My da|ra Login

Detailed view

metadata language: English

National Survey of Community Policing Strategies Update, 1997, and Modified 1992-1993 Data

Version
v0
Resource Type
Dataset : survey data
Creator
  • Rosenthal, Arlen M. (Opinion Research Corporation (ORC) Macro International, Inc.)
  • Fridell, Lorie (Police Executive Research Forum)
Other Title
  • Archival Version (Subtitle)
Publication Date
2003-01-23
Funding Reference
  • United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice
Language
English
Free Keywords
community policing; crime rates; law enforcement agencies; police community relations; police citizen interactions; police training
Description
  • Abstract

    In September of 1991, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) awarded the Police Foundation a grant to conduct a national survey on the extent to which community policing had been adopted by law enforcement agencies across the country. The study, conducted in 1992-1993, was designed to provide information on what was occurring and what needed to occur in the development and implementation of community policing. The study sought to determine how community policing was operationally defined and how it differed from traditional forms of policing. In 1997, ORC Macro International, Inc., and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) conducted a longitudinal follow-up to the previous survey. The 1997 study was designed to provide information on the most current practices and trends in community policing. The survey was based on the survey administered by the Police Foundation in 1992-1993. Parts 1 and 2 of this data collection consist of the quantitative responses by chief executives and police agencies, respectively, to the 1997 survey administered to a nationally representative sample of police agencies. The same survey instrument was also administered to a second sample of chief executives (Part 3) and police agencies (Part 4) that received at least one grant from the Community Oriented Policing Service (COPS) office of the United States Department of Justice. This second sample was designed to supplement the first sample in order to adequately represent police agencies that were involved in community policing. Part 5 consists of the police agency survey data gathered by the Police Foundation in 1992-1993 and reanalyzed by the principal investigators of this study. Part 6 contains the qualitative open-ended responses to questions selected from the 1997 Police Agency Survey (Part 2). Variables in Parts 1 and 3 include whether the top executive was elected or appointed, whether the executive mandated community policing, executive opinions about community policing, the impact of community policing, who should be responsible for conducting community policing, and what influenced the decision to implement community policing. Information is also available on the type of agency represented in the survey and its regional location. Parts 2, 4, and 5 include information about the types of resources that agencies utilized in their approach to law enforcement, organizational programs and practices, the agencies' current situation with respect to community policing, when community policing was implemented, types of administrative policies that had been implemented with respect to community policing, types of training officers received, written policies concerning police interactions with government agencies and citizens, new legislation passed to support community policing, the effects of community policing, types of organizational arrangements in place, specific duties of patrol officers, special units, and civilian personnel, specific responsibilities of captains, lieutenants, and sergeants, types of citizen participation in community policing, numbers of various types of personnel, population of jurisdiction, and type of jurisdiction served. In addition, Parts 2 and 4 contain crime rates for police jurisdictions for murder, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Part 6 contains open-ended responses from the 1997 Police Agency Survey (Part 2) to questions about resources used in the agency's approach to law enforcement, specific types of officer training, specific written policies concerning community policing, lessons learned in the process of making changes in policies or practices, and additional comments to the survey.
  • Abstract

    An increasing number of police and sheriffs' departments have implemented formal community policing procedures in an effort to improve public safety and the overall quality of life in their communities. Although the law enforcement agencies share a common goal, many different strategies are employed to achieve this goal. In September of 1991, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) awarded the Police Foundation a grant to conduct a national survey on the extent to which community policing had been adopted by law enforcement agencies across the country. The study, conducted in 1992-1993, was designed to provide information on what was occurring and what needed to occur in the development and implementation of community policing. The study sought to determine how community policing was operationally defined and how it differed from traditional forms of policing. In 1997, ORC Macro International, Inc., and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) conducted a longitudinal follow-up to the previous survey. The 1997 study was designed to provide information on the most current practices and trends in community policing.
  • Abstract

    Questionnaire development was a collaborative effort among NIJ, PERF, and Macro staff and consultants. The survey was based on the survey administered by the Police Foundation in 1992-1993. The major changes made to the instrument were: (1) it was modified to capture data regarding civilian personnel, (2) it was redesigned to focus on existing strategies, with less emphasis on planned approaches, (3) it was modified to include a comprehensive section on officer training, and (4) it was designed in a more user-friendly format. Topics covered on the survey included: (1) executive views, (2) organizational programs and practices, (3) organization's experience with community policing, (4) organizational arrangements, (5) patrol officer, deputy, and civilian personnel responsibilities, (6) authority and responsibility of managers and supervisors of field operations, (7) citizen participation, (8) organizational characteristics, and (9) other approaches. To maximize response rates and minimize nonresponse bias, the survey employed a multi-phase approach, which included using the United States Postal Service, facsimile transmissions, and telephone contacts. Completed surveys were scanned via optical-character- recognition technology. Quality control measures were instituted to ensure that the scanned data file matched the questionnaire completed by each respondent. Surveys were also checked to ensure logical consistency. Parts 1 and 2 of this data collection consist of the quantitative responses by chief executives and police agencies, respectively, to the 1997 survey administered to a nationally representative sample of police agencies. The same survey instrument was also administered to a second sample of chief executives (Part 3) and police agencies (Part 4) that received at least one grant from the Community Oriented Policing Service (COPS) office of the United States Department of Justice. This second sample was designed to supplement the first sample in order to adequately represent police agencies that were involved in community policing. Part 5 consists of the police agency survey data gathered by the Police Foundation in 1992-1993 and reanalyzed by the principal investigators of this study. Part 6 contains the qualitative open-ended responses to questions selected from the 1997 Police Agency Survey (Part 2).
  • Abstract

    Variables in Parts 1 and 3 include whether the top executive was elected or appointed, whether the executive mandated community policing, executive opinions about community policing, the impact of community policing, who should be responsible for conducting community policing, and what influenced the decision to implement community policing. Information is also available on the type of agency represented in the survey and its regional location. Parts 2, 4, and 5 include information about the types of resources that agencies utilized in their approach to law enforcement, organizational programs and practices, the agencies' current situation with respect to community policing, when community policing was implemented, types of administrative policies that had been implemented with respect to community policing, types of training officers received, written policies concerning police interactions with government agencies and citizens, new legislation passed to support community policing, the effects of community policing, types of organizational arrangements in place, specific duties of patrol officers, special units, and civilian personnel, specific responsibilities of captains, lieutenants, and sergeants, types of citizen participation in community policing, numbers of various types of personnel, population of jurisdiction, and type of jurisdiction served. In addition, Parts 2 and 4 contain crime rates for police jurisdictions for murder, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Part 6 contains open-ended responses from the 1997 Police Agency Survey (Part 2) to questions about resources used in the agency's approach to law enforcement, specific types of officer training, specific written policies concerning community policing, lessons learned in the process of making changes in policies or practices, and additional comments to the survey.
  • Methods

    ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Standardized missing values.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes..
  • Methods

    Presence of Common Scales: Several Likert-type scales were used in Parts 1-5.
  • Methods

    Response Rates: Parts 1, 2, and 6: 74.7 percent, Parts 3 and 4: 73.2 percent, Part 5: 71.3 percent
  • Table of Contents

    Datasets:

    • DS0: Study-Level Files
    • DS1: 1997 Chief Executive Survey Data
    • DS2: 1997 Police Agency Survey Data
    • DS3: 1997 Chief Executive COPS Supplement Survey Data
    • DS4: 1997 Police Agency COPS Supplement Survey Data
    • DS5: 1992-1993 Police Agency Survey Data
    • DS6: Open-Ended Responses to 1997 Police Agency Survey Data
Geographic Coverage
  • United States
Sampled Universe
Law enforcement agencies in the United States.
Sampling
Stratified random sampling.
Collection Mode
  • (1) The original survey of police agencies conducted by the Police Foundation is the NATIONAL SURVEY OF COMMUNITY POLICING STRATEGIES, 1992-1993 (ICPSR 6485). Users should read the codebook notes provided in the PDF documentation for this data collection to understand how the data in Part 5 of this study differ from ICPSR 6485. (2) The user guide, codebook, and data collection instruments are provided by ICPSR as Portable Document Format (PDF) files. The PDF file format was developed by Adobe Systems Incorporated and can be accessed using PDF reader software, such as the Adobe Acrobat Reader. Information on how to obtain a copy of the Acrobat Reader is provided on the ICPSR Web site.

Note
Funding insitution(s): United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (96-IJ-CX-0045).
Availability
Not available
This study is currently unavailable.
Alternative Identifiers
  • 3367 (Type: ICPSR Study Number)
Relations
  • Is previous version of
    DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR03367.v1
Publications
  • Burruss, George W., Giblin, Matthew J.. Modeling isomorphism on policing innovation: The role of institutional pressures in adopting community-oriented policing. Crime and Delinquency.60, (3), 331-355.2014.
    • ID: 10.1177/0011128709340225 (DOI)
  • United States Government Accountability Office (GAO). Community Policing Grants: COPS Grants Were a Modest Contributor to Declines in Crime in the 1990's. Washington, DC: GAO. 2005.
    • ID: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06104.pdf (URL)
  • Maguire, Edward R.. Multiwave establishment surveys of police organizations. Justice Research and Policy.4, 39-60.2002.
    • ID: 10.3818/JRP.4.1.2002.39 (DOI)
  • Rosenthal, Arlen M., Fridell, Lorie A., Dantzker, Mark L., Fisher-Stewart, Gayle, Saavedra, Pedro J., Markaryan, Tigran, Bennett, Sadie. Community Policing: 1997 National Survey Update of Police and Sheriffs' Departments, Final Report. NCJ 187693, Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. 2000.
    • ID: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/187693.pdf (URL)

Update Metadata: 2015-08-05 | Issue Number: 6 | Registration Date: 2015-06-15

Rosenthal, Arlen M.; Fridell, Lorie (2003): National Survey of Community Policing Strategies Update, 1997, and Modified 1992-1993 Data. Archival Version. Version: v0. ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03367