Many have asked the questions of where to purchase the CompStat computer software application and others wanting to know where is this ‘computer’ in their current facility to allow them to have the same success in crime reduction as other police departments over the years. (Godown, 2009)
It’s clear that many have a misinterpretation about the CompStat process and its solicitation to crime-fighting efforts. The reality is, there is no state-of-the-art computer equipped with this ‘special’ program. In fact, it’s about adopting a state of mind that police really would like to reduce crime. CompStat is not the quick fix to solving crimes but rather a process of organized problem solving that, when the CompStat meetings are conducted properly, new crime strategies are announced, established and shared. This process unifies all members and unites of the department towards a common goal decrease crime rates.
CompStat, short for “Computer Comparison Statistics,” is a “management process within a functioning of organization structure that synthesizes analysis of crime and disorder data, strategic problem solving, and a clear accountability structure.” (What is compstat?) In a perfect world, CompStat collects accurate and timely analysis of crime and disorder data, which in hand helps identify crime patterns and problems.
These four core elements of CompStat are: accurate and timely intelligence, effective tactics, rapid deployment, and lastly relentless follow-up and assessment. Accurate and Timely Intelligence is defined as simple as know what is happening. Official sources such as calls for service, crime, and arrest data are relied heavily on crime intelligence. This data should be as accurate as possible and accessible as close to r...
... middle of paper ...
...tinctive locations. It is vital for crime analysis to catch these particular flaws or else this would weaken or contaminate later analyses causing the CompStat process to be unsuccessful along with statics. (Exploring crime analysis:, 2008 pg.117)
CompStat is not the quick fix to solving crimes but rather a process of organized problem solving that, when the CompStat meetings are conducted properly, new crime strategies are announced, established and shared. This process unifies all members and unites of the department towards a common goal decrease crime rates. In the Compstat process it is vital for Crime Analysis to ensure all data is input correctly because such particular flaws and weaknesses might contaminate later analyses. Data integrity is very vital when establishing a report because without reliable data, there cannot be any reliable analytical reports.
Crime data is a resource being used to help understand who the victims are, their age, race, what type of crime they have committed. The more information someone has about crime the more prepared they can be to deal with the victim, evaluate programs that help prevent crime. There are several official sources used UCR, NCVS, NIBRS that are used. There are pros and cons to each source and the following information will include some of the positive and some of the negatives points of each report. This is not inclusive by any means, there are many different various pros and cons of each report.
This information comes from the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR). The Uniform Crime Reporting technique was established in 1930, by the FBI. Crime was something that was very hard to keep track of. The FBI started this technique to keep track of crimes that are happening in our nation. Police use uniform crime reporting for their data. Some police departments or officers are required to focus on one specific area and crime. The most popular crimes all deal with drugs. CompSTAT help to map these crimes so that police officers know what geographical location to pay the most attention to. CompSTAT is the most popular technique for police departments to use. When they collect the data of crimes, they take this information and they start to evaluate and create techniques on how to stop or prevent this crime from happening again. According to Police Executive Research forum, “Compstat changed how police view crime problems. Instead of merely responding to crimes after they are committed, police fundamentally expanded their mission to include preventing crimes from happening in the first place” (Compstat: Its Origins, Evolution, and Future In Law Enforcement Agencies, 9). After collecting data for crime mapping the next step is for them to analyze the
The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is information that is gathered by the U.S Census Bureau. Unlike UCR this information is not given by law enforcement officials, but by a household survey that is conducted about twice a year. When the survey is being commenced they place the crimes into two different categories; person crimes and property crimes. NCVS has four objectives when obtaining information; “(1) to develop detailed information about the victims and consequences of crime, (2) to estimate the number and types of crimes not reported to the police, (3) to provide uniform measures of selected typed of crimes, and (4) to permit comparisons over time and types of areas.” (NACJD)
According to Kelling, Pate, Dieckman, & Brown (1974), patrol is the “backbone” of police work. This belief is based around the premise that the mere presence of police officers on patrol prohibits criminal activity. Despite increasing budgets and the availability of more officers on the streets, crime rates still rose with the expanding metropolitan populations (Kelling et al., 1974). A one year experiment to determine the effectiveness of routine preventive patrol would be conducted, beginning on the first day of October 1972, and ending on the last day of September 1973.
The exclusion of crimes such as, fraud and homicide means results are not correctly demonstrated (ONS, 2013).
Compstat has improved policing ever since it was introduced in the 1990s. Compstat is a system that is used by police agencies to reduce crime as well as achieving other departmental goals. Some of department goals are developing good relationship with the community as well as empowering commanders together with their subordinates. It focuses on sharing information, responsibility, fostering accountability, as well as improving tactics used to solve crime. Although, it has also been criticized for been incompatible with the community, inflexible and undermining some goals of policing, it is still acknowledged as an important organizational development in policing during the latter half of the 20th century (BJA, police executive research forum, compstat, 2010).
One of those programs is the New York Police Department’s CompStat. The New York Police Department’s CompStat made a profound impact on troubled neighborhoods in New York. This program was first was introduced Officer Jack Maple and was implemented in the New York Police Department under police commissioner William Bratton (Manning, 2013). According to Manning (2013), the New York Police Department’s CompStat is a computer program that analyzes crime data and combines it with problem solving technologies to identify crime patterns and problems. CompStat embraces the targeted maps of areas with high criminal activity and uses criminal reports and cases to focus on reducing crime in those areas, Because of its implementation, the program helped reduce various percentages of crime including murder rates and subway crimes. Law enforcement agencies around the world are now introducing their own versions of CompStat to decrease crime rates and reduce social disorganization within certain
The effective reduction of crime and quality of life abatement is of prime importance in the COMPSTAT model is and is one of the four core principles in the COMPSTAT paradigm. This essay will examine the impact that the implementation of COMPSTAT has had, specifically the process of Data-Driven Problem Identification and Assessment, and model it against the Newark Police Dept., New Jersey, USA. In doing so it will determine what changes in strategy, structure and operations have taken place as a result of the implementation process.
The development of the network analysis assisted CPD in identifying not as much “hot spots” as “hot people” or individuals who were most likely to be involved in violent gun related crimes. That finding was transforming the way the police did business in Chicago and had significant implications for how other cities are able to identify violent crimes and attempt to prevent
The Uniform Crime Report also allows us to geographically see crimes spread over the United States. Where certain crimes are committed, who is committing them, and when they are most likely committed. These trends allow for federal and local law enforcement to predict where patrolling may need to be more prevalent or allow criminal profilers to be able to speculate what type of person is a possible suspect for a certa...
Targeting and identifying crime conducive conditions and coordinating with Commanders to develop techniques to prevent loss of equipment or funds will serve as a Combat Multiplier (CID195-1). Both the findings and observations will assist the supported commander in deterring and reducing crime within his command and control. CID’s current role with respect to Crime Prevention Surveys can also be bolstered for future improvement. Coordinated efforts with subject matter experts should be the main focus when determining the scope of the crime prevention surveys. These actions will assist Commanders to preserve their resources and promote good order and discipline within their
The New York Police Department has structured some information technology applications to help optimize their firm performance in reducing crime versus patrols in the street. Some of the implications involved in the information systems are input, processing, output and feedback. Computer Statistics (COMPSTAT) uses Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to help police respond to crimes faster. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threat analysis (SWOT analysis), are evaluated in the predictive policing. All of these subject matters will be discussed in this paper.
The author focuses on the U.S. Task Force on 21st Century Policing and Police Data Initiative or PDI to determine if it helps to restore trust and the broken relationship between and communities and police officers. The Task Force made by Barack Obama recommended the analysis of department policies, incidents of misconduct, recent stops and arrests, and demographics of the officers. The PDI has tasked 21 cities to comprehend the police behavior and find out what to do to change it. Also PDI was said to have data and information on vehicle stops and shootings by police officers. The use of statistics has a purpose to help rebuild trust and the relationship between and communities and police officers.
Crime Analysis has many benefits to the community. Community engagement, targeted initiatives, strategic use of resources, and data-driven decision-making contribute to decreasing crime. Crime prevention and community satisfaction with police services, while linked to the number of officers on the streets, does not depend entirely on the visibility of patrol officers. Community engagement, targeted initiatives, strategic use of resources, and data-driven decision-making contribute to decreasing crime. So in closing I believe that departments that take the positive elements of foot patrols and combine their efforts with crime analysis that focuses on the time, location, and type of crime, may use the findings to develop strategies to decrease crime and enhance the quality of life in their communities.
The police records crime reported by the public in 43 police force areas and provides these data to the Home Office and for their Basic Command Units. These data provide a wealth of statistical information on recorded crime rates and possibly identify long-term trends in recorded crime rates. Due to such data collecting process, how crime being reported by the victims or witnesses and recorded by the police may affect the accuracy of such official statistics. Thus, however, the main drawbacks of this kind of statistics are excluding crimes that are not discovered, reported or recorded. Firstly, some criminal activities are not witnessed or discovered then not recorded officially by the police. According to Croall (1998), a crime being counted officially should be perceived and recognised by a member of the public, a victim or law enforcement officers. For example, white –collar crimes such as fraud or misuse of expense accounts may not be discovered easily. Therefore, crimes that are not be seen may be uncounted in the official crime