@article{ref1,
title="Community policing grows in Brooklyn: An inside view of the New York City Police Department's model precinct",
journal="Crime and delinquency",
year="1994",
author="Pate, Antony M. and Shtull, Penny",
volume="40",
number="3",
pages="384-410",
abstract="VioLit summary: OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study by Pate and Shtull was to examine the structure and operations of a community policing program in Brooklyn, New York, in addition to evaluating attitudes and impressions of police officers concerning community policing.METHODOLOGY:This study was quasi-experimental in design. This article utilized information from an earlier study conducted in 1984. The New York Police Department implemented a community policing program in the 72nd precinct of Brooklyn called the Community Patrol Officer Program. The program involved police officers who were assigned to foot patrol in a specific neighborhood. The officers acquainted themselves with their assigned neighborhood, and were taught how to recognize and deal with problems with crime and maintaining order. The department later executed a fully staffed paradigm of a community policing precinct. Under this model, areas that worked very well in addition to problematic areas were identified. This article summarized the attitudes and behavior of the officers involved with the program.The study utilized a variety of methods in data collection. Some of these methods included interviews, observation, and analysis of official records. An evaluator interviewed and observed 147 police officers (almost 75% of the total population) involved with the community policing program from January to December 1992. In addition, officials were interviewed concerning issues such as goals, the structuring of the project, and future planning. Participation existed on a voluntary and confidential basis.FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:It was found that officers generally possessed a favorable attitude towards the model precinct. Some of the main reasons cited for approving of the new program were greater independence, having the opportunity to take initiative, and more flexible hours. In addition, the problem-solving mechanisms, such as team meetings and the precinct management team, were facilitated by the program. However, the attempt to integrate officers in problem solving did not have as much success, because the number of calls to officers as compared with calls to &quot;regular&quot; police officers were not reduced. Thus, with the new program, the officers still did not have more time available to work on fewer problems. Also, involvement with other units, such as detectives and narcotics was limited. In addition, officers were unsuccessful in becoming crime prevention specialists under the model project.It was also found that regular police officers resented Special Operations Unit Officers, because the regular officers felt that their colleagues were not doing their fair share of the work load. The Special Operations Unit (SOU) focused their tasks primarily on problem-solving, while the regular officers remained inundated with a high number of phone calls from citizens. In return, the SOU officers felt that the regular police officers could neither appreciate or understand the level of complexity involved in the work they did.(CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)New YorkCommunity PolicingPolice InterventionPolice PreventionPolice PerceptionsLaw Enforcement PreventionLaw Enforcement InterventionAdult PerceptionsAdult AttitudesIntervention ProgramPrevention ProgramCommunity BasedCommunity CrimeCrime InterventionCrime PreventionNeighborhood BasedNeighborhood Crime05-05<p />",
language="en",
issn="0011-1287",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}