues, more and more elected
officials are becoming involved with the police to prevent crime by supporting
community policing.

The most basic type of police/citizen involvement encouraged with
community policing is at the neighborhood level with citizens whose involvement
has nothing to do with community agencies, the media, or being an elected
official. The police department in Reno encourages police/citizen involvement
through a group called NAG. The department has a police captain supervising
each geographical area. In each area, the captains form and maintain a NAG,
which consists of concerned citizens who represent their geographical area. The
members periodically attend meetings with the area captain and other police
department representatives and discuss neighborhood problems and possible
strategies. Separate models have emerged due to the demographic diversity of
each area (Bradshaw, Peak and Glensor, 1990). This advisory group enables
citizens to become directly involved with the police and to provide input into
problem solving within their own neighborhoods.

Brown (1992) discusses the need for police-community partnerships.
He speaks in generalities, bringing up points which are found again and again
when looking at community policing. The police must form working partnerships
within the community in order to get to the root causes of crime, violence, and

fear. "Getting people involved in the community (policing) helps them to identify

23

and solve their own problems" (Brown, 1992, 3). The police, therefore, should
be permanent, highly visible fixtures in the neighborhood, known personally to
the people who live and work there. This, in turn, will help facilitate crime solving
and prevention.

The Madison Wisconsin Police Department has taken a specific step
toward developing police community partnerships by organizing community
focus groups and by conducting community feedback surveys (Couper and
Lobitz, 1991). Thus, an attempt is made to determine the needs of the
community, and a course is then set in an attempt to meet those needs.

Operation Cul-de-Sac (OCDS) (mentioned earlier in research question
1), started as an experiment in LAPD community policing (Vernon and Lasley,
1992). The program was implemented to examine the potential of community-
based policing to restore order within the most crime-ridden, inner-city
neighborhoods of Los Angeles. Among other things, the police wanted to study
the building processes for police/citizen partnerships.

During the first and last month of the operation, a random sample of
350 residents of the OCDS project area were asked to respond to the statement,
"I will do anything possible to work with the police to make my neighborhood a
better place to live." This question is referred to as a measurement of
partnership opinion. The greatest improvement in partnership opinion occurred
for those residents who believed that "officers cared about them as a person."

This was an 80 percent improvement rate. Next came improvement rate

24

regarding partnership opinion; polite officers, helpful officers, contacts in the
home and in the streets, contacts in the home, daily, weekly, and then monthly
personal contact with officers. The results of the research seem to show that
police/citizen contact in various frequencies and degrees of involvement do
increase the likelihood that a citizen "will do anything possible to work with the
police...". This also shows that police/citizen involvement need not be lengthy,
nor complex in order to be beneficial to a community policing agency and to the
community being policed.

Many community policing agencies initiate crime watch programs
which involve the community in reporting suspicious circumstances. The police
also educate citizens on how they can avoid becoming the victims of crime
(Goldstein, 1987). The possibilities and opportunities for police/citizen
involvement are endless. Though the different types of involvement can be split
into categories, and examples can be cited, the only true guide is the imagination
of the community policing agencies, the community police officers, and the
needs and resources of the communities.

The degree of involvement between the police and the citizens can be
influenced by the policies and practices of the particular police department. To
some extent, of course, the goal the department and community are working
toward will dictate the degree of involvement. The two projects mentioned in
Richmond, the sexual assault task force, and the project which involved

obtaining some land to be used by the neighborhood youth for recreation and

25

possibly a boys club, could not have been completed without the somewhat
extensive involvement of very specific community agencies.

The degree of media involvement depends in large part on the
attitudes of the local media and their willingness and incentive to become
involved, as well as on the initiative taken by the police department. The degree
of involvement of elected officials varies. The incentive for the elected official to
become involved-the perceived benefits for the official—would naturally influence
the degree to which helshe became involved. Mayor Rutherford of Flint,
Michigan, had the support of a great percentage of his constituency for his part
in the initiation of the Neighborhood Foot Patrol Program.

The daily opportunities for police/citizen involvement for the average
citizen can be influenced, on a more general basis, by the policies implemented
by the police department. Citizen groups that meet with the police to discuss
neighborhood problems, police prioritization, and problem solving can be initiated
as a matter of course by police departments practicing community policing. The
success of such citizen groups, as well as the success of Crime Watch and
educational programs initiated by the department, will depend for the large part
on the willingness of citizens to become involved with the police. This
willingness is determined, to some degree, by the manner in which the police
treat the citizens when interacting with them, and by the location and frequency
of police/citizen contact, as is indicated by the respondents to the survey

discussed by Brown (1992).

26

Trojanowicz (1990, 8) states that, as part of a departments
organizational strategy, "the department must permanently deploy a portion of its
patrol force as community officers in specified beats so they can maintain direct,
daily contact with average citizens." This increases the amount of contact the
citizens have with the officers and should increase the willingness on the part of
the citizens, to become involved in short and long term proactive efforts aimed at
the department's expanded mission.

Vernon and Lasley (1992, 18), mention that in "some communities, a
simple friendly gesture by a police officer may be enough to get the partnership
underway." Goldstein (1987, 6), mentions elements associated with the general
concept of community policing. Most common among these are the involvement
of the community in getting the police job done: the permanent assignment of
police officers to a neighborhood in order to cultivate better relationships..."
Here, Goldstein (1987, 6) lists permanent assignment of officers as one way to
improve relationships between citizens and police, which should in turn
encourage the involvement of the community in getting the police job done.
Again, repeated contact--a degree of involvement which occurs on a daily or
weekly basisuis recommended as an integral part of community policing.

The degree of involvement, in addition to the influence of
neighborhood specific goals, can include media involvement, political
involvement, and citizen groups, but can also be influenced by the police

department's mandate or policy regarding police/citizen contact. In addition to

27

permanent assignment of officers, the departments are implementing additional
foot patrol and motorcycle patrol in order to get the officers out on the street on a
regular basis, where they can more readily interact with the citizens in their
neighborhood. A specific aim of community policing is to encourage a high

degree of police/citizen involvement in a wide variety of areas.

Summary of Review of Literature

Community policing is becoming more and more widely practiced. The
literature reveals a variety of experimental programs which have been evaluated
and shown to have been successful, but also a variety of programs with a history
of success which are being implemented in various cities at once.

A great variety of service types have been reviewed in the literature, all
of which are focused on meeting the specific needs of a community. The service
types can be so community specific as to change from community to community
in order to meet specific needs.

Some evidence has been shown in the literature to indicate that a
community experiencing community policing will have a higher level of
satisfaction. This evidence is not extensive, though, and there is a need for
more research in this area.

The degree and type of police/citizen involvement which is provided by
a community policing force has been shown to be quite extensive. Almost every
sector of society, down to the single citizen, can become involved in working on
reducing crime with their police force. The degree of involvement can be
extremely varied depending on the needs of the community and on the

opportunity and interest of the citizens.

28

METHODOLOGY

The Department of Public Safety at Michigan State University began
practicing community policing in 1987. Prior to implementation, a survey was
distributed to the staff, faculty and students at Michigan State University,
identified as the community respondents. In 1992, a second survey instrument
was distributed to the respondents.

The research was qualitative, using a multi-variable survey. The
research instrument was a questionnaire. There were 18 questions in the survey
which was given in 1992, and 11 questions in the survey of 1987. Of the 18
questions on the 1992 survey, the first 11 were identical to the 11 questions of
the original survey 1987. The methodology, which will be discussed here, was
the same for both surveys.

The questionnaire consisted of open-ended and closed-ended
questions. Questions nine, 10, 11 and 18 were open-ended questions.
Questions one through eight and 12 through 17 were closed-ended. Three-
thousand-Mo-hundred questionnaires were hand delivered to the respondents
by police personnel working at the Department of Public Safety at Michigan State
University. The questionnaires had pre-addressed, stamped envelopes included
for the respondents' use.

Cluster sampling was used. The population consisted of the students,
faculty and staff at Michigan State University. The following clusters at Michigan

State University were chosen for the distribution of both the original survey and

29

30

the more recent survey of 1992:

- University Apartments (All apartments in Spartan Village)

- Brody Complex (Butterfield, Rather, Bryan, Armstrong, Bailey,
Emmons, Brody)

- West Circle Complex (erliams, Gilchrist, Yakeley, Landon, Campbell,
Mary Mayo)

- Office Buildings North of River (Farm Lane West, West and East Circle
Dr.)

- IM Sports Circle

- Olds Hall

- Library

- Administration Building

- Computer Center

- Music Building

- Museum

- Linton Hall

- Union

- Morell Hall

- Human Ecology

The instrument and the survey design were the same for both surveys.
The sample size was very nearly the same (904 responses for the first survey
and 854 for the second). The delivery and return were the same for both
surveys and the sampling design was the same for both. All respondents
remained anonymous for both. Using the same type of methodology for both
surveys enables more accurate comparisons of the results and thus, more

accurate analysis of these comparisons. Though this paper will only briefly

emphasize this comparison, all pertinent data is included for future analysis.

ANALYSIS OF DATA

Introduction

Data are divided into four sections. In the first section the data obtained
from both the 1987 survey and the 1992 survey will be presented. The data is
presented in tables. For both surveys, data for questions one through 11 are
presented together for ease of comparison. The data for questions 12 through
18 are presented using the same format as one through 11. The responses are
tabulated in the form of percentages. The variables of gender, role, residence,
and race/ethnic background, are respondent variables which are included in the
tabulation of results.

The second, third and fourth sections of data each include analysis. The
second section contains data relevant to the first research question, which is
included in the purpose of this study. The third section contains data relevant to
the second research question. The final section of data reflect responses
relevant to research question three.

The literature review which is relevant to sections two, three and four is

considered in the analysis following each presentation of data.

31

Comparison of Survey Results for the 1987 8. 1992 Surveys

All responses have been tabulated and are noted in the first column of
every table. Regarding the demographics of race, only the black, hispanic and
white races are tabulated separately as those races account for 82.3 percent of
the respondents. Only those response differences of five percent or more were
recorded for some of the subgroups in the 1987 survey, therefore, some of the
subgroup responses are not tabulated here on the tables depicting the 1987
responses. There is no discussion here regarding the subgroups, as this
division of respondents was not relevant to the analysis.

See Appendix A for a copy of the 1992 survey.

32

33

 

 

 

Table 1 - Respondent Preference for Public Safety Focus N=854

FocaI Area % % Gender % Role % Res. % Race

1992 Resp. Pref. M F Std. F ac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
gtu—al Assaults 90.2 83.4 94.4 88.7 90.7 92.0 89.0 92.3 95.0 100.0 92.3
Robberies 79.6 78.2 80.7 78.6 82.4 80.7 78.3 81.4 86.7 78.3 80.8
Burglaries 78.1 74.9 80.1 77.9 78.7 79.4 76.0 80.2 83.3 91.3 78.5
Property Destruction 68.6 64.5 71.0 64.1 72.2 74.2 62.8 74.5 66.7 78.3 73.1
Auto Theft 66.7 58.3 71.7 67.1 66.7 67.2 66.3 67.8 83.3 87.0 65.5
Office/Residence Thefts 60.3 55.0 63.4 60.1 63.9 61.3 59.9 61.4 53.3 60.9 61.9
Drug/Alcohol Enforcement 53.5 45.0 58.2 48.0 54.6 60.1 47.7 58.9 60.0 60.9 51.1
Theft of Car Parts 45.3 42.0 47.0 48.0 38.9 45.1 48.5 43.1 56.7 47.8 42.9
Moped/Bicycle Theft 41.9 38.4 43.7 47.0 46.3 35.6 46.7 38.4 48.3 34.8 39.4
Traffic Law Violations 26.5 25.7 26.8 22.9 27.8 29.8 25.0 28.5 26.7 17.4 23.9
Loud Parties 18.3 19.2 17.3 21.9 17.6 14.4 . 21.2 15.1 '1 3.3 13.0 14.5
Table 1A

1987

Sexual Assaults 95.1 85.4 95.2 96.8
Robberies 76.4 73.8 77.2 79.3 72.1 79.6 70.8 81.0 77.7
Burglaries 74.9 71.7 78.4 77.4 77.1 81.0 75.3
Property Destruction 62.7 59.3 65.5 57.3 69.8 64.2 54.6 67.5 60.4 47.6 63.8
Auto Theft 62.2 57.9 65.3 64.6 42.9 62.8
OfficelResidence Thefts 56.5 55.6 62.3 53.5 56.3 47.6 57.5
Drug/Alcohol Enforcement 50.6 45.7 53.8 40.2 53.7 58.2 42.5 55.6 56.3 76.2 50.3
Theft of Car Parts 38.1 36.0 35.8 41.6 39.6 33.3 37.5
Moped/Bicycle Theft 35.0 38.8 39.5 31.3 40.0 33.8

Traffic Law Violations 26.0 16.8 34.6 29.8 17.1 30.3 16.7 28.6 26.7
Loud Parties 16.9 15.0 25.9 15.1 8.3 28.6 16.7

 

34

The data in Table 1 indicate that the respondents are very concerned
about sexual assaults as well as robberies and burglaries. The data in Table 1A
indicate that the respondents were concerned most about the very same crimes.
While noting that the highest priority for Public Safety focus (sexual assault)
dropped about five percent between 1987 and 1992, the respondent preference
for focus on robberies, burglaries and property destruction increased around four
percent for each area. This could indicate some success on the part of the DPS
in dealing with sexual assault during those five years, showing that crimes
against the person are a higher priority for the DPS, as well as for the
respondents. The next highest priority areas (robberies, burglaries, etc), then,

receive greater focus.

35

 

 

 

Table 2 - Respondent Preference for Investigative Efforts N=854

Foca| Area ' % I % Gender % Role % Res. % Race
1992 Resp. Pref. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
filmm 94.5 92.5 95.7 93.7 94.4 96.0 93.6 96.0 95.0 91.3 96.0
Assaurtaeatlery 86.5 65.0 87.7 84.7 86.1 89.6 83.9 89.1 91.7 69.6 91.0
Destruction ofProperty 70.6 72.3 69.9 63.3 81.5 76.1 64.0 77.0 58.3 60.9 75.3
Child NegleotsAbuse 67.2 56.0 73.6 65.1 60.2 72.1 66.1 68.3 63.3 76.3 72.4
Drug/Alcohol Violations 50.9 46.5 52.2 44.7 56.5 56.1 43.9 57.9 56.7 47.6 48.2
Auto&Auto Parts Theft 47.0 53.1 43.3 53.0 46.3 40.5 52.3 42.3 61.7 56.5 42.6
Simple Theft 16.5 23.8 15.6 22.9 20.4 12.9 23.2 13.9 10.0 21.7 17.7
Moped/BicycleThelt 17.3 20.6 15.2 24.9 14.6 6.9 25.8 9.7 23.3 21.7 14.4
Concealing Stolen Property 15.6 17.9 14.5 18.3 7.4 14.7 18.1 12.9 11.7 6.7 13.5
CreditCrd Fraud/Chk Forg. 14.6 15.6 14.1 18.3 6.3 12.6 19.4 10.4 13.3 17.4 12.3
Table 2A

1987

Sexual Assault 98.2

Assault & Battery 89.1 85.4 95.2 89.7
Destruction of Property 76.4 73.4 80.4 76.6 72.9 65.7 76.4
Child Neglect&Abuse 67.9 61.1 71.4 66.7 81.0 66.4
Drug/Alcohol Violations 51.6 46.9 53.9 40.6 52.1 56.2 60.4 66.7 50.6
Auto&Auto Parts Theft 42.7 39.9 41.1 45.6 43.8 26.6 42.6
Simple Theft 22.6 727.7 19.7 16.7 9.5 22.8
CreditCrd Fraud/Chk Forg. 16.6 13.5 18.5 20.2 9.6 16.9 12.5 14.3 17.6
Moped/Bicycle Theft 15.8 423.6 14.1 9.5

Concealing Stolen Property 11.0 15.2 8.9 13.3 8.0 10.3 12.5 4.8 10.4

 

36

As shown in Table 2, the respondents are concerned primarily about
sexual assault, assault and battery, and then destruction of property. The data
in Table 2A indicate the same. This shows a primary concern with crimes
against the person, with property crimes coming second. Decreases in
respondent preference for investigative efforts are shown regarding crimes of
sexual assault , assault and battery , and destruction of property between 1987
and 1992, possibly indicating some success on the part of the DPS in handling
these areas of crime.

It is also interesting to note that a difference greater than ten percent is
shown on both tables 2 and 2A regarding the gender preference for
investigative efforts on the area of child neglect and abuse. Females put more

emphasis on this area than males.

37

 

 

Table 3 - Respondent Prioritization of Service Types =854

Service Types ' % %Gender '%"Role " ...... %Res. ""%"Race

1992 Resp. Pref. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
KhSexualAssault Prev. 75.2 67.4 79.9 77.6 73.1 73.6 77.0 74.0 66.7 78.3 76.9
Assist Stranded Motorists 72.8 66.4 76.6 66.8 70.4 81.6 65.8 80.0 66.7 56.5 61.0
lnv. All VehicleAccidents 69.2 67.1 70.6 61.1 81.5 75.5 61.2 76.5 66.3 65.2 72.6

Office/Res. Sec. Inspection 69.1 68.4 69.7 64.6 77.8 72.1 66.3 73.3 65.0 47.8 71.1
Teaching Crime Preventlorl 58.9 55.5 61.3 59.0 52.8 60.4 58.7 59.9 68.3 69.6 59.5
Check Welfare of 53.4 59.9 50.0 55.8 52.8 51.5 55.4 51.7 53.3 56.5 54.5
Deliver Emerg. Messages 44.3 45.0 43.9 51.3 35.2 39.3 51.0 38.1 36.7 17.4 44.0
Assist People Lckd Out Car 40.9 35.8 43.9 38.7 38.9 43.6 38.3 43.3 38.3 39.1 41.1
Help People Lckd Hem/Off 27.9 26.1 28.8 26.1 37.0 25.8 27.3 28.2 21.7 43.5 27.7

 

Home See. Chks for Vac. 24.6 36.2 16.2 38.4 16.7 9.6 36.8 10.9 31.7 34.6 16.8
Pick Up Found Property 17.8 21.6 15.6 26.1 9.3 1.3 25.0 10.6 15.0 8.7 16.8
Vehicle Safety Inspections 12.4 14.3 1.3 15.8 10.2 8.6 15.6 9.2 8.3 17.4 6.5
Table 3A

1987

Teach Sexual Assault Prev. 1
Assist Stranded Motorists A} I
lnv. All Vehicle Accidents
Office/Res. Sec. Inspection
Teaching Crime Prevention
Check Welfare of

Deliver Emerg. Messages 1,... p .3
Assist People Lckd Out Car ”- 13531"
Help People Lckd Ham/Off '12.}?
Home Sec. Chks for Vac.
Pick Up Found Property
Vehicle Safety Inspections

 

 

 

38

The data in Table 3 depicts the prioritization of service activities, the top
four are clustered together, with 69 percent or more mentioning teaching sexual
assault prevention programs, assisting stranded motorists, investigation of all
vehicle accidents, and providing office building/residence hall security
inspections. The data in Table 3A also shows 69 percent or more of the
respondents prioritization the same four service activities as depicted in Table 3.
A decrease is shown in respondent focus for the three highest areas of service
priorities (teaching sexual assault prevention programs, assisting stranded
motorists, and investigating all vehicle accidents) between 1987 and 1992.

This, again, could be due to some success on the part of the DPS.

Table 4 - Respondent Responsibility in Dealing with Crime N=854

 

 

Foca| Area I % Resp. % Gender 1 9%Role I % Res. i ' % Race

L92 Responsibil. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
Report Crime 94.5 94.8 94.6 94.5 97.2 94.2 93.6 95.8 95.0 91.3 96.0
Report Suspicious Activity 91.9 89.8 93.1 91.0 92.6 92.9 91.8 93.8 85.0 95.7 93.7

AssisthtimNeedlng Help 88.4 88.3 88.8 87.9 91.7 88.0 88.8 90.1 76.7 87.0 91.8
AssistOfflcerNeeding Help 77.0 78.5 76.6 78.6 75.9 74.5 79.1 77.0 60.0 82.6 78.9

 

Part. in Comm. Policing 49.6 47.9 51.1 45.5 47.2 55.5 46.4 54.0 40.0 56.5 52.1
Avoid Involve. with Wctim 5.4 4.6 5.9 7.8 3.7 2.8 7.4 3.2 5.0 13.0 3.1
Avoid Involve. with Police 4.4 5.2 3.9 6.0 4.6 2.8 5.6 2.2 5.0 8.7 3.2
Table 4A

1987

Report Crime 98.1

Report Suspicious Activity 94.2, _ , 90.5 96.4 90.0 96.4

Assist Victim Needing Help 9 _ 93.3 -

Assist Officer Needing Help . .- ' 81.2: , ‘

Part. in Comm. Policing 51.5 43.3 52.1 56.4 45.5 54.0
Avoid Involve. with Victim . 4.6 _

Avoid Involve. with Police ,,,2.2

 

39

The data in Table 4 indicate that the vast majority of respondents would
report crime and suspicious activity as well as assist victims and police. Just
about 50 percent would also participate in community policing programs. Table
4A shows remarkably similar results.

Off-campus residents Show a slightly higher feeling of responsibility to
report crime, report suspicious activity, assist a victim needing help, and
participate in community policing than on-campus residents. This is interesting
to note, as the on-campus residents are more a part of the community, and yet
they seem to feel less of a responsibility to participate with the police. Though,
as was mentioned, the difference between the on- and off-campus responses is
minor, less than three percent for the first three aforementioned areas, with a
larger difference of close to nine percent for the area regarding community

policing.

40

Table 5 - Respondent Prioritization of Services =854

 

 

 

Foca| Area '7 ‘% i i t % Gender 2 % Role ‘- 7 ' % Res. % Race

1992 Resp. Pref. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
mVehicle Patrol 28.9 30.3 28.4 26.1 27.8 34.0 28.1 31.7 13.3 26.1 31.6
Comm. Policing Foot Patrol 21.9 22.5 21.6 21.9 26.9 20.6 20.7 21.8 15.0 21.7 22.7
Inv. Citizen Complaints 19.1 19.9 18.8 18.3 22.2 19.0 17.1 20.3 28.3 13.0 20.0
Crime Prevention Programs 14.4 14.3 14.5 20.6 5.6 9.2 21.2 8.2 31.7 8.7 10.3
Drug/Alcohol Education 9.8 8.1 10.4 9.3 10.2 10.4 8.9 11.6 6.7 13.0 10.2
Canine Patrols 2.0 1.3 2.4 1.8 0.9 2.8 1.5 2.0 1.7 8.7 1.9
Table 5A

1987

Motor Vehicle Patrol 33.7, p iiiii

Comm. Policing Foot Patrol 22.3 p _

Inv. Citizen Complaints 317.1 .';..i 1'. 7,15f ;- '3'i‘1r:::-.; :15 j_'_;.
Crime Prevention Programs 11.0 I I A i H i h i i I .
Drug/Alcohol Education - 6.71 '

Canine Patrols 3.8 '

 

As is shown in Table 5, motor vehicle patrol ranks the highest in the first
priority ranking, with community policing foot patrols coming second.
Investigation of citizens complaint by a detective and crime prevention programs
rank third and fourth, consecutively. The data in Table 5A show the exact same
order of prioritization. The high interest in patrols reflects a high interest in a

service emphasized by community policing.

41

Table 6 - Respondent Victimization Rate N=854

 

 

 

Foca| Area % % Gender % Role 1 % Res. % Race

1992 Victims M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
VictimofCrime 19.0 20.2 18.2 21.6 25.9 13.8 20.9 15.6 18.7 8.7 21.0
Reported Crime _ 77.8 82.3 74.5 1.70.9 85.7 84.4 69.5 85.7 60.0 50.0 .. 79.2
Table 6A

1987

Wctimof Crime 19.8 23.5 18.0 22.4 23.4 16.9 26.3 16.6 20.8 4.8 20.7
Reported Crime ‘ 79.0

1 4

 

The data here for both Table 6 and 6A indicate that a little more than
three quarters of those who have been a victim of crime on campus have

reported the crime.

Table 7 - Respondent Comparison of the Department of Public Safety N=854

 

 

 

Focal Area ‘ % % Gender 17 % Role % Res. ' % Race
1992 Resp. Pref. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
9;; 51.2 44.6 55.0 53.8 44.4 51.2 51.5 50.5 38.3 39.1 53.9
Better 28.7 36.2 24.7 24.1 32.4 31.6 26.6 31.2 35.0 52.2 27.3
Worse 7.3 7.5 7.2 11.3 2.6 4.3 11.0 3.2 16.7 4.3 6.6
Table 7A

1987

Same V 55.4

Better 24.9 36.6 19.0 19.2 25.1 26.4 21.4 26.1 20.8 36.1 24.8
Worse g 9.3 . 16.1 7.2 5.7

 

The data in Table 7 show that the number of respondents that rated the

42

DPS better than other police departments with which they were familiar is Close
to four times greater than the number of respondents that rated the DPS as
being worse. The data in Table 7A Show that those that rated the DPS better
were close to three times greater than the number that rated the DPS as being
worse.

A greater percentage of the respondents rated the DPS as being better in
1992 than in 1987, and a smaller percentage of respondents rated the DPS as
being worse in 1992. This shows an increase in respondent satisfaction over

those five years, possibly due to the practice of community policing.

Table 8 - Respondent Familiarity with Campus Police Officer N=854

 

 

 

Focal Area % % Gender % Role % Res. % Race
1992 Resp. Fam. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
Don’t Know 62.3 61.2 63.2 71.4 74.1 48.5 70.2 54.5 50.0 65.2 60.5
Acquaintance 19.1 18.2 19.3 16.8 15.7 23.0 17.3 20.8 25.0 17.4 19.7
VeryWelI 11.1 14.3 9.3 5.0 7.4 19.3 5.6 16.8 16.7 8.7 12.3
Moderately 6.4 5.5 7.1 5.8 1.9 8.3 6.1 6.9 ’6.7 8.7 6.8
Table 8A

1987

Don't Know 70.00 60.8 74.5 81.5 74.3 60.9 78.3 66.4 64.60 81.00 69.80
Acquaintance 14.50

Very Well 8.60

Mmbmmw 550

 

The data from both Table 8 and 8A indicate that the majority of
respondents did not know any police officers. The data in Table 8, however,

Show a lower percent that do not know an officer than the data in Table 8A and

43

show a higher percent that are acquainted with an officer than the data in Table
8A. In 1992, then, the respondents Show more familiarity with the campus police

officers than they do in 1987. This is another goal of community policing.

44

Table 9 - Respondent Perceptions of the DPS Strengths N=524

 

 

 

 

Focal Area W % 0f
1 992 Comments Total
Response Time : 93* 1 i 17.7
Attributes/Qualities of the Personnel 69 13.2
Vlsibility . - 6.2 I 1 11.8
Professionalism . ' 60 1 1 .5
Service and helpfulness - ' 40 ;_ 3 7.6
Ticketing Parking Violators - I 30 : 5.7
Competency, Knowledge and Education -' 29 '- f ' 5.5
Patrols .. 29. ' 5.5
Resources 24 ' 4.6
Public Relations . 21 , 4.0
Campus Location . 19~ . ' 3.6
Crime Prevention '19 ' 3.6
Programs and Activities ' . '-§.,1»2- : ~ - ’ 2.3
Traffic Control 3 p "' 8 . _ 1.5
Emergency Telephones 3 =12; 3 '7' 0.6
Drunk Drivers ' ' '72 I. “ 0.4
Nothing .; :2" ': 0.4
Female/Minority Officers ' 1. i 0.2
Minority Relations 1 ... 0.2
Table 9A

1 987

Response Time 117 18.5
Attributes/Qualities of the Personnel 87 13.8
Visibility 63 10.0
Programs and Activities 60 9.5
Competency, Knowledge and Education 60 9.5
Ticketing Parking Violators 50 8.0
Service and Helpfulness 41 8.5
Patrols 39 6.2
Campus Location 31 4.9
Professionalism 28 4.4
Public Relations 15 2.4
Resources 15 2.4
Emergency Telephones 7 1.1
Drunk Drivers 5 0.7
New Director 4 0.6
Low Profile 4 0.6
The Survey 4 0.6
Female/Minority Officers 2 0.3

 

45

Regarding the data for Table 9, there were a total of 524 responses to this
question. Many respondents made more than one comment regarding a
perceived strength of the DPS. The comments have been placed in 19
categories, with the category having the most comments being number one and
the rest appearing in descending order. As there was some arbitrariness in
placing comments in a particular category categories two, five and seven have
some degree of overlap between them.

Regarding the data for Table 9A, there were a total of 632 responses to
this question. Many respondents made more than one comment regarding a
perceived strength of the DPS. These comments have been placed in 18
categories with the category with the most comments being placed in number
one and so forth. Here, there was also some arbitrariness in placing comments.

It is interesting to note that the same three areas—Response time,
Attributes/Qualities of the personnel and Visibility—were mentioned most
frequently on each table.

See Appendix B for more detailed responses.

46

Table 10 - Respondent Perception of the DPS Weaknesses N=475

 

 

   

 

 

Focal Area Numberof % of
1992 comments -. Total
Emigrants 106 22.3
Resources - Personnel Equipment 3. 33131569.:1131-1 - ' 14.5
Public Relations/Public Opinion - . 7 46. : ‘ ' 9.7

Traffic 00""0' :iff33f53l9ifiil'i-Esjfl 8-2

Priorities . 36 ‘ 7.6

Visibility .7 ' 732:2; -::-- 6.7

Attributes/Qualities of Personnel . f 29 C I 6.1

Minority Relations ..s;:;<;25-1:.fi2'}' 5.2

Foot patrol 16 I 3.4

Communication 1 _ 15 ‘ . 3.2

Response Time . . _- 14 i, 2.9

Patrols '75' 7 {9:213 - é ‘ i; . 2.7

Community Support “.5851: :’_* 1.7

Drug/Alcohol Enforcement and Education _' 1‘ 5 13.. 1.1

Attitudes of Motor Vehicle Officers _‘ 4 I 0.8

Keeping Community Peace :14 0.8

Sexual Assaults 4 . i 0.8

Lighting ' ~32: 0-6

Parking Space .‘ 3 1 ' 0.6

Everything , -; 2.. I . ' . 0.4

Emergency Phones ‘ 1 ' i i 0.2

Lack of Signs 1 0.2

Table 10A

1987 _

Parking Tickets "1763} _’ 26.6
Resources - Personnel Equipment 103 .1 ' 15.6
Vlsibillty . . 74;, 1 1.2
Negative Attitudes of Motor Vehicle oriicers 61 9.2

Public Relations/Public Opinion 55 ' , J 8.3

Sexual Assaults 46 7.0

Traffic Control 36 5.4

Foot Patrol 31 :1, 4.7

Communication 27 . 4.0

Response fime ‘ 20 - 3.0

Theft on Campus '8 1.2

Community Support 8 1.2

Drugs and Alcohol _,5 0.8

Minorities and Women 3 0.5

Lighting 3 0.5

Prejudice ’3 0.5

Emergency Phones ' 2 0.3

 

47

Regarding the data for Table 10, there were a total of 475 responses for
this question. Many respondents made more than one comment regarding a
perceived weakness of the DPS. The comments have been placed in 22
categories, with the category having the most comments being number one and
the rest appearing in descending order. As there was some arbitrariness in
placing comments in a particular category, categories seven, 10 and 15 have
some degree of overlap between them.

Regarding the data for Table 10A, there were a total of 661 responses to
this question. Many of the respondents made several comments regarding a
perceived weakness of the DPS. The comments have been placed in 17
categories with the category having the most comments being number one and
so forth. There was some arbitrariness in placing comments.

It is interesting to note here that Parking Tickets and resources-personnel
equipment were noted most frequently on each table.

See Appendix B for more detailed responses.

48

Table 11 - Respondent Recommendations for DPS Changes N=470

 

 

 

Focal Area _ _ _., _ V %of
1992 001111116 4 01:3 Total

 

Patrol 3 '71:}; 50 1 . 10.6
Crime Prevention 4a . 10.2
Public Relations/Public Opinion .{g-E.5"'§’l§f47;;f—2 I; ' 10.0
Parking Tickets 46 i ‘ 9.8
Foot Patrol 3:.4155.259225]-- 9.6
Resources - Personnel and Equipment 1 _ 43 9.1
Visibility . 36 f 6.0
Community Involvement ’ , 33 i 7.0
Lighting .1 31 6.6
Crime Prevention/Education 29 2 6.2
Traffic Control 9245:? 21 4.5
Minority Relations f f' 14 3.0
Dlal-a-Ride "51557155955; 1-1
Priorities 5;: a: i :.. 1.1
Attitude and Demeanor .-.-:-:?.:.-.- 3142.525 CI .- : .327: 0.9
. 0.9
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.2

0.2

Response Time

Pedestrian Rights

Survey

Drug/Alcohol Activities
Eliminate DPS

Less Drug/Alcohol Education

.-+ f-';+ ... .4 as

 

Table 1 1A

1987
Foot Patrols 130 19.0
Crime Prevention/Education . ,96 .. 14.0
Patrol 885135. ‘ 13.0
Parking 77 " '1‘; 11.2
Vlsibility 76 11.1
Resources 45 .. ,. 6.5
Public Relations :1 44 .'_-_;;;i I. 6.4
Traffic .36, 5.5
Attitudes/Demeanor 4" 29 4-2
Lighting :25'ij7ffifrjjj1j 3.7
Dial-a-Ride ”- 12 ' 1.8
Pedestrian Rights ~ 510 ' 1.5
Drug/Alcohol Activities 7' 1.0
Females and Minorities 7 1.0
Survey «:3. ‘ I. 0.4

3.

2

Eliminate DPS 0.4
Less Drug/Alcohol Education 0.2

 

49

Regarding Table 11, there were a total of 470 responses to this question.
Many respondents made more than one recommendation for a change in the
DPS. The comments have been placed in 21 categories, with the category
having the most comments being number one and so forth. As there was some
arbitrariness in placing comments in a particular category, categories two, seven
and 14 have some degree of overlap between them.

Regarding Table 11A, there were a total of 692 responses to this
question. Some of the respondents made more than one recommendation. The
recommendations have been placed in 17 categories with the category having
the most comments being number one and so forth. There was some
arbitrariness in placing comments in a particular category.

Patrols and Crime prevention received the majority of comments for each
table.

See Appendix B for more detailed responses.

Table 12 - Respondent Knowledge of Community Policing N=854

 

 

Foca| Area % Resp. % Gender % Role % Res. % Race

Egg Knowledge M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
Yes 46.7 47.9 46.1 47.5 37.0 49.7 48.0 46.0 61.7 52.2 48.9

Not Sure 34.5 31.3 36.8 32.2 41.7 35.3 32.9 36.6 23.3 13.0 34.2

No 16.9 19.5 15.2 18.8 20.4 12.6 17.6 15.1 15.0 34.8 15.2

 

The data on Table 12 indicates that the percentage of respondents who

know what community policing is, is greater then the percentage of respondents

50

who do not know what community policing is. About two-and-a-half times more

respondents are familiar with community policing than are not.

Table 13 - Respondent Preference for Police Responses N=854

 

 

Foca| Area % % Gender % Role % Res. % Race

1 992 Resp. Pref. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
m 50.2 45.0 53.7 56.8 34.3 47.2 57.4 44.8 61.7 56.5 46.6

Serious Calls 44.6 51.8 40.1 40.2 54.6 46.9 39.8 49.0 ‘ 36.7 43.5 48.1

 

The data on Table 13 shows that slightly (5.6%) more respondents feel it
is important for campus police to respond quickly to all types of calls (serious and
minor) as they occur as opposed to responding quickly only to serious calls,

thereby spending more time working at solving problems that contribute to crime.

Table 14 - Respondent Preference for Police/Citizen Involvement N=854

 

 

Focal Area % % Gender % Role % Res. % Race

1922 Resp. Pref. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
Citizens Involved 79.5 3 77.5 80.7 274.4 86.1 83.4 73.7 84.7 78.3 91.3 82.7

Police Working 16.4 19.2 14.9 22.6 10.2 11.3 23.0 10.4 18.3 8.7 13.1

 

Seventy-nine point five percent of the respondents indicate on Table 14
that they would prefer citizens to be regularly involved with the police officers in
there community as opposed to being involved with police officers solely when

the police officers respond to calls.

51

Table 15 - Respondent Perception Regarding DPS Officers Availability N=854

 

 

Foca| Area % % Gender % Role % Res. % Race

1992 Resp. Perc. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
mow 57.1 47.9 62.1 55.0 53.7 62.3 53.8 61.6 56.7 56.5 60.5
Yes 28.0 37.1 23.0 26.1 34.3 26.7 27.6 27.2 23.3 21.7 27.1
No 12.4 13.0 12.3 17.1 7.4 9.2 16.8 8.4 16.7 21.7 10.2

 

As the data in Table 15 indicate, 28 percent of the respondents felt that
the officers are readily available for minor concerns. A minority (12.4%) felt the

DPS was not readily available for minor concerns.

Table 16 - Respondent Perceptions Regarding DPS Oflicers Availability N=854

 

 

Foca| Area % % Gender % Role % Res. % Race

L92 Resp. Perc. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
Don't Know 51.2 46.3 53.7 47.7 62.0 52.1 47.4 55.4 40.0 47.8 53.2
Yes 41.1 47.9 37.5 43.5 29.6 42.3 45.0 47.8 45.0 47.8 40.5
No 5.4 4.2 6.1 7.3 4.6 3.1 7.1 3.5 . 10.0 4.3 4.4

 

The data on Table 16 indicate that 41.3 percent of the respondents think
the DPS responds adequately to emergencies and major concerns. A minority
(5.4%) felt the DPS does not respond adequately to major concerns.

Table 17 - Respondents Rate Department of Public Safety Effectiveness N=854

 

 

Focal Area % % Gender % Role % Res. % Race

L99; Resp. Pref. M F Std. Fac. Stf. On Off Black Hisp. White
Effective 48.5 46.3 49.6 46.2 44.4 51.2 46.9 50.2 38.3 47.8 50.2
Moderately Effective 24.1 22.8 24.7 30.2 19.4 19.6 28.3 19.8 33.3 17.4 21.8
Very Effective 12.8 16.6 10.8 10.8 15.7 13.8 12.0 13.6 15.0 13.0 13.9

Not Effective Enough 5.2 .62 4.6 6.3 5.6 4.0. 6.4 3.7 5.0 8.7 5.0

 

52

The data on Table 17 indicates that the majority of the respondents felt
that the DPS was effective in serving the university community. Only five point

two percent felt the DPS was not effective enough.

Table 18 - Respondent Recommendations to Improve DPS Effectiveness N=238

 

 

 

Focal Area W %of
1992 ; room‘rnonts _. Total
Cr-im_e Prevention A 34 . 14.2
Parking Tickets _ 33 , 13.9
Public Relations ; 28:.1  ,' 11.8
Visibility ,1 7:26.521? ” 10.9
Resources 1 I 13 t 7.6
Community Education   f 17 7.1
Patrols " 7' 16 ; _ 6.7
Foot Patrols ‘ .116; ~ 5 5.4
Community Involvement 77:11 h V 4.6
Traffic Control - .2 :9: 3.8
Response Time 8 3.4
Minority Relations 2 7 8‘ _- 3.4
Priorities ' ‘5 2.1
Lighting 7 '6 2.1
Dial-a-Ride ~3 1.3
More Drug/Alcohol Education 1 3 1.3
Attitudes/Demeanor 1 _ 0.4

 

Regarding Table 18, there were a total of 238 responses to this question.
Some of the respondents made several recommendations regarding ways the
DPS could improve their effectiveness. The recommendations have been placed
in 17 categories, with the category having the most comments being number one
and so forth. As there was some arbitrariness in placing comments in a

particular category, categories six, 13 and 16 have some degree of overlap

53

between them.
Crime prevention is mentioned most frequently as an area in which the
DPS could improve their effectiveness.

See Appendix B for more detailed responses.

Discussion of Research Questions

Research Question 1

Are the types of services the Michigan State University community prefers
commensurate with services that a community police force provides?

Questions one, two, three, five, 11, 13 and 18 are all pertinent to this
aspect of the study and the results from the questionnaire given in 1992 only, will
be discussed in this section of analysis.

The data in Tables 1 and 2 show that the respondents feel that much
attention should be given to crimes such as sexual assaults, assault and battery,
robberies, burglaries and property destruction. The literature does indicate that
community policing provides services which focus on the prevention of such
crimes. Programs initiated by the police such as "crime watch"1 help the
community work with the police to help prevent such crimes. Groups such as the
neighborhood advisory group (NAG)2 provide citizens with direct input into the
manner in which these crimes are addressed. Sexual assault prevention has
also been focused on by a task force which was put together in Reno, Nevada“.
These services which the community prefers are commensurate, therefore, with
services that a community police force provides.

The data in Table 3 indicate that the respondents chose teaching sexual

assault prevention programs, assisting stranded motorists, investigation of all

 

‘ Goldstein, 1987
2 Bradshaw, 1990
3 Hageman, 1990

55

vehicle accidents and providing office building/residence hall security inspections
as the most important types of public service oriented services. The literature
does show that these are the types of services which community policing
provides. Goldstein (1987) discusses how community police officers educate
citizens on how they can avoid becoming the victims of crime, this could include
sexual assault prevention programs The community Bradshaw (1990) mentions
in Nevada discusses various neighborhood problems with their community police
officers along with possible strategies. If a neighborhood chose, this could
include assisting stranded motorists, and investigation of all vehicle accidents as
well as security inspections. These community preferred services are services
that a community police force provides.

The data in Table 5 shows that the respondents chose patrolling as a
priority in servicing. Next came investigation, crime prevention programs and
education. The Operation Cul-de-Sac (OCDS)‘ practiced in California, certainly
shows the emphasis community policing puts on patrolling, as does the Foot
Patrol Experiment in Flint, Michigan5. The very nature of community policing
emphasizes investigation, as the officer who is in very close touch with the
members of the community and who is very familiar with the daily goings-on in
the community is constantly investigating anything out of the ordinary. It has
previously been illustrated that the literature shows that community policing is
suited to prioritization crime prevention programs and education. Again, the
services preferred by this community are commensurate with the services that a

" Vernon and Lasley, 1992
5 Trojanowicz, 1982

 

56

community police force provides.

The data in both questions 11 and 18 show that to improve the
effectiveness of the Department of Public Safety the respondents most frequent
recommendations include increasing patrols, emphasizing crime prevention,
improving public relations and increasing the visibility of the police. Increasing
patrols and increasing visibility tend to go hand in hand. Trojanowicz (1982)
emphasizes patrolling, as does Couper and Lobitz (1991), Brown (1992),
Bradshaw, Peak and Glensor (1990), Vernon and Lasley (1992) etc., as
increased patrolling is an integral part of community policing. As Vernon and
Lasley (1992) emphasize, the visibility of the police is crucial also in community
policing. Crime prevention is emphasized in community policing as a proactive
approach to policing as opposed to a the reactive approach of getting involved
only after the crime has been committed. This is demonstrated with the "crime
watch" programs and programs such as the sexual assault prevention program7
in Reno. Improved public relations should be a natural side effect of community
policing as the police work more and more with the community by increasing
their visibility, getting to know the members of the community, organizing
community groups to address certain problems which may be specific to that
community and actively seeking the input of the community members. The things
which the community suggested for increased effectiveness are areas of service
which are, therefore emphasized by community policing.

Forty-four percent of the respondents for Table 13 indicated that they feel

° Goldstein, 1987
7Hagaman, 1 990

 

57

it is more important for police to respond quickly only to serious calls, thereby
spending more time working at solving problems that contribute to crime. Fifty
percent of the respondents for Table 13 indicated that they feel it is most
important for the police to respond quickly to all types of calls (serious and minor)
as they occur. Response-time was not emphasized one way or the other in the
literature. Though, as community policing does encourage citizen input regarding
the policing of the community“, the community being policed could request a
voice on this issue. A voice for the community is a community policing type

service.

Research Question 2
Is the level of satisfaction of the Michigan State University community with

their police force related to the fact that their police practice community
policing?

Data from Tables 7, 9 and 10 showing the results from both the 1987
questionnaire and the 1992 questionnaire are pertinent to this question, as well
as data from Tables 16 and 17 showing the results from the 1992 survey.

The 1987 survey was taken just prior to the implementation of a
community policing program at Michigan State University. By the time the
survey was given in 1992, the community policing program had been in effect for
five years. As questions one through 11 are identical on each survey, the data

from these questions can be used for comparison purposes. By looking at the

 

l"Trojanowicz, 1 990; Bradshaw, 1 990

58

data from questions seven, nine and 10 we can see if, after the DPS has
practiced five years of community policing, the respondents respond differently
to these questions.

Question seven asks the respondents to rate the overall service of the
MSU Department of Public Safety compared to other police departments they
were familiar with. In Table 7A the data indicate that 24.9 percent of the
respondents rated the DPS better that other police departments they were
familiar with, and nine point three percent rated it worse. The data from Table 7
indicates that 28.7 percent of the respondents rated the DPS better than other
police departments they were familiar with, and seven point three percent rated it
worse. This shows a three point eight percent increase in the number of
respondents who rated the DPS better than other police departments and a two
percent decrease in the number of those who rated the DPS worse. Though the
percent of difference between the data on the two tables is small, the level of
satisfaction indicated by the community is higher after five years of community
policing have been practiced. As to whether or not this is due to the fact that
their police practice community policing or not is more difficult to tell. The data
from Tables 9, 9A and 10A give us an idea of what the respondents consider the
greatest strengths of the DPS to be and the greatest weaknesses of the DPS to
be. These can then by considered in relation to the type of policing emphasized
with community policing.

The data for Table 9 (1992) show that the four most frequent things the

59

respondents commented on as a strength of the DPS were response time,
attributes/qualities of the personnel, visibility and professionalism. The data for
Table 9A (1987) show the top four to be response time, attributes/qualities of the
personnel, visibility and programs and activities. As can be seen, the responses
were very similar for the 1987 and the 1992 survey. All categories are services
which were emphasized in community policing (T rojanowicz, 1982; Nichols,
1991; Worsnop, 1993; and Vernon and Lasley, 1992). This data does not show
a significant change in citizen response between the years 1987 and 1992. This
data does show that the areas of policing most frequently commented on as
strengths by these respondents are all areas of policing which are emphasized
with community policing. This would indicate that the high level of satisfaction
(Table 17) with the police force may be due, in part, to the fact that the police
practice community policing.

The data for Table 10 (1992) shows that the four most frequent things the
respondents commented on as a weakness of the DPS were parking tickets,
resources-personnel equipment, public relations/public opinion and traffic
control. The data for Table 10A (1987) show the top four to be parking tickets,
resources-personnel equipment, visibility and negative attitudes of motor vehicle
officers. The areas mentioned here that are particularly emphasized with
community policing are public relations/public opinion, Table 10, and visibility
and negative attitudes of motor vehicle officers, Table 10A. These areas,

however, were not number one or number two on the list. These perceived

60

weaknesses in things which are emphasized by community policing

(T rojanowicz, 1982; Hageman, 1990; Goldstein, 1987) were commented on here
by both the 1992 group (Table 10) and the 1987 group (Table 10A). Choosing
these areas as weak areas would indicate a desire for more emphasis on these
areas which are part of the community policing practice. If not for these
perceived weaknesses the satisfaction level may have been even higher.
Though it is interesting to note that the number one weakness indicated on both
tables is parking tickets, not an area emphasized by community policing.

Parking tickets received more than double the number of comments that either
public relations/public opinion or visibility did. The data from other questions (3,
5, 11, 13, and 18) shows that the respondents prefer services which are offered
by the practice of community policing. As the respondents prefer community
poling type services, and the two most frequently mentioned weaknesses are not
specifically community policing type services, this would indicate that the
respondent's high degree of satisfaction is due in large part to the practice of
community policing by the DPS.

The data on Table 16 indicates whether the respondents think the DPS
responds adequately to emergencies and major concerns. The majority (51.2%)
said they don't know. Forty-one point one percent stated that they DO think the
DPS responds adequately to emergencies and major concerns as opposed to
the five point four percent who don't. A high level of confidence that the police

will respond adequately to major concerns would, of course, show a high level of

61

satisfaction with their police force. Responding adequately to emergencies and
major concerns is emphasized by community policing (T rojanowicz 1990,
Worsnop 1993), thus the high level of satisfaction of the MSU community with
their police force is in part due to the fact that their police practice community
policing.

The data on Table 17 indicates how respondents rate the Department if
Public Safety in its effectiveness at serving the University community. A majority
49.9 percent of the respondents felt the DPS was effective in serving the
University community, as opposed to the six percent that felt the DPS was not
effective enough. This, in and of itself, does not indicate whether the level of
satisfaction of the Michigan State University community with their police force is
related to the fact that their police practice community policing. However, as
their police are practicing community policing and as there is a high satisfaction
level, it does appear as though the two are related. If the community were not
satisfied with community policing, they would not be satisfied with their police

force in general, since community policing is what they are receiving.

Research Question 3
Does the degree and type of police/citizen involvement which the Michigan

State University prefers correlate with the degree and type of police/citizen
involvement which is provided by a community policing force?

Data from Tables 4 and 14 from the 1992 survey is the data most relevant

62

to this question.

The survey respondents were asked to check items that they felt were
their responsibility, as a citizen, in dealing with crime. The vast majority of
respondents indicated that they would report crime and suspicious activity as
well as assist victims and police. Forty-nine point six percent would also
participate in community policing programs. Goldstein (1987) refers to citizens
reporting crime and suspicious activity as a specific part of a community policing
program, he mentions a "crime watch" program as one way to encourage a
community to help in this manner. Reporting crime, then, is a type of
police/citizen involvement encouraged with community policing.

Reporting crime and suspicious activity and assisting victims indicate a
more individual type of police/citizen involvement, which is a definite part of
community policing (T rojanowicz, 1982). Assisting police and participating in
community policing programs, however, opens up a type of police/citizen
involvement which can occur on a much larger scale. Citizens in general, as well
as elected officials and the citizens who make up community agencies
(T rojanowicz 1992) who assist police and participate in community policing
programs are also part of community policing. in Portland, Oregon (Austin and
Sweet, 1992) the police department made an agreement with citizens, business
owners and other service providers to share responsibility for solving community
problems. Here the citizens are both assisting the police and becoming involved

in community policing. The Sexual Assault Prevention Program in Reno,

63

Nevada (Hageman 1990) involves the citizens who run and work in all sorts of
agencies, in working with the police in a community policing effort to prevent
crime. The elected officials Mayor James Rutherford and Chief Max Durbin
helped initiate the Foot Patrol Program in Flint in 1979 (T rojanowicz 1982).
These are two elected officials who have certainly become involved in
community policing. Reporting crime and suspicious activity and assisting
victims (as checked by the MSU community) are definitely types of police/citizen
involvement encouraged by community policing, though these types of
involvement are of a individual nature.

The data in Table 14 indicates which of two degrees of police/citizen
involvement the respondents would prefer. Either police officers working to
decrease crime with police/citizen involvement occurring solely when police
respond to calls, or, citizens regularly involved with the police officers in their
community in an effort to decrease crime. A great majority (79.9%) of the
respondents, prefer citizens to be regularly involved with the police officers in
their community. This shows that the Michigan State University community
prefers to be involved with the police to a degree which does correlate with the
degree provided by community policing. Regular involvement with the police
officers is exactly what is encouraged by community policing (Goldstein, 1987;
Trojanowicz, 1990; Brown, 1992; Couper and Lobitz, 1991; and Vernon and
Lasley, 1992). Thus, the degree and type of police/citizen involvement the

Michigan State University community prefers does correlate with the degree and

64

type of police/citizen involvement which is provided by a community policing

force.

Summary of Analysis

The data here indicate that the types of services the MSU community
prefers are commensurate with services that a community police force provides.
The literature certainly indicates that the types of services preferred by the
community are types of services which are considered to be a included in the
community policing practice.

That the high level of satisfaction the MSU community has shown with
their police force (Table 7) is related to the fact that their police practice
community policing has been demonstrated. The literature indicates that certain
types of services are emphasized by community policing and the MSU
community has indicated (T ables 3, 5, 11, 13 and 18) that they prefer those
types of services. This, in conjunction with a high satisfaction rate indicates a
positive correlation between the satisfaction rate and the practice of community
policing.

The degree and type of police/citizen involvement preferred by the MSU
community does correlate with the degree and type of involvement provided by
a community policing force.

The analysis of all three of the questions addressed here, show a positive

response to community policing on the part of the MSU community.

65

CONCLUSIONS

This study consisted of two surveys which were administered to a sample
of the students, faculty and staff at Michigan State University. These surveys
were administered five years apart, one in 1987 and the other in 1992. The
primary focus is on the data obtained from the survey given in 1992.

The analysis of the data was used in three specific ways. The first was to
determine if the Michigan State University community prefers services which a
community police force provides. The second was to determine if the
community's satisfaction with their police force is related to the fact that their
police practice community policing. The third determination regarding the
analysis of data was whether the degree and type of police/citizen involvement
which the MSU community prefers, correlates with the degree and type of
police/citizen involvement which is provided by a community policing force.

In making these determinations, the data obtained from the surveys were
considered in relation to a review of literature regarding the practice of
community policing. Finally, an overall view of this analysis provides us with a
response of a campus community to the practice of community policing.

ln focusing on the three determinations mentioned above, the results of
this study indicate the following :

1. The types of services the Michigan State University community prefers

are commensurate with services that a community police force
provides.

66

67
2. The level of satisfaction of the Michigan State University community
with their police force, is related to the fact that their police practice
community policing.
3. The degree and type of police/citizen involvement which the Michigan
State University community prefers, correlates with the degree and type
of police/citizen involvement which is provided by a community policing
force.
The data indicate that the campus community has responded favorably to
community policing.

The results of this study help show that community policing is a type of
policing which can be successfully molded to meet the needs of a specific
community. Community policing is so versatile that every community, no matter
how unique, can benefit from it. The specific needs each community has for
different areas and different types of police involvement can best be met by a
police force which is specifically designed to determine those needs (with the
help of the community) and then to meet those needs using resources which are
available to the police force and the involved members and groups in the
community. It is not only the multitude of resources which can become available
to the police through the use of such a flexible and community based approach
which help the police meet the specific needs of each community, it is also the
flexibility of the policy makers within each department. This flexibility enables
them to develop policy designed to more directly meet the needs of the
community. Different communities benefit from different policies according to

their needs. Every community is inherently different from every other

community, thus, this type of policing, which redesigns itself from community to

68

community, is much needed.
The success enjoyed by the Department of Public Safety at Michigan
State University demonstrates the positive effects of community policing on an

unusual community. The police department has successfully designed itself to

meet the needs of this community.

RECOMMENDATIONS

These recommendations are based on the review of literature and the

analysis of data obtained from both questionnaires.

1. It is recommended that further research be undertaken to investigate any
correlation between policing style and community satisfaction. This could be
done to determine whether a certain policing style (community policing,
traditional policing, etc.) results in higher community satisfaction. Longitudinal
studies could be done of communities, beginning before the implementation
of community policing within a community, and continue on to include a study
of the community's satisfaction after having experienced community policing.
In investigating any correlation between policing style and community
satisfaction, one survey instrument could be given to a city which is
experiencing community policing in one half and a more traditional style of
policing in the other.

2. It is recommended that campus police departments investigate the specific
needs of the community being serviced and develop a policing style which is
"custom made" to meet those needs. The experiences of other campus police
departments should be reviewed and used as an aid in policy making.

3. It is recommend that studies be done comparing the campus community to the
non-campus community in relation to their policing needs. This type of study
would be helpful because of the different needs of the college community. To
help ensure that geographical area is not a differentiating factor, one could
study a college along with the city in which it is located, for example:
University of Michigan compared to Ann Arbor; University of Iowa compared to
Iowa City; Michigan State University compared to East Lansing; and so forth.

A community police force on a campus would differ from a community
police force in a city in a number of ways. The campus police force would
more likely have all of the officers involved in community policing. Due in part,
to the smaller size of a campus force, the entire force could operate under the
philosophy of community policing. A city force is more likely to have some
officers designated as community policing officers, while others operate under
a more traditional style of policing. The transient nature of the campus
community necessitates another difference between a campus community
police force and a city community police force. The educational programs are
more repetitive on campus, as each year there is a significant number of new
community members. Also, the training of various community groups

69

(community watch, etc.) must occur more frequently than in a city, as the
groups are constantly changing members.

As campuses have a greater incidence of property crimes, sexual assault
and drug related offenses, the campus police concentrate on meeting these
needs, which are somewhat different from the needs of a city community. A
city community would have a greater need for maintaining peace and quality
of life for families, children and the elderly and would have a greater emphasis
on organizing activities forjuveniles and on business security. By looking at
the policing needs of the campus community as compared to those of the city
community a community policing design could be better developed to
specifically meet the needs of a campus community.

70

APPENDICES

Appendix A

Survey Instrument

71

In an ongoing assessment of the Commity Policing program, the Department of Ptblic Safety is
conchcting an anonymous survey of University residents and erlployees. The information you provide
by coupleting this survey will be helpful in assessing the current Cormutity Policing program and in
determining what you, as residents and airployees, feel are irrportant priorities for the Department
of Ptblic Safety. Therefore, your views concerning the following questions are of utmost
iirportance. Rernerrber, your responses are corrpletely anonymous. You indicate your volmtary
agreement to participate by coripleting and returning this questionnaire. Please answer each
question carefully and return the questionnaire in the enclosed envelope through interdepartmental
carrpus mail by Monday, March 2, 1992.

For analysis purposes, please answer the following:
Are you D female
CI male

that is your primary role at M.S.U.? (Choose only one)
0 student
0 faculty
D staff
Cl other, specify

00 you reside on carrpus? CI Yes Cl No

What is your racial/ethnic background?
CI Black/African American
0 Hispanic
Cl Hhite
D Native American
CI Asian Pacific
CI Other, specify

 

It is generally recognized that the police through random patrol can discourage the following types
of criminal activities from being committed. which would you like to see your police concentrate
their efforts on?

Check one answer only for each item:
1 2 3
Much Attention Sometimes Little Attention
1. How such priority should the police give to:

Burglaries ............. D D D
Property Destruction.. . CI CI 0
Auto Theft. ............ Cl CI Cl
Traffic Law Violations. C] D D
Robberies .............. Cl C] D
Office/Residences Theft CI CI CI
Sexual Assaults ........ D D D
Theft of Car Parts ..... CI CI CI
Loud Parties ........... Cl Cl C]
Moped/Bicycle Theft.... Cl C] D
Drug/Alcohol Enforcement 0 Cl C]

72

2. On which of the following crimes that are emitted do you think the Department of Public Safety
should concentrate their investigative efforts toward solving? Choose only five (5).

0000000000

Simple Theft

Assault and Battery

Credit Card Fraud and Check Forgery
Sexual Assault

Moped/Bicycle Theft

Malicious Destruction of Property
Concealing Stolen Property

Auto and Auto Parts Theft
Drug/Alcohol Violations

Child Neglect and Abuse

3. The following is a list of service types of activities performed by the Department of Public
Safety. which of these do you feel are the MOST IMPORTANT? Choose only six (6).

DDUDDDDDDUUU

Pick up found property

Home security checks for vacationers

Assist people locked out of their cars
Investigation of all vehicle accidents

Deliver emergency messages

Vehicle safety inspections

Office building/residence halls security inspections
Teaching crime prevention

Teaching sexual assault prevention programs
Checking the welfare of residents

Assisting people locked out of their homes or offices
Assisting stranded motorists

4. Hhat is your responsibility as a citizen in relation to dealing with crime? Check all that apply.

C)
C]
C]

Avoiding involvement with victim
Assist victim needing help
Report suspicious activity

C] Avoiding involvement with police

CJ

Reporting crime

C1 Assisting police officers needing help

C]

Participating in Community Policing programs

5. Keeping in mind that there are limited resources, please rank the following services. ( 1 will be
your top priority and 6 will be your lowest priority. )
Motor vehicle patrol

C]
E]
E3

Community Policing foot patrols
Investigations of citizen's complaints by detectives
Crime Prevention programs

EJ Drug and alcohol education and enforcement

E3

Canine patrols

73

6. Here you the victim of a crime on campus?
C] Yes
C] No

If yes, what was the crime?

Did you report it to the Department of Public Safety?
E] Yes
E] No

7. Now would you rate the overall service of the MSU Department of Public Safety compared to other
police departments you know?

E] Better
E] Same
C] Horse

8. How well do you PERSONALLY know a campus police officer?
D Very well, on a first name basis
E] Moderately well
C] Acquaintance only
C] Do not know any

9. What do you consider the GREATEST STRENGTHS of the Department of Public safety?

10. what do you consider the GREATEST HEAKNESSES of the Department of Public Safety?

11. what changes would you recommend to the Department of Public safety in order to improve the
public safety of the University community?

12. Do you know what Community Policing is?
E] Yes
E] No
D I'm not sure

13. which is more important for campus police?
C] Quick response to all types of calls ( serious and minor ) as they occur.

C] To respond quickly only to serious calls thereby spending more time working at solving
problems that contribute to crime.

74

14. Different styles of policing require different degrees of citizen involvement. Of the two
degrees of citizen involvement mentioned below, which would you prefer?

C] Police officers working to decrease crime with police/citizen involvement occurring solely
when police respond to cells.

C] Citizens regularly involved with the police officers in their community in an effort to
decrease crime.

15. Do you think that Department of Public Safety officers are readily available for minor concerns
( e.g., assisting stranded motorists, assisting people looked out of their homes or offices, picking
up found property, home security checks for vacationers...)?

C] Yes
E] No
D I don't know

16. Do you think that the Department of Public Safety responds adequately to emergencies and major
concerns (e.g., robberies, sexual assaults, assault and battery, auto theft...)?

E3 Yes
C] No
C] I don‘t know

17. Overall, how do you rate the Department of Public Safety in their effectiveness at serving the
University community?

C] Very effective

C] Effective

C] Moderately effective

E3 Not effective enough

18. If you feel that the Department is not meeting the needs of the University Community, please
indicate what you think the Department needs to do in an attempt to be more effective.

Now that you have completed this questionnaire, please enclose it in the envelope and mail it by
interdepartmental mail on Campus by Monday, March 2, 1992.

The results of the survey will be publicly available through the Department of Public Safety. Thank
you for your cooperation.

Appendix B

Responses to Open Ended Questions from the 1992 Survey

Question 9
What are the greatest strengths of the Department of Public Safety?

There were a total of 524 responses to this question. Some of the 854
respondents did not make comments. Of those that did respond, many made
more than one comment.

The comments have been placed in 19 categories, with the category
having the most comments being number one and the rest appearing in
descending order.

1. Response Time
A total of 93 comments related to quick response time. Statements such
as, "fast response time, quick to respond, quick response to crime
reporting, available, always respond, speedy," were typical.

2. Attributes/Qualities of the Personnel
Sixty-nine (69) comments related to the positive attributes and qualities of
the personnel. The personnel were described as being polite and
reasonable, concerned, willing to follow through, committed, well
educated, calm, cooperative, friendly, open, and diplomatic. It was
mentioned that they seem to be non-judgmental and that they seem
concerned with minor as well as serious complaints.

3. Visibility
There were 62 comments about the high visibility of DPS officers. Such
comments included, "They're everywherel, appear to be everywhere, very
visible, seen a lot, a real presence, always around". Positive comments
were also made about the apparent availability of the officers due to their
high rate of visibility.

4. Professionalism
There were 60 comments about the professionalism displayed by the DPS
officers. The respondents primarily referred to the officers as being
"professional" or "very professional". Some respondents included
comments regarding the high education level of the officers.

75

 

76

5. Service and Helpfulness
There were 40 comments which related to the service and helpfulness of
the DPS. Included with such comments were, "willingness to work with
our office, caring individuals, helpfulness in circumstances, willing to help".
The respondents mentioned the officers "genuine interest" in "helping the
community".

6. Ticketing Parking Violators
There were 30 comments regarding ticketing parking violators. Some of
the comments praised the uses the money goes to. Many were
appreciative of the effort to protect designated parking for those it was
designated for. It was mentioned that the DPS was so good at giving out
parking tickets, that they must spend all their time doing it. On the whole,
however, the comments were positive.

7. Competency, Knowledge, and Education
There were 29 comments about the competency, knowledge and
education of the officers. The educational level of the officers was
frequently mentioned. As well, was their efficiency in handling a variety of
situations. Intelligence and competency were mentioned, as well as
communication skills.

8. Patrols
Twenty-nine (29) people commented on frequent patrolling by the DPS.
The majority commented on the motor patrols. Many also commented on
the canine patrols, with a very few comments regarding foot patrols.

9. Resources
Twenty-four (24) comments related to resources. Many of these
comments focused on the number of personnel, while a very few
mentioned the police cars as being a positive resource.

10. Public Relations
Twenty-one respondents commented on public relations. These
respondents mentioned the various communications the DPS made with
the University community, and the projected attitude of caring and
interest.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

77

Campus Location
There were 19 comments on the location of the Department of Public
Safety. The respondents commented on how the close proximity to the
DPS seemed to help provide for a real feeling of community involvement
with the police. It was mentioned that this also allowed for a quicker
response by officers and more personalized service.

Crime Prevention
Nineteen (19) comments were made praising the effectiveness of the
Department of Public Safety in preventing crime. Effort was also praised,
with mention of officers "following through".

Programs and Activities
Twelve (12) comments were made regarding programs and activities.
Most of the comments referred to educational programs on topics such as
drugs and alcohol, sexual assault prevention, and security.

Traffic Control
Eight (8) comments were made regarding the effectiveness of the
Department of Public Safety in controlling traffic. Speeding was the
primary violation addressed.

Emergency Telephones
Three (3) commentors mentioned emergency telephones, stating that they
were well located and increased ones feeling of safety.

Drunk Drivers
There were 2 comments regarding the Department of Public Safety's
ability to deal well with drunk drivers.

Nothing
Two (2) respondents mentioned that the Department of Public Safety had
no strengths.

Female/Minority Officers
One (1) respondent mentioned the positive effects of having minority
officers.

78

19. Minority Relations
One (1) comment was made regarding the officers diplomacy in dealing
with minorities.

Question 10

What Do You Consider the Greatest Weaknesses of the Department of
Public Safety To Be?

There were a total of 475 responses to this question. Some of the 854
respondents did not make comments. Of those that did respond, many made
more than one comment.

The comments have been placed in 22 categories, with the category
having the most comments being number one and the rest appearing in
descending order.

1. Parking Tickets
One hundred and six (106) people commented about parking tickets. This
category has the largest number of negative responses and included
comments such as, "tendency to focus on minor violations - eg. parking
tickets, their obsession for giving tickets for parking and ‘minor’ violations,
too much emphasis on parking tickets". The general slant was that this
was something the DPS did to excess and that their time would be better
spent on "real crime" and crime prevention.

2. Resources/Personnel Equipment
There were 69 comments regarding resources/personnel equipment.
Most frequently mentioned was the number of officers, which were
considered to be too few. These comments included, "not enough officers,
not enough to go around, too few officers". There were minimal
responses regarding equipment.

3. Public Relations/Public Opinion
There were 46 comments for this category. It was mentioned that the DPS
needed to put out more newsletters and to notify the community through
the State News of such things as, services provided by the DPS, ways in
which the DPS is involved with the community, educational programs
provided by the DPS. It was also mentioned that the DPS should make
an attempt to be seen as doing something other than handing out parking
tickets.

79

80

4. Traffic Control
Thirty-nine (39) people commented on lack of traffic control. Mention was
made primarily of too much speeding going on, "inadequate enforcement
of speeding (auto) on campus". Rush hour was also mentioned as
presenting a traffic problem, and some mention was made of unregulated
bike traffic.

5. Priorities
Thirty-six (36) comments were made regarding the priorities displayed by
the DPS. A few of the commentors mentioned that ticketing parked cars
should be less of a priority and crime prevention should be a higher
priority. Mention was also made regarding the safety and security on
campus and recommending that they should be higher on the priority list.

6. Visibility
Thirty-two (32) respondents commented on low visibility of the DPS
officers. Many comments were made suggesting more night patrols and
more foot patrols, as well as more building checks and patrols.

7. Attributes/Qualities of Personnel
There were 29 comments on the Attributes/Qualities of the personnel.
Commentors mentioned that they felt a "lack of support" from the officers
toward the community, and that the officers sometimes seemed unfriendly
and inflexible.

8. Minority Relations
Twenty-five (25) comments were made regarding minority relations.
Actual criticisms were not made so much as suggestions. Mention was
made of the officers needing to learn more about minority relations and
just in general to work on and improve relations and attitudes toward all
minority groups.

9. Foot Patrol

Sixteen (16) comments were made on the weakness of the DPS foot
patrol. Too little night foot patrol was mentioned as well as too little foot
patrol in general.

81

10. Communication
There were 25 comments criticizing DPS communication with the campus
community. Mention was made that the DPS didn't understand the
students and that the officers tended to prejudge and that they tended not
to listen.

11. Response Time
Fourteen (14) comments were made regarding the response of the DPS
officers. Primarily, mention was made that they didn't seem to respond
quickly to minor complaints, "not fast in responding to minor complaints,
like parties".

12. Patrols
Thirteen (13) comments were made regarding patrols. Mention was made
of there not being enough night patrols and "not enough patrol on parking
lots".

13. Community Support
Eight (8) comments were made mentioning community support as a
weakness of the DPS. Some of these commentors felt the officers didn't
involve themselves with community problems, such as wild children in
Spartan village and domestic problems.

14. Drug and Alcohol Enforcement and Education
Five (5) comments were made saying there wasn't enough drug and
alcohol enforcement and education.

15. Attitudes of Motor Vehicle Officers
Four (4) comments mentioned negative attitudes of motor vehicle officers.

16. Keeping Community Peace
Four (4) comments were made stating a greater need for "crowd control"
and noise control.

17. Sexual Assaults
There were 4 comments suggesting rape prevention education and more
avid investigation of sexual assaults.

82

18. Lighting
Three (3) commentors mentioned that there wasn't enough lighting on
campus.

19. Parking Space
Three (3) commentors pointed out a lack of parking space on campus.

20. Everything
Two (2) commentors mentioned that everything was a weakness.

21. Emergency Phones
There was 1 comment stating that there were not enough emergency
phones.

22. Lack of Signs
One (1) commentor mentioned a lack of signs.

Question 1 1

What changes would you recommend to the Department of Public Safety in
order to improve the public safety of the University community?

There were a total of 470 responses to this question. Some of the 854
respondents did not make comments. Of those that did respond, many made
more than one comment.

The comments have been placed in 21 categories, with the category
having the most comments being number one and the rest appearing in
descending order.

1. Crime Prevention/Education
Seventy-seven (77) people suggested increasing the crime prevention
efforts of the DPS. These respondents were concerned with security in
general, building security, and "security on the parking ramps". Also with
safety and night safety - a main concern being with sexual assaults.
Many suggested "more prevention programs", more programs on sexual
assault, self-defense, property theft and drug and alcohol abuse.
Newsletters and such, suggesting safety and security tips were also
suggested.

2. Patrol

There were 50 comments regarding patrols. More patrols were
suggested. As well as motor patrols, many respondents suggested more
motorcycle patrol, bike patrol, and night patrols. There was much
emphasis on night patrols to increase student safety.

3. Public Relations/Public Opinion
Forty-seven (47) respondents suggested the DPS improve their public
image through more community involvement and through newsletters,
pamphlets and the State News. It was also suggested that the DPS
inform the community of what it is exactly that they do.

4. Parking Tickets

There were 47 recommendations regarding ticketing parked cars.
Suggestions such as, "stop wasting time with parking tickets", and "don't
emphasize so much on parking tickets" were common. Most comments

83

34

referred to reducing the emphasis on ticketing. It was also suggested the
money received from ticketing be obtained elsewhere.

5. Foot Patrol
Forty-five (45) comments were made suggesting "more foot patrols".
Much emphasis was on having more foot patrols at night for safety
purposes, especially around frequently used buildings, parking ramps, etc.
It was also suggested that more foot patrol in general would encourage
community involvement and interaction and give the officers more of a
feel for the community at large.

6. Resources/Personnel Equipment
There were 43 comments suggesting a change in the resources and
personnel equipment of the DPS. There were many suggestions to
increase the number of emergency phones on campus. There were also
suggestions to "increase numbers" of officers. These are the main
categories in which changes were suggested. Also included were
"surveillance cameras" and an introduction of "auxiliary or cadet corps".

7. Visibility
There were 38 comments suggesting the DPS increase their visibility. It
was suggested that this be done by increasing the number of all types of
patrols and by the officers walking through buildings more frequently.

8. Community Involvement
Thirty-three (33) recommendations were made to increase community
involvement. It was suggested that the officers have "more contact with
the community" and "more interaction with students".

9. Lighting
Thirty-one (31) respondents recommended "better light" in general, as
well as "better lighting in parking ramps and better lighting in parking lots".

10. Crime Prevention/Education
Twenty-nine (29) respondents suggested the DPS concentrate on
"security on the parking ramp" and more foot patrol lighting, etc., to
prevent sexual assault. Also suggested were "more prevention
programs", including drug prevention, assault prevention & security and

85

safety information.

11. Traffic Control
There were 21 responses regarding traffic control. Most were concerned
with speeding problems.

12. Minority Relations
Fourteen (14) respondents suggested the DPS improve their minority
relations, though it was not made clear as to how it should be done.

13. Dial-a-Ride
Five (5) comments were made recommending expanding the Dial-a-Ride
program.

14. Priorities
Five (5) comments were made suggesting the DPS change their priorities.
It was suggested parking be de-emphasized and safety and crime
prevention be emphasized.

1 5. Attitude\Demeanor
Four (4) recommendations were made suggesting the DPS work on
having a more friendly attitude.

16. Response Time
Four (4) recommendations were given suggesting the DPS work on "quick
response to crime reporting".

17. Pedestrian Rights
Three (3) respondents suggested that pedestrians should have more
rights.

1 8. Survey
One (1) respondent mentioned "surveys, trade demonstrations".

19. Drug/Alcohol Activities
One (1) respondent mentioned putting more emphasis on drug/alcohol
activities.

86

20. Eliminate DPS
One (1) respondent suggested eliminating the DPS.

21. Less Drug/Alcohol Education
One (1) respondent suggested less drug/alcohol education

Question 18

If you feel that the Department is not meeting the needs of the University
Community, please indicate what you think the Department needs to do in
an attempt to be more effective.

This question asked respondents to indicate what they think the
department needs to do in an attempt to be more effective.

There were a total of 238 responses to this question. Some of the 854
respondents did not make comments; others made several comments.

The comments have been placed in 17 categories, with the category
having the most comments being number one and the rest appearing in
descending order.

1. Crime Prevention
Thirty-four (34) respondents mentioned emphasis on crime prevention.
Respondents mentioned that the DPS should "keep [their] eyes open to
crime" and "have more night security everywhere on campus". The
greatest emphasis seemed to be on night security.

2. Parking Tickets
Thirty-three (33) comments related to parking tickets. It was strongly
suggested that the DPS spend less time ticketing.

3. Public Relations
There were 28 comments suggesting the DPS improve their public
relations. It was suggested this could be done through media usage and
through improving the friendliness of officers.

4. Visibility
Twenty-six (26) respondents suggested the DPS increase the visibility of
the officers. It was mentioned that this could be done through an increase
in motor patrols, foot patrols and building checks.

5. Resources
Eighteen (18) respondents suggested the DPS increase their resources.
Most of these suggested the DPS "increase staff" and hire "more
personnel".

87

88

6. Community Education
Seventeen (17) respondents suggested an increase in community
education with an emphasis on sexual assault prevention.

7. Patrols

Sixteen (16) respondents suggested more frequent patrols by motor
vehicle personnel.

8. Foot Patrol
Thirteen (13) respondents suggested more foot patrols. It was also
suggested that the DPS "put more officers in buildings".

9. Community Involvement

There were 11 responses regarding community involvement. One
respondent wrote "I like the idea of community policing". This seemed to
be the consensus among these respondents.

10. Traffic Control
Nine (9) respondents suggested an increase in traffic control.

11. Response Time

Eight (8) respondents suggested the DPS increase their response time.
One respondent commented "Please react as soon as you can to
emergency callsl".

12. Minority Relations

Eight (8) respondents suggested the DPS work on improving their
relations with minorities.

13. Priorities

Five (5) respondents suggested the DPS change their priorities. Again, it
was suggested more emphasis be put on crime prevention.

14. Lighting
Five (5) respondents suggested the DPS improve the lighting on campus.

89

15. Dial-a-Ride
Three (3) respondents suggested the DPS expand the Dial-a-Ride
programs.

16. More Drug/Alcohol Education

Three (3) respondents suggested the DPS increase their number of
drug/alcohol education programs.

17. Attitudes/Demeanor

One (1) respondent suggested an improvement in the attitudes of the
officers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Austin, Sergeant D. and Sweet, Carroll. 1992. Information and referral efforts
extend department's reach. W. pp. 65-66

Blumenthal, Ralph. 1992. Brown says community policing will endure. Ihehlew
Iorklimes. 141 PB4(L). col 1

Bradshaw, Robert V., Peak, Ken, and Ronald W. Glensor. 1990. Community
policing enhances Reno's image. W. 57 No. 10, pp. 61-65

Brown, Lee P. 1992. Building support for community policing. IbeJiBLLaw
Enfomementfiulletin. 61 No. 5. PP- 2-5

Couper, David C., and Sabine Lobitz. 1991. The customer is always right. Ihe
EQJIQLQIJIBI. 58 No. 5, pp. 16-23

Cox, John F. 1992. Small departments and community policing. W
EntommenLBulletin. 61 No. 12. PP- 1-4

Field, Mark W. 1990. Evaluating police services through citizen surveys. Ina
M. 57 No. 10, pp. 69-72

Fulwood, Isaac, Jr. 1990. Community empowerment policing. W.
57 No. 5, pp. 49-50

Goldstein, Herman. 1987. Toward community-oriented policing: Potential, basic
requirements, and threshold questions. Cameandjelinguency. 33 No.1,pp.6-30

90

91

Hageman, Mary Jeanette. 1990. Crime prevention and the phenomenological
approach. W. 57 No. 10, pp. 76-86

Hartmann, Francis X. Brown, Lee P. and Darrel Stephenson. 1988. Community
WW Charles Stewart Mott Foundation.

Holloway, Lynette. 1993. Walking the beat on mean street: Tough

neighborhoods put community policing to the test. Mm. 142
Sec. 1, p27(L), col 2

Home, Peter. 1991. Notjust old wine in new bottles. W. 58 No. 5,
pp. 24-29

Jackson, Eric. 1992. Campus police embrace community-based approach. Ihe

8211915211131. 59 No. 12. PP. 63-64

James, George. 1991. On foot and twirling a night stick, via Madison Avenue.
W515- 141 9310-). 00' 2

Mitchell, Helen Buss. 1992. Police/community relations: A non-traditional training
approach. W. 59 No. 12, pp. 58-61

Nichols, Warren R. 1991. Putting our best foot fonivard. W. 58 No.
5! pp- 31'35

Riechers, Lisa M. and Roy R. Roberg. 1990. Community policing. Acritical

review of underlying assumptions. .LQumaLQLEQliceficienceandAdmmistLanon
17 No.2, pp. 105114

92

Skolnick, J. H. and Bayley, D. H. 1986. Me. New York: Free
Press

Terry, Don. 1992. Difficult balancing act of watching the police. Iheflewlork
limes. 142 pA10(N) pA16(L), col 1

Trojanowicz, Robert C. 1992. Building support for community policing. Ihe_EB_l
LamEntomementBulletin. 61 No. 5. PP- 7-13

Trojanowicz, Robert C. 1990. Community policing is not police-community

relations. IheEBlLaMLEntQLcemenLBulIe-fln. 59 No. 10. PP- 6-11

TrOIanowicz RobertC 1982 ammmmneueignmmmmmm
WW. Charles Stewart Mott Foundation.

Trojanowicz,RobertC.1989. WW
EQJIQIDQADDLQth. Charles Stewart Mott Foundation.

Trojanowicz, RobertC. and HazelA. Harden. 1985. 1111813111101
Wm. Charles Stewart Mott Foundation.

Vernon, Rupert L. and James R. Lasley. 1992. Police/Citizen partnership in the
inner city. IbeEBLLaMLEnthcemenLBulls-‘rtin. 61 No. 5. PP- 18-22

WIIHamS. Jerry and Ron Sloan. 1990.Iurntng_0_0n9e01_lnto_ELactice._Ihe_Aumta.
mm. Charles Stewart Mott Foundation.

93

Wolff, Craig. 1992. Brown legacy: Community policing. W.
141 pB2(L), col 1

Wolff, Craig. 1992. To teach new policing, a new kind of teacher. W
11m. 142 pB1b(L), col 5

Worsnop, Richard L. 1993. Current situation. MW 3 No.
5, pp. 10-11

Worsnop, Richard L. 1993. Is community policing the best answer to the nation's

crime problem? WW. 3 No. 5, pp. 99-103

 

llllllllllllllllljilillllillll“

 

1774