A Manual for
the Establishment and Operation
of a Foot Patrol Program

Robert C. Trojanowicz, Ph.D.
Paul R. Smyth, Ph.D.

The National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center
School of Criminal Justice,
Michigan State University
East Lansing

This publication was made possible by a grant from the Charles Stewart Mott foundation to the School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University. The information contained herein represents the views and conclusions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Mott Foundation, its trustees, or officers.

Copyright 1984 The National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center

In addition to conducting research and offering academic classes, the Center provides two services which will interest police administrators and citizens who would like to know more about foot patrol:

• Foot Patrol Training Seminars are offered at Michigan State University twice a year. The Center provides lodging, meals, and the seminar at no charge.
• Center staff and police officers with wide experience in foot patrol are available to conduct technical assistance visits to communities planning a foot patrol program. This assistance is offered at no charge to the communities.

The National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center
School of Criminal Justice
560 Baker Hall
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824-1118

Telephone: (517) 355-2322
Toll Free: 1 (800) 892-9051

We are indebted to the Flint Police Department for its continued cooperation and aid. Chief Max Durbin, Deputy Chief Bruce Benson, Lieutenant Robert McFadden, and Sergeants John Benthall, Kenneth Burns, Gerald Dickenson, and Arthur Evans were a rich source of practical information on running a successful foot patrol program.

Robert Baldwin and Jesse Thompson deserve special mention for their valuable comments on personnel selection and training and community service agencies, respectively. Special thanks also to Hazel Harden for the coordination of this project and to Maryellen Geyer for her work preparing the typescript.

We are, of course, especially grateful to the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, its President, William White, and our Program Officer, Marilyn Steele, for their continued encouragement and support.

CHAPTER I
Introduction
Recently published research has shown that foot patrol programs have the capacity to improve the quality of life in contemporary communities.¹ Consequently, police administrators, community leaders, and private citizens from all sections of the country are exploring the possibility of creating their own community foot patrol programs. The National Neighborhood Foot Patrol Center is constantly being asked to provide detailed information. People want to know what foot patrol is, what its benefits are, and how it can be financed, planned, and implemented.

This manual is an attempt to respond to these queries systematically. Although its subject is the establishment of new police programs, it is not written for police administrators exclusively. It is, rather, designed as a basic "nuts and bolts" guide, useful to all persons interested in establishing a foot patrol program.

The material in this manual is not "text book" theory-it is derived from the actual practice of foot patrol. Most of what is recommended here was proved effective in an experimental foot patrol program which took place in Flint, Michigan between 1978 and 1981. Some of the recommended practices were established at the beginning of the Flint program and proved valuable throughout. Others reflect changes and modifications which were made in response to unforeseen problems. Naturally, not all of the problems that have been identified have been adequately solved. These problems have been described here in the hope that discussion and analysis will eventually lead to their solution -with the result that other communities can avoid making the same "mistakes."

Practical suggestions are offered in this manual, not prescriptions. Foot patrol is, finally, community policing, a form of policing in which the community collectively decides what local problems are and what resources can be used to address them. The police interact with the community thereby helping it recognize and eliminate the sources of crime. But different communities have different problems and resources. In practice, therefore, foot patrol programs will be as varied as the communities in which they occur.

Thus, while patrolling on foot may work very well in a densely populated urban environment, it will not necessarily be appropriate in every jurisdiction. However, the central concept of foot patrol, that of having the officers involved with and accountable to the community, has the widest applications.

Again, foot patrol programs have been demonstrated to be effective. Even so, police INTRODUCTION
administrators want to know if they are also cost effective. The authors of this manual believe that they are, though it is true that traditional methods of budget analysis typically undervalue foot patrol.

Foot patrol, being proactive, is designed to prevent crime and to deal with social problems before they become overtly criminal. Yet for these very reasons its strengths are often not properly assessed by a traditional cost/ benefit analysis. The cost of maintaining an officer on patrol is relatively simple to calculate. Assessing benefits, however, is a more complex task, inevitably involving assumptions on the part of the analyst. Police planners, indeed Americans generally, too often assume that what is most easily quantifiable is most relevant or beneficial.

If speed of reaction time and the making of arrests are seen as the chief benefits of patrolling, then motorized patrol will be seen as more effective. It cannot be otherwise. Reaction time and the making of arrests are important considerations, but they are not necessarily the only or even the chief benefits to be considered.

Foot patrol can reduce crimes and calls for services while increasing citizen satisfaction with the community. These are extremely important benefits but difficult to quantify. Exactly how much does society save when there is a drop in the crime rate? What are the benefits -financial, medical, or psychological -of reduced levels of stress in the community? Perhaps the answers lie buried in insurance statistics. For now it is enough to observe that current methods of budget analysis are too crude and unsophisticated to measure the broad social benefits of foot patrol.

Unlike the officers in some previous foot patrol programs, the officers in Flint did not attempt to deter criminals by their mere presence in uniform. For this reason, the term "foot patrol" is potentially misleading for the program being advocated here. Flint officers did not patrol continuously on foot. They did some patrolling, of course, as a means of staying in touch with the community. But their most important job was to do all that was possible to ensure that the individual neighborhoods were maintained or improved. The officers came to know the citizens of the neighborhoods well, and they established "base stations" where citizens could meet with them to discuss a wide range of community problems.

It is important to realize that citizens and police officers often view community problems differently. And an effective policing program takes the community view into account. The police tend to be oriented toward serious crime-murders, assaults, armed robberies, and the like. Citizens, on the other hand, are often more distressed by a host of smaller problems such as rowdy youths, abandoned cars, stray dogs, and domestic disturbances. None of these problems qualifies in itself as a major social problem. Yet when these problems go unresolved and become chronic they are a serious source of citizen dissatisfaction with the community. These problems must be addressed and the foot patrol officer is in a uniquely strong position to address them effectively.

Many traditionally minded police officers will object that dealing with these problems is more properly "social work" than police work. But in the opinion of the authors this is an unnecessarily narrow view of the police role. Crime has, after all, complex social causes, and any attempt to deal with it must be comprehensive and rooted in an understanding of the internal dynamics of society.

Furthermore, the police are historically an administrative arm of government charged with maintaining peace and order in society. Thus, while solving major crimes is an important police duty, it is not the only one. And there is certainly nothing inappropriate about using the police to attack smaller but debilitating problems. Indeed, there is evidence that an environment in which smaller problems are allowed to flourish will rapidly deteriorate.

Flint foot patrol officers had all of the duties and responsibilities of a police officer. They carried weapons, made arrests, and responded to emergencies. Their activities were only restricted by their reduced mobility. However, Flint foot patrol officers had key additional responsibilities. First, they were expected to provide linkages between citizens with problems and service agencies, both governmental and private. The foot patrol officers made referrals when necessary, and were at all times a source of information about services which were available to citizens.

Second, Flint patrol officers were catalysts of a community effort to combat crime. They made security checks at businesses and private homes. They instructed citizens in self-protection techniques, They organized block clubs and neighborhood watch associations. In short, they operated on the assumption that an organized and informed community is a powerful weapon against crime.

In practice, Flint foot patrol officers engaged in an impressive range of activities:

They visited schools to give safety tips.
They participated in the Police Athletic League-a sports program for young people.
They organized trips to ballgames and museums for recreation and cultural enrichment.
They investigated foster care homes.

CHAPTER II
Establishing the Foot Patrol Program
A foot patrol program can only come into being if some group or individual is committed to it and willing to work for its establishment. Whether it be a police chief interested in effective new programs, a businessperson concerned about a deteriorating downtown area, or a private citizen concerned about crime in the neighborhood, the impetus for change must come from somewhere.

If early sponsors of foot patrol are unable to generate widespread interest in the concept,
no program will emerge. If, however, the public's response is positive, sponsors will be compelled to move very rapidly from the level of interest and discussion to the level of action.

In the initial phase, sponsors will be engaged in such critical activities as gathering information, analyzing the community, identifying resources and leaders, and bringing leaders together.² Only then will it be possible to develop a formal proposal to be brought forward for community approval.

Information Gathering
Although crime is discussed a great deal, community members usually do not have any precise measure of its extent, its cost to the community, or the resources available to combat it. Crime statistics provide a start, but there must also be an estimate, by area and by type, of unreported crime. This information is best obtained from neighborhood groups, citizen interviews, medical professionals, and from the clergy. Drug abuse "hotlines" and centers which provide counseling to victims of sexual or domestic assault are also excellent sources of information. When available, victimization surveys should also be consulted.

Those gathering this information should look for patterns-crimes which occur with regularity in specific areas of the community. This in turn should lead to the identification of "target crimes" in the individual neighborhoods-thereby ensuring that community resources are employed where they are most needed.

An added benefit to gathering this information is that it might suggest immediate remedies such as increased lighting, more frequent police patrols, or coordinated citizen action. It would be wrong to assume that any simple or obvious solutions will have been tried by those in authority. Public officials, acting in a climate of high demand and limited resources, usually react only to blatant threats to public equilibrium. To be effective, citizen groups must be aware of the climate in which public officials operate. Only then will they be in a position to initiate changes and offer complementary action.

Analyzing the Community
It is unlikely that an outsider to the community could organize a community foot patrol effort. For to do so requires familiarity with the community, its history, its process of development, and its current politics and problems. All of these factors influence the attitudes of the citizens toward problems and toward problem solving techniques. Even citizens who are familiar with the community must be willing to undertake a rigorous, systematic analysis which includes:

An analysis of the community's
Economic Base:

Is the local economy dominated by a single company or industry or is it diversified?
Are there any expansion plans?
What is the community's attitude toward expansion?
What is the state of labor/management relations?
What are employment prospects now and what are prospects likely to be in the future?

Is it a single or multicultural community?
What are the class divisions? Is there a history of class cooperation or conflict?
If it is a multicultural community, what is the history of relations between the various cultural groups?
What is the official response to the cultural situation in terms of favoritism, distribution of services, alignment of elected officials, etc.?
To what degree do class and cultural divisions affect mobility?

What social, fraternal, or church organizations exit in the community? How influential are they?
Are these organizations in conflict or are they capable of cooperating for a common cause?
What are the political affiliations of these organizations? Are they attached to particular social movements?
Do these organizations have programs or projects designed to react to particular community problems?
Is there a potential for creating new organizations?

What formal punitive justice agencies are there?-the police, the sheriff's office, the prosecutor's office, the courts, for example.
Are there any nonpunitive rehabilitation programs designed for offenders?
What social service agencies are there?
Do either the justice agencies or the social service agencies encourage citizens to create supplementary programs?
Is there cooperation or conflict between these agencies? Are official programs centrally planned and coordinated or are resources fragmented?

What natural disasters or other crises have influenced citizen attitudes?
Has there been serious racial strife? If so, how well was it handled?
Have there been sensational crimes which have influenced the public's perception of the adequacy of officials?
To what degree is the situation complicated by the presence of organized crime?

Identifying Relevant Systems
Before programs requiring broad social cooperation can be implemented, it is necessary to identify the basic units of social organization-the relevant systems. In effect, any part of the community that can contribute resources to the foot patrol effort should be identified. Official systems would include the police, the courts, the schools, social service agencies and other agencies of government. Unofficial systems would include private businesses and corporations, church groups, youth programs, ethnic and fraternal organizations, and block clubs.

It is particularly important to think of the press as one of the systems which should be contacted. Good press relations can generate energy and momentum for the foot patrol program, while bad press relations can damage morale and lessen the possibility of cooperation within the community.

The number and nature of unofficial systems will vary immensely from community to community. In the case of official agencies, however, much more specific information will be part of the public record. It should be possible to gather information on their charter or public mandate, their jurisdiction, budget, current programs, organizational structure, physical and manpower resources, and future plans. The idea is to develop a clear sense of the potential these agencies possess as well as their operational limitations.

All of this is necessarily an abbreviated approach to the planning process. Differences between communities and the sheer number of official and unofficial systems make greater comprehensiveness beyond the scope of this manual. What is, however, clear is that sponsors of foot patrol must be imaginative, resourceful, and thorough. There are always more sources of aid in a community than are superficially apparent.

Identifying Leaders
There is no universally reliable guide to selecting the leadership of a foot patrol program. In one community, civic, business, and government leaders may have the public support and confidence necessary to set goals and initiate action. By contrast, another community may greet the efforts of these leaders with skepticism or even hostility.

Successful foot patrol programs will utilize a coalition of established community leaders who are genuinely interested in innovation and action, leaders who emerge informally from the neighborhoods, and leaders of various social groups. Established leaders, whether they be from a block club, a social relief agency, or the command rank of the police department, are valuable because they reflect the values of their organizations and know how their organizations operate. However, many influential citizens of the community hold no formal office, and they should certainly not be neglected or ignored.

Sponsors of foot patrol should try to discover who has real power and influence in the community, who is asked for advice, and who has a reputation for getting things done. Through a process of community sampling, it should be possible to compile a list of people who are most often identified as leaders.

The sampling process is important, and it would be wrong to dispense with it on the grounds that community leaders are already known. The identification of true leadership is essential if the foot patrol effort is to be properly planned and implemented, and true leadership is not static. Those who are well known and endowed with impressive titles are not necessarily the most powerful or influential.

Regardless of the method of selection, leaders of a foot patrol program should have many of the following characteristics:

• An ability to relate personally to the program, preferably by living in the affected neighborhood or by maintaining close cultural or class ties with those who do.
• An inclination to work and solve problems rather than talk.
• An ability to act as a natural spokesperson for a neighborhood or group.
• An ability to get things done coupled with a high tolerance for frustration. An ability to see that crime prevention is a long term effort requiring patience.
• An ability to innovate and inspire action from the citizens of the community.

Similarly, the elderly should be integrated into community life at all levels. Older citizens possess the social skills and the strong sense of purpose that lend stability and status to a program. Their experience and commitment is invaluable; it should be directly sought and extensively used.

Bringing Leaders Together
After the community leaders have been identified they should be brought together at a meeting. They should be told that they have been identified by their peers as individuals .who could best guide a foot patrol program.

The first meeting will be unstructured since its central purpose is to allow an exchange of views and to bring complaints and prejudices out into the open. More specifically, the major objectives of the first meeting will be to:

• Allow for the expression of feelings about community problems.
• Encourage representatives of the various systems to examine the ways in which they view one another. There is often a great deal of mutual suspiciousness between agencies and between agencies and individuals.
• Create a meaningful dialogue so that misconceptions can be corrected and community problems intelligently discussed.
• Demonstrate that a cooperative approach to controlling crime is ultimately in everyone's self-interest. Service agencies will have smaller caseloads and more time to provide services, while citizens will be better protected against threats to life and property.

When diverse interest groups meet for the first time, they will often have biased opinions, misinformation, and negative perceptions about one another. It is, therefore, extremely important at this point to avoid defensiveness. If freedom of expression does not prevail, the process of forming program leadership will be hindered with unfavorable implications for program development.

Experience shows that representatives of the various systems often exchange accusations at first. The police, for example, may be criticized by citizens for being aloof and authoritarian. The police may in turn accuse the citizens of being complacent, naive, and uncooperative. Agency professionals may also express hostility toward one another. Social workers may accuse the police of being simplistic, hard-headed disciplinarians, only to have the police retaliate by calling them permissive "do-gooders."

If the assembled leaders are able to admit the partial truth of some of these accusations, it will help establish trust and mutual credibility -and thus cooperation. If, however, there is too hasty a denial of the accusations-if, that is, the elements of truth in accusations are not handled honestly the discussion will be shallow and many problems will be left unrecognized and unresolved.

Ideally, the discussion should go beyond establishing the existence of misperceptions to include an examination of how misperceptions arise in the first place. As would be expected, ignorance is the chief villain. For example, citizens often do not know what the policies of the various agencies are or how they affect the delivery of services. It would be useful for citizens to know how agencies establish priorities and what administrative considerations must be weighed. Similarly, agencies may be ignorant of each other's operations. Agencies can become frustrated with one another in the same way that citizens can be frustrated by a lack of responsiveness in the bureaucracy.

Clear and unambiguous discussion will help destroy misperceptions and provide new insights into individual and organizational behavior. Both individuals and agencies will be forced to recognize the legitimacy of alternative perspectives-a necessary beginning if there is to be future understanding and cooperation.

The first few meetings, then, are typified by: 1) the expression of feelings and frustrations; 2) the admission of "facts"; 3) the discussion of factors which create misunderstandings, thus leading to 4) increased understanding and 5) increasingly positive relations.

When this process is well advanced, the sessions begin to take on a more focused and less emotional orientation and the practical business of planning an actual program can begin. Soon after, the leaders agree to draft a proposal to be presented to the citizens at a city-wide meeting. Obviously, having the leadership established in advance makes the entire process manageable.

The Initial City-Wide Meeting
This meeting is especially important in as much as it is the first time that the views of the community-in whose name the foot patrol program is being established-are actively sought. The agenda of this meeting will be dictated by four important goals:

1. To educate the public as to the history of the foot patrol concept and how it might be modified to suit the unique needs of the community. The leaders who developed the proposal should be introduced and the results of the community analysis made public-at least in outline form.
2. To obtain feedback on the proposal from the citizens.
3. To achieve a consensus on the description of the individual patrol areas so that the meetings may proceed to the neighborhood level.
4. To formalize a timetable for moving the program from the planning to the implementation stage.

• Is the site large enough to accommodate the expected turnout?
• What is the expected turnout? Have there been similar meetings called from which to draw relevant comparisons?
• Is there sufficient parking at the site?
• Is the site readily accessible to all of the residents of the community? Is it accessible by public transportation?
• Will the citizens be comfortable if the meeting is a long one?
• Are the acoustics adequate?
• Is the lighting adequate?

• Will a public address system be needed? If so, how does one go about securing it? If it is available at the site, how is it operated and who is in charge of it?
• Will additional microphones in the aisles be needed? Everyone should be able to hear questions from the audience as well as the presentation being made by those in charge.
• Can audio visual presentations be made at the site? What sort of equipment is needed? Again, who is in charge of the equipment? It is imperative that the equipment be available at the time it is needed.
• What about an equipment failure? Are there, for example, spare bulbs for a projector?

The date. Experience shows that a weekday night is most appropriate for a meeting of this type. Some people are unwilling to give up weekend nights, and day meetings exclude many working people.
The time. 7:30-8:00 p.m. is often a good compromise. It is early enough for working people to get to bed at a reasonable hour, but late enough for them to eat and relax beforehand.
Potential conflicts. Does the date conflict
with an important cultural or sporting event? A night when the local high school
basketball team is playing for a regional championship would be a poor choice.
Confirming the date and time. Who is in charge of scheduling at the site? Is the proposed date and time firmly reserved?

• Announce the meeting early enough so that citizens can make plans to attend.
• Prepare a press release emphasizing important facts. Get political leaders, prominent business leaders, and other prominent citizens to come to the press conference. Contact radio stations, newspapers, television stations-especially television stations. See if a local newspaper will do a feature story on the proposal.
• Take advantage of community service announcements in the local media. Often this is an excellent means of following up on the initial press release.
• Use the social organization of the community to advantage. Contact:
Businesses
Community Service Groups
Block Clubs
Neighborhood Associations
Churches

Ask for their help in publicizing the meeting. Perhaps they would be willing to make an announcement in one of their publications or allow for the placement of posters or the distribution of brochures.

• Use the schools. Parents generally read what their children bring home from school. Announcements can be mimeographed and given to students to take home.

It is equally important that the proposal be written and available to the public well in advance of the meeting. Citizens should have ample opportunity to read the proposal, digest its contents, and come to the meeting ready to discuss it.

To Be Stressed In the Proposal
Every community foot patrol program will be unique in many important respects. Nevertheless, competent proposals will stress many of the following important points:

• The case for foot patrol-what it is, its linkages to past practices, its ability to reduce crime and calls for service, and its ability to improve police community relations.
• The difference between proactive and reactive policing. Foot patrol works to eliminate the sources of crime.
• The services foot patrol can provide. Stress that the foot patrol officer knows the community well and is in a strong position to provide services. List the services-youth programs, home security instruction, referrals to social service agencies, etc.
• The ways in which foot and motorized patrol can complement one another. Citizens should know when and under what circumstances motorized patrol should be contacted-in the case of severe emergencies for example. Citizens should know when the foot patrol officer is working and how he or she can be contacted.
• A clear description of the proposed patrol areas and an explanation of the choice. Ideally, these patrol areas should be:
Natural divisions within the community.
Of a size which can be completely patrolled in two working days.

The patrol areas should have a neighborhood identity, since under these circumstances it is easier for citizens to cooperate and for police administrators to match the foot patrol officer to the area.

In general, the smaller the patrol area the better. Both the citizens and the officers become discouraged if the patrol areas are too large. Of course, it is the time it takes the officer to cover the beat-not the number of square blocks-that is the key consideration. An area with single family dwellings will inevitably cover more city blocks than an area of high rise apartments or housing projects.

• An indication of what appear to be the most important problems in each of the patrol areas and a suggestion of how they might be addressed.
• A recommendation for the placement of "base stations" within the individual neighborhoods. The base station is the officer's place of business-the place where he can meet with citizens to discuss their concerns. The following are important considerations:
Is the base station easily accessible?
Is it sufficiently secure to permit the storage of basic records and files?
Is it arranged in such a way that citizens can meet privately with the officer to discuss confidential matters?
Is it free from other distractions?
• A proposed timetable for the completion of the planning process. There should be ample time for discussion at the neighborhood level, but a specific time, date, and place for the final city-wide meeting should definitely be proposed.

Group Discussions
These smaller group discussions have very simple aims, and need not, at this point, take up a lot of time. Some discussion of the evening's presentation is to be expected, but the principal reasons for breaking down into these groups are:

• To elect a neighborhood leader or "captain" whose function it is to organize the meetings on the neighborhood level, to keep the names and addresses of people who are willing to participate, and to serve as a contact person for the police.
• To elect a secretary whose duty it is to record the deliberations of the group.
• To establish contact with the particular police officer who will be available to aid and advise the group.

When the above three objectives are met, the city-wide meeting is adjourned. Planning then moves to the neighborhood level.

Neighborhood Meetings
The goals of the neighborhood meetings will be similar to the goals of the city-wide meeting. They may, in fact, be seen as an effort to obtain a local or "grassroots" critique of the original proposal. The citizens have read the proposal and know the rationale for it. Now they must have the time to thoroughly examine its appropriateness for their neighborhood.

Goals of the Neighborhood Meetings
The overall goal of the neighborhood meetings is for citizens, in cooperation with the police, to develop a model of foot patrol which will best suite the unique character of each neighborhood. More specific goals include the following:

• To confirm the patrol area boundaries and the location of the base station.
• To identify the most important crimes and sources of citizen dissatisfaction with the community and target them for reduction.
• To describe the foot patrol officer's routine in each neighborhood. Once this is done, the routine should be widely publicized so that citizens will have informed expectations of what the officer should be doing.
• To establish a formal liaison between the foot patrol officer and the civic groups, neighborhood watch associations, and block clubs in the area. This will:

Facilitate communications between the citizens and the officer.
Facilitate the scheduling of security and self-protection programs in the neighborhood.

• To examine ways in which the neighborhood can aid the foot patrol officer. In the past, residents of foot patrol areas have typed letters, written articles, and paid for the base station telephone.
• To designate the various publications, neighborhood publications, school newsletters, etc-through which the foot patrol officer can regularly communicate with the neighborhood.
• To establish programs and procedures through which the foot patrol officer can make contact with the youth of the neighborhood. These may include regular programs in the schools and extracurricular activities such as trips to cultural or sporting events.
• To establish a system for reviewing the officer's performance. A system of community review should be strongly considered. Foot patrol is a form of community policing and citizens should be able to review the performance of the officer assigned to their area. To deny them input would be a breach of trust and violate the most basic principle of foot patrol-that of community involvement.

There may be only one meeting in each neighborhood or there may be several. In arriving at a final proposal, the majority in each neighborhood must rule. But every effort should be made to achieve a consensus. A group of citizens who are seriously dissatisfied with the proposal can cause real problems even if they are a small minority.

The Role of the Neighborhood "Captain"
The neighborhood "captain" becomes critically important during this stage. For the captain coordinates the meeting or meetings -in effect makes everything work. He or she schedules and publicizes the individual meeting and makes sure that the police officer assigned to the neighborhood is free to attend. The captain must be energetic, capable, an committed if the neighborhood meeting is to fulfill its function.

Obviously, it is desirable to have broad community representation at the meeting. And nothing works so well as word of mouth employed as in a chain-letter-scheme. Each person who attended the city-wide meeting informs four neighbors that meetings will be held in the neighborhood. Each of these four neighbors informs four new neighbors and so on.

The Role of the Officer at the Neighborhood Meetings
The advising officer also has a crucial role to play in ensuring the effectiveness the neighborhood meetings. He or she is constant source of objective professional a vice. At the neighborhood meetings, the officer has the following responsibilities:

• The officer is the formal representative of the police department. He or she makes sure that the department's views are known a taken seriously even if they are not final adopted.
• The officer is a law enforcement expert who can offer practical criticisms of suggestions made by the citizens. The officer lets the citizens know when a suggestion is unworkable or even illegal.
• The officer serves as an arbitrator or broker when there is a real dispute between the police department and the community over a given point.
• The officer aids in the final formulation of a proposal for the neighborhood which is acceptable to all parties.

When the final city-wide meeting is adjourned, no one should be in doubt as to how the foot patrol program is going to operate in that community. Indeed, it is worth being repetitious to emphasize this point. Specify, everyone should know:

• What the beat areas are
• What shifts the foot patrol program will be in operation
• The duties of the officer assigned to individual neighborhoods
• How to contact the foot patrol officer
• Where the base station is located
• When to contact the foot patrol officer
• When to contact motorized patrol
• How to process complaints
• How the foot patrol officers are evaluated

Clearly this can only come about if all of those concerned are willing to listen, to learn, and to compromise. Community residents have every right to expect a say in the way their community is policed, and they have a right to demand effective services. But they must temper their expectations with realism. There are conflicting demands for services, and not every problem can be solved overnight.

Foot patrol officers are often more effective if they have the satisfaction of helping to define the nature of their work. But they must never expect that they can eliminate the unpleasant aspects of police work. They are bound by the demands of professionalism as are all members of the department. Furthermore, while it is appropriate and desirable for the foot patrol officer to become an advocate for the citizens he or she serves, such advocacy should not overshadow all other considerations. Foot patrol officers should realize that their perspective is necessarily different from that of their supervisors. A program may greatly benefit one neighborhood and yet be a poor use of department resources.

Finally, supervisors and department administrators have a right to expect that their professional decisions will be respected. It is their job to provide the technical expertise and to ensure that the foot patrol officer's performance squares with departmental policy and the standards of police professionalism.

Yet supervisors and department administrators should realize that their professionalism can in fact isolate them from the citizens they serve. Policies which look correct from a managerial standpoint may adversely affect the quality of life in certain neighborhoods.

The search for funds begins with an analysis of public and private resources. It is important to note that the relative importance of public and private funding may well be changing. Over the past fifteen to twenty years, public funding for police programs has been fairly plentiful. Now, however, there are increasing signs that public funding for police programs will be curtailed and that funds for new programs will come from private sources.

Public Funds
There are essentially three sources of public funding for projects like foot patrol. These include: the reallocation of existing resources, state or federal grants, and special taxes.

The Reallocation of Existing Resources
There is little "fat" in most police budgets today. However, the search for funding should begin with a review of the departmental budget. Are there discretionary funds which could be devoted to foot patrol? Are there weak or ineffective programs which could be eliminated in favor of foot patrol?

Of course, the answer to these questions will likely be "no." Still, this is an important process to go through. Agencies and foundations routinely ask why the proposals before them could not be funded in some other way. Therefore, a department which has undergone a thorough budgetary review will be in a good position to make a satisfactory answer.

State or Federal Grants
Government grants have been available for a long time and most police administrators have made use of them at one time or another. Many of these grants are for specific well defined purposes. Others, however, are made in the form of "block" grants which communities may use for a broad range of local activities.

The amounts and purposes of these grants vary enormously. First, however, it is necessary to learn when funds are available. Local government can be a good source of information since most cities have someone on the payroll who is an expert on public sector grants. Sponsors of foot patrol should make an effort to locate this person. Perhaps it is the city manager or someone on the mayor's staff.

It is difficult for citizens of a community to monitor developments on the state and federal level directly. There are, however, professional and community associations on both the state and federal level which can help. Since these associations are typically located in or near the seat of government, they are among the first to know when funds are available.

Above all, sponsors should make use of elected officials. Both United States Senatorsand local State Representatives have an interest in seeing that their constituents get a fair share of public funds. Sponsors should contact these officials and describe the proposed foot patrol program. More often than not these officials have large staffs whose business it is to look after constituent interests. They are a source of good information even if they cannot influence the actual decision.

Special Taxes
Taxes are always unpopular, but citizens in many communities will approve new taxes if they are convinced that the programs being funded will be effective. In Flint, for example, citizens approved a proposal to raise property taxes in order to continue funding foot patrol.
 

Private Funds
Generally speaking, there are three sources of private funding: 1) small community service groups; 2) corporations; and 3) foundations. These may further be distinguished by the size of the grants they award and the methods which must be used to obtain them. As a rule, service groups make small to moderate grants and can often be approached informally through the social networks of the community. Corporations make grants of all sizes, though they are commonly a source of moderate grants. It is possible to approach most corporations informally; in some cases, however, a formal proposal will be required. Foundations do make grants of all sizes, but they are better known as the source of large grants. Whereas service groups and corporations may be approached informally, gaining a foundation grant requires a carefully planned strategy and the making of a formal proposal.³

Community Service Groups
Every community has these. The Rotary Club and the Kiwanis club are examples. So are neighborhood associations and local business associations. Organizations of this type have small to moderate budgets and local interests.

Community service groups do not have much money to give away-$1,000.00 would be a large grant for many of them. But they are extremely easy to approach and sympathetic to police concerns for the most part.

Small service groups cannot fund a foot patrol program by themselves, but they can be helpful. They can help fund a campaign to publicize foot patrol. They can contribute funds for officer training. They can contribute to a fund for the neighborhood base station, and they can buy signs for neighborhood watch programs.

Corporations
Corporations may, of course, contribute a great deal of money to certain causes. The Mobil Oil Corporation's decision to fund the Shakespeare series on public television is a good case in point. More often than not, though, theirs are grants of moderate size -not more than $4,000.00-and directed to local programs. Corporate contributions will not fund an entire foot patrol program, but they will pay for training programs, specialized equipment, and opportunities for professional advancement.

Police administrators and citizens should not hesitate to approach the business community for help. Corporations of all sizes have a vital interest in seeing their communities well policed. Small concerns, particularly retail concerns, can be badly damaged if the area in which they are located is perceived to be disorderly and unsafe. Less obviously, large corporations benefit from effective policing. Large corporations need a talented work force, and a safe community is one of the things they "sell" to prospective employees.

Frequently, the bast approach is to ask an influential member of the business community for help in acquiring private funds for a desirable police program. Business leaders are often happy to do so. Provided that the proposed project is sensible, and provided that the contributing businesses receive publicity for their good citizenship, a surprising amount of money can be raised in this way.

Two other points are worth mentioning here. First, corporations can help the police in ways other than making cash contributions. They may, for example, give the police access to their training facilities or printing equipment. In another instance they may allow a corporate computer expert to lend technical assistance to the police at no charge.

Second, it is possible to set up a foundation to aid police work in a specific community. Under such an arrangement, the foundation accepts contributions from many sources, and then, after consulting with the police and the community, releases funds for individual police projects. Just such an approach worked well in New York City. Admittedly, New York is a city with immense private resources. But it is surely possible that foundations could be established in smaller cities. The projects funded would be less ambitious but still quite valuable to the community.

Foundations
There are many more foundations in this country than most people suspect. Some, like the Toledo Foundation of Toledo, Ohio fund programs in specific communities. Others, like the Police Foundation, fund projects of a certain type. Still others like the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation (which funded the Flint foot patrol experiment) fund a number of projects nationwide.

At present, it is unlikely that many foundations would be willing to grant a large sum of money-say $500,000.00 a year-to fund a major foot patrol project over an indefinite period of time. More often than not, foundations like to provide "seed money" to start programs which can then be funded from other sources if they are proved successful. Still, two important facts are clear:

1. The social climate is such that foundations will look upon funding requests from the criminal justice community with increasing favor over the coming years.
2. Sound projects have a way of attracting money at all times. Police administrators and citizens with sound new ideas should energetically pursue funding for them.

Perhaps the most important document published by the Foundation Center is the Foundation Directory, an indispensable tool for any group or individual seeking a foundation grant. The Directory contains a listing of the important foundations in this country. Each listing contains: the name of the foundation, its location, its assets, its purpose and general philosophy, and the names of important foundation officers.

The value of this information is that it allows selectivity. At most, sponsors of foot patrol should apply to three foundations. It is important to remember that just as the sponsors expect their proposal to be taken seriously, so the foundations, in turn, expect that applicants will have conducted the appropriate background research. Foot patrol sponsors should not send a letter to every foundation that might conceivably fund the project. Some foundations, for instance, spend most of their funds building libraries at small liberal arts colleges. These foundations are unlikely to fund a police project so applying to them would be a waste of everyone's time.

Once the list has been shortened to a half dozen or so foundations, it is appropriate to acquire a copy of their annual reports. These may be obtained by writing to the foundation directly or by visiting one of the Foundation Center collections (the Foundation Directory identifies these collections). The annual reports will provide information on how selected foundations dispensed money during the previous year.

The object of this search is a foundation which gives funds to police programs in the geographical region where the foot patrol program is to take place, If there are several foundations which appear to be plausible recipients of a proposal, sponsors should look for the small things which can provide an edge:

• What sorts of people are on the foundation's board of trustees?
• Does anyone making the proposal know a member of the board of trustees?
• Is there any reason to believe that someone on the board of trustees may have a bias for or against the proposal?

Writing a Proposal
Once the sponsors of foot patrol have identified a target foundation, they must begin the process of writing an effective proposal. Most foundations have specific guidelines which applicants are obliged to follow. However, an excellent review of the art of making grant proposals is included in the "Introduction" to the Foundation Directory.

Applicants should study all of the guidelines carefully. In writing the proposal it is extremely important to remember the nature of the audience. Foundation officers are generally careful men and women who know how to handle money. They want to be convinced that they are giving money to sensible people with good projects. More specifically, they will want to know:

• What the purpose of the proposed project is and why it should be funded instead of other worthwhile projects.
• Who is involved. The best ideas can be ruined by incompetents. Therefore foundations will want to know who will be directing the project and what that person's qualifications are.
• The details of the budget. Rough guesses won't do. The proposal should include detailed line items: salaries, fringe benefits, supplies, services, travel, etc.
• How long the program is expected to last and what its ultimate benefits will be.
• How and by whom the program is to be evaluated.

• In all communications with the foundation make sure that the names and titles of the officers are correct.
• Write for an intelligent reader who is not necessarily an expert in police affairs. Avoid technical jargon.
• Don't apologize for requesting funds; foundations expect it. Rather stress the positive aspects of the proposal-that it involves an important and useful activity.
• Work to maintain good relations with the foundation officers-even if they are forced to deny funding for the project. They may have had a difficult decision to make. Perhaps they will respond more favorably in the future.

The Selection of Officers
Personnel selection is important in any line of work, and it is especially critical in foot patrol. A foot patrol officer is out in the community everyday interacting with the citizens. If he or she is lazy, bored, unhappy with the job, or otherwise ineffective it will be obvious to the community residents. If poor personnel selection is a pervasive problem, the foot patrol program will rapidly deteriorate and lose public support.

What Makes a Good Foot Patrol Officer?
Who should be assigned to foot patrol? What sort of personal profile is desirable? Are there significant differences between foot and motorized officers? Is it better to train veterans or new recruits for foot patrol? These are questions that police administrators inevitably want answered.

The question of experience -whether it is more desirable to use veterans or new recruits-can be answered most directly. In Flint, nine of the original twenty-two foot patrol officers were new recruits. Several of these new recruits did well from the start and nearly all of them became fine officers in
time. Most, however, had some initial problems. The reason was simple: they had not yet learned to be police officers.

No matter how thorough the recruit training may be, it takes several years of street experience to make a good police officer. A new officer put into motorized patrol usually has the advantage of being paired with an older and more experienced partner. The new recruit effectively "learns the ropes" by watching how the older officer conducts him or herself and when and how the older officer makes arrests. The new recruit absorbs a great deal of informal knowledge in this way-knowledge which is extremely valuable but difficult to integrate into the training program.

By contrast, most foot patrol officers work alone in their patrol areas, and a new recruit does not have an experienced partner to learn from and rely on. The following are some of the areas where foot patrol officers without previous experience had noticeable problems:

Making arrests. They either made unnecessary arrests or had difficulty making arrests which were legitimate. Some were clumsy and unsure of themselves in making necessary arrests. Others, perhaps because they were unsure of their authority, made arrests when there were more appropriate alternatives.
Culture shock. Officers who grew up in a poor urban environment had fewer problems in this respect. But many new recruits were not prepared for how rough life could be in such an environment. They did not, for example, know how emotional a domestic quarrel could be and had trouble intervening effectively.
Attitudes toward foot patrol assignment. Some new recruits had the "red light and siren" syndrome. They thought "real" police work involved dramatic high speed chases. Naturally, they viewed foot patrol as a second class "rookie" assignment. Experienced officers, recognizing that real
police work is service oriented, appreciated the value of foot patrol.
Lack of social and political awareness. Many of the new recruits did not know how
the city worked, how, that is, city services are distributed. They had received training in this area, but there can be no substitute for experience.

Experience is a valuable asset to a foot patrol officer, but there are other considerations. Foot patrol does make definite demands on the officers, and some are more suited to it than others. Indeed, many fine police officers are not well suited for foot patrol. Ideally, foot patrol officers should be strong in all of the following areas:

• They should have strong interpersonal  skills. They should be good listeners who
• are naturally sympathetic toward the citizens and their problems. A natural ease and self-confidence in dealing with people are extremely important.
• They should express themselves well-in writing as well as verbally.
• They should be motivated people who give an honest eight hours of effort. Foot patrol officers are more difficult to supervise closely than motorized officers. An officer who is inclined to "goof off" will have more opportunities to do so on foot patrol.
• They should be natural organizers and problem solvers.

However, it is essential that administrators try to convince a core of respected and experienced officers to volunteer for foot patrol assignment. These officers will add a high degree of prestige, discipline, and professionalism to the new program. But these officers must believe that departmental administrators value foot patrol. If they suspect that their careers will be hindered by a foot patrol assignment they will not volunteer.

When dealing with applicants from within the department, administrators can use their familiarity with the officer and the officer's record as a basis for judging his or her fitness for foot patrol. Taking applications from the outside involves more uncertainty. Clearly, a talented candidate with police experience is desirable. Just as clearly, it is poor policy in the long run to hire experienced but mediocre candidates over inexperienced candidates with real potential.

In assessing inexperienced candidates, administrators should look for skills which would be readily transferable to foot patrol. For example, some of the best new recruits in the Flint foot patrol program had formerly been school teachers. Why did they prove effective? Because they were a little older, knew the community and how it worked, were used to dealing with people, and could express themselves well in public.
 

Training Foot Patrol Officers
Foot patrol officers should be expected to perform all of the duties of a police officer. Therefore, they should receive the same basic training as all other recruits. This will neces-sarily vary from community to community in accordance with local conditions and differ-ences in administrative philosophies. In most instances, however, foot patrol officers will need supplemental training in the following four areas:

Communication skills
Interpersonal skills
Crisis intervention skills
Knowledge of community resources and services

There are consulting firms which in-struct corporate employees in precisely these areas. No doubt they could be contracted to do similar work at a police training session. In fact this would be an excellent opportunity to make use of any newly established links to the business community. Business execu-tives may very well be able to provide the names of reputable consulting firms. Better yet, they may have in-house professionals who provide instruction in these areas to em-ployees. Perhaps they could arrange for these professionals to appear at a training center free of charge.

Communication Skills
Speaking in public is never easy at first, but anyone with reasonable poise and confi-dence can learn to do a creditable job. The
following simple rules should be stressed over and over again to officers unaccustomed to speaking in public:

Be prepared. There is no antidote to nerv-ousness like thorough preparation. Offi-cers should know what they want to say and how long they want to take to say it. Rehearsals can help.
Relax. Neighborhood gatherings are not usually hostile. People are there because they want to keep informed.
Emphasize major points. Do not spend too much time on minor issues. What firm ideas should the audience return home with?
Do not rush through the material. Speak naturally and pause frequently to illustrate important points with concrete examples.
Encourage Questions. Questions provide the opportunity to restate main points and correct false impressions.

Be clear. The average reader must be able to understand the presentation. It is, in fact, next to impossible to be too clear.
Be natural. Foot patrol officers do not write scholarly treatises on esoteric sub-jects. They write for community residents about issues which directly concern them.
Be personal. Use the "I'll "you," and "we" forms-they make writing more accessible.
Seek help if it is needed. An editor can easily correct minor problems with spel-ling and grammar. Nor is there anything shameful about seeking an editor's help. A number of well known authors have been notoriously poor spellers.

• Often the neighborhood publication which is to print the foot patrol officer's remarks will provide this assistance as a matter of course.
• Some large police departments have their own publicists who would presumably be available to help.
• Perhaps there is a publicist elsewhere on the city payroll who would be available for help.
• Perhaps there are citizens in the patrol district who would be willing to help on a volunteer basis. Look for freelance writers, technical writers, and journalists.
• Perhaps a member of the officer's family or  a family friend would be willing to help.

Interpersonal Skills
This is a large area. Communication skills are one form of interpersonal skills but there are others. What is most needed is the imagination and sensitivity to see where others are "coming from"-how they view the world and their social situation. Officers who possess strong interpersonal skills are aware that different people and different situations must be handled differently.

One difficult situation might require that the officer be sympathetic, another that he or she be humorous or tactful. Yet another may require determination and force. Again, one of the chief aims of this style of policing is to resolve situations, but to resolve them at the lowest level of intervention necessary.

Racial and Ethnic Relations
One of the chief interpersonal skills required of a foot patrol officer is an awareness and sensitivity to racial and ethnic differences. The United States is a country which embraces many diverse racial and ethnic groups. Consequently, it is impossible to speak of community policing without the racial and ethnic makeup of the community assuming a place of special importance.

Foot patrol officers must be aware of how race and ethnic background affect cultural attitudes and values. To the extent possible, they should be aware of the history of a given group in this country. The cultural and historic roots of a group go a long way toward explaining its attitudes toward the government in general and the police in particular. Not having an understanding of these issues can lead to a number of undesirable consequences:

• The officer may misinterpret behavior and act harshly when there is no need to.
• The officer may unwittingly antagonize the community.
• The officer who is well meaning but uninformed may be hesitant and uncertain in dealing with an important problem. Not wanting to offend, he or she might not act quickly or decisively.
• The officer may have difficulty mediating a dispute between citizens with different racial or ethnic backgrounds.

Case studies. Trainees should be given a number of concrete instances where racial and ethnic sensitivity helped solve a problem. At the same time they should be given instances where a lack of sensitivity impeded the solution of a problem.
Role playing scenarios. Dramatization is a powerful training tool. Skillful trainers can have trainees become involved in the enactment of a scene where racial or ethnic sensitivity is the key to resolving a difficult situation.
Effective films. Films are another form of dramatization wherein the trainee is invited to compare his or her responses with those of the characters on screen.

Crisis Intervention
All police officers intervene in crises. For the foot patrol officer, however, this is more central to the job. In the proactive model, the idea is to intervene before the individual or society is harmed. The fact that the foot patrol officer is more active in the community puts that officer in a uniquely strong position to intervene at an early stage. Motorized officers, on the other hand, lack this close familiarity with the community and can only react when a crisis becomes sufficiently serious.

The following hypothetical example is instructive. A foot patrol officer may know of a person who has a well paying factory job. The officer also knows that this person drinks a bit too much and is inclined to become abusive when he or she does so. Under normal circumstances, this does not prove to be too great a problem. There are occasional embarrassing scenes, but the person manages to stay within the bounds of what is socially tolerable.

But suppose, then, that this person loses the job. His or her behavior may not get worse, but then again it may. The point is that the foot patrol officer will be aware of the situation and alert for signs of trouble. At the first sign of it, the officer is in a position to help, The officer may do nothing more dramatic than let the person's spouse know that help is available -leaving the family's dignity intact while affording them protection. With intelligence and tact, it is possible
to nip the person's negative behavior in the bud. And think what has occurred:

• The spouse and family may be spared physical and psychological abuse-this is the more important in as much as violence at home during the formative years may be a major cause of future criminal behavior.
• The criminal justice system has been spared the cost of taking action against the individual. There has been social intervention but only of the mildest and least dramatic kind.
• The person is spared the guilt of having hurt those closest to him or her and the trauma of arrest. Under these circumstances, he or she is far more likely to return to productive life.

Alcohol problems and domestic violence are the sorts of crises in which the foot patrol officer may make timely intervention. The officer may also prevent drug experimentation from becoming addiction, may help a troubled youngster find a healthy outlet for his or her energy, or may ensure that an elderly shut-in is getting proper attention. Recognizing the possibility of a crisis and linking individuals to appropriate services is the key.

Community Resources and Services
In order to effectively intervene in crises, the foot patrol officer must know what services, either governmental or private, are available to the community. Some services, like Legal Aid, are mandated by the federal government and will be available in most communities. Similarly, private organizations like Alcoholics Anonymous or the Red Cross have chapters across the country. Yet in the most instances important help will come from IMPLEMENTATION
state and local programs which vary from community to community. Foot patrol officers should be particularly aware of what resources and services are available to address the following categories of problems:

Lack of food
Lack of shelter
Medical problems
Legal problems
Financial problems
Marital problems
Parenting problems
Transportation problems

It would be an excellent idea to develop a community service manual which indexes services according to the problem area. The officer would not have to rely on memory, then, but could make referrals with full knowledge of the available options. Services do change, so the manual would have to be updated on a regular basis.

This is also an area where new computer technology could be used very effectively. The officer could call or radio in to describe the problem and the sort of services needed. in a matter of minutes, the dispatcher could punch in the information and provide a list of services. Computers have the additional advantage of being easy to reprogram as services change. The computer file could be updated on a daily basis if necessary.

There are two further training issues which warrant discussion, if only briefly: 1) Community criticism of other officers; and 2) Improving the foot patrol officer's contact with the citizens.

Criticism of Other Officers
Police administrators should expect that foot patrol officers will frequently hear criticism of the department and of other officers. More often than not, the criticism will be directed toward a specific officer in motorized patrol, though administrators and other foot patrol officers may be targets of criticism as well. Obviously, the foot patrol officer is in a difficult situation. The officer cannot dismiss the complaint out-of-hand without forfeiting the trust of the citizen. Yet, the officer does not want to appear to be encouraging criticism of his or her colleagues.

The best solution, probably, is to have the officer listen to the complaint. Most times, the complaint is the result of a misunderstanding or a reasonable difference of opinion. In these instances, the foot patrol officer can clarify the issue or explain the department's or the other officer's point of view.

When, however, the complaint appears valid, the foot patrol officer should explain how complaints are handled. The important point is that in so doing the officer should not be viewed as a traitor. In community policing, valid and reasonable complaints should be encouraged-in the long run , everyone benefits.

Citizen Contact
Foot patrol officers must work to make themselves known in the community. The personalizing of relations is critically important. Neighborhood leaders and citizens who are active in neighborhood affairs will come to know the foot patrol officer quickly. But to be really effective, the officer must reach beyond these people to the average citizen who has infrequent contact with the police.

In Flint, some of the most effective foot patrol officers carried business cards and passed them out whenever possible. The officers would meet a citizen in the street and exchange casual conversation. As they parted, the officer would give the citizen a card and TRAINING OFFICERS
indicate that calls were encouraged. If a citi-zen was not at home when the officer stopped to call, the officer would slip a card under the door.

The Flint Police Department also used several standardized forms which proved quite effective. One of these was a letter of introduction to be passed out at meetings. It included:

The name of the officer in the district.
The address and phone number of the base station.
A description of foot patrol services.
A clear indication that emergency calls were to go to a central dispatch.

As a final comment, it should be stressed that foot patrol techniques will only work if the necessary skills are taught in training. If, for example, the trainees perceive informa-tion on the delivery of services as a light in-terlude in an otherwise serious program, they will pay little attention. If, however, they know that they must demonstrate competence in this area in order to complete training, they will take a more intense interest. Foot patrol programs have a much greater chance for suc-cess when trainers insist that recruits develop the unique skills which are needed.

The first step toward sound management of foot patrol is to take the program seriously. In some past instances, public pressure forced police departments into creating a foot patrol program they did not want. As a result, these departments treated foot patrol as a second class assignment for ineffective officers and disciplinary problems. At the same time, the foot patrol program was treated as a general
labor pool which could be raided whenever administrators perceived a more pressing need.

Obviously, if a program is consistently undermined in this fashion it is not going to work very well-no program or business could under such circumstances. The first two principles of sound management for foot patrol are:

1. The program must be staffed by officers who want to be in it and who have been selected because they possess the skills necessary to succeed in a foot patrol program.
2. Foot patrol supervisors must be able to plan on having their officers available. A foot patrol supervisor cannot arrive for the second shift to discover that several key officers have been drafted by the traffic division.

Smaller programs will not necessarily require such a complicated supervisory structure. If a foot patrol program covers only a downtown shopping area, perhaps only a sergeant need be assigned to supervise it. If the program is very small, foot and motorized officers may have the same supervisors and be part of a single patrol unit.

Departmental Relations
Maintaining harmonious and productive relations between the foot patrol officers and the other officers in the department will be a challenge at first. There will be strong resistance to foot patrol in some quarters most particularly among veterans of motorized patrol. Their reasons are as follows:

• Foot patrol is new and they don't properly understand it.
• They feel that foot patrol is some sort of 11 social work"-not real policing.
• They resent the popularity foot patrol officers enjoy with the citizens -particularly if they feel their own performance is being contrasted.

In some instances foot patrol programs are staffed with new recruits. Veterans of motorized patrol see them as "rookies" doing an easy job.

• Informing motorized patrol of the exact nature of foot patrol -what foot patrol officers do and how they can help motorized officers. In emergency situations, for example, the foot patrol officer's detailed knowledge of the neighborhood can be extremely useful.
• Emphasizing that a foot patrol officer's duties are limited only by lack of mobility. They, too, are expected to respond to emergencies.
• Organizing regular contact between foot and motorized officers. Personal contact will make it easier for the two groups to work out problems and exchange information.

Communications
Communication and understanding between the divisions of the department is important. Equally important is communication between the department and the officer in the field.

It is particularly important that central dispatch knows which foot patrol officers are working in which districts at any given time. Dispatch should know the officer's routine and be able to contact the officer rapidly. Only in this way can the expertise of the foot patrol officer be utilized.

Dispatchers, like all human beings, are creatures of habit. If they do not know what the officers in the new foot patrol program are supposed to be doing, they will fall back upon habit and call a squad car.

As a means of improving communications, administrators should explore the possibility of using lightweight electronic communications gear. If this is unavailable, foot patrol officers should call in at regular intervals, and central dispatch should have the phone numbers of "contacts" in the community-people who can reach the foot patrol officer quickly at specific times of day.

In addition, some system should be set up so that non-emergency complaints which come into central dispatch are quickly and accurately relayed. In time, of course, most citizens will learn to contact the foot patrol officer directly with calls of this sort. For that reason, it is useful to install recording equipment on the base station telephone. This is a very efficient way of improving communications between the citizens and the officer.

Matching the Officer To the Beat
Every foot patrol area will be unique. They will be of different economic status, of a different racial and ethnic mix, and of different population density. Consequently, a good administrator will try to produce a strong match between the strengths of the individual officer and the needs of the neighborhood. If possible, the officers themselves should be able to influence their assignment. Citizen preference will also affect the assignment to some degree. The community analysis worksheet provided in Appendix B is a useful tool for developing information.

A good administrator is likely to put an extroverted, athletic officer in an area where there are problems with unemployed teenagers-the idea being that the officer could maintain order while getting the teenagers interested in productive activities like training programs and organized sports. On the other hand, a patient, low-key officer who is known as a good listener might best belong in a neighborhood where there is a large population of elderly persons.

Racial and Ethnic Considerations
The appropriateness of putting black officers in black neighborhoods, white officers in white neighborhoods, and Hispanic officers in Hispanic neighborhoods is frequently at issue. Matching the officer to the beat on the basis of ethnic and racial considerations has a good deal to recommend it. Under these circumstances officers usually find it easier to communicate with the residents and to gain their trust and acceptance.

However, as the Flint experiment clearly showed, it is the competence of the individual officer which is most important. In one instance, a predominantly black neighborhood petitioned for the removal of a black officer in favor of a white officer whom they perceived to be more effective. In another instance, a white neighborhood petitioned for the removal of a white officer in favor of a black.

Female Officers
More and more women are entering police work, so questions about their use in foot patrol are relevant arid important. Women officers were prominent in the Flint Neighborhood Foot Patrol experiment, and their performance was generally excellent. Whatever difficulties they encountered as a result of entering a traditionally male occupation did not affect their job performance.

Such problems as there were largely had to do with community perceptions. Citizens shared many of the common sexual stereotypes. They liked the idea of women on the force, but the prospect of a woman officer in their neighborhood caused them to wonder if she would really be up to the job. Thus, the mothers of one neighborhood wondered if the slim female officer assigned to their neighborhood would be able to control the rowdy youths who were causing problems. They would have preferred a husky male officer. As it turned out, she was more than up to the job, but both she and her supervisor had to do a good initial selling job to gain her acceptance.

Supervising for Foot Patrol
Foot patrol supervisors should ensure that all evaluations of their officers reflect the aims of the foot patrol program. The special skills, attitudes, and characteristics which are most beneficial to foot patrol should be recognized and rewarded. It does little good to talk about the importance of attending meetings, making referrals, and working with youths, if the officers find that a failure to perform these tasks well will not lead to a negative evaluation. If supervisors want something done, they must make clear what it is. Then they must reward those who do it and reprimand those who do not.

Often, the special needs of foot patrol will require a shift in the managerial philosophy of the supervisor. Many traditional departments, for example, stress making arrests. The offenders were, after all, doing something wrong. And the number of arrests is an easily quantifiable figure which demonstrates to the public that the police are "doing something" about crime.

From the community policing perspective, however, this is a limited approach. For it is often not the quantity but the quality of arrests which is important. Many commentators have observed that police are aware of much more crime than they can actually deal with. This being the case, it only makes sense to direct scarce resources toward crimes which are dangerous or which are destructive to the
quality of life in the community.

An officer who acquires a reputation for making arrests on the slightest excuse, will soon be unwelcome in many houses. Citizens will want to see a warrant before letting the officer through the front door. But if the officer is known to be relatively tolerant of small failings yet tough on major crime, he or she will get an altogether different reception. Citizens will willingly impart a great deal of useful information, perhaps leading to the arrest of a major narcotics supplier.

This is not to say that the officer should ignore illegal acts because they are minor. Rather, the officer should try to prevent the recurrence of the illegal activity-that is, he or she should try to perform what amounts to correction in advance. Of course, if the individual committing these small crimes persists, he or she will have to be arrested.

The point, then, is that the foot patrol supervisor should judge how well the officer's activities improve the quality of life in the neighborhood. The supervisor should not be unduly impressed with a high number of arrests.

Special Supervisory Problems
Many social programs achieve a great deal during their formative years when enthusiasm for them is running high. If, however, they are to be successful over a number of years a rigorous system of quality control must be maintained.

In most respects, supervising foot patrol requires the same skills and capacity for judgment as supervising any police program. However, the unique nature of foot patrol does pose some unique supervisory problems.

"Cooping" or "Hiding Out"
It is inherently more difficult to supervise foot patrol than motorized patrol. An officer contacted on the squad car radio is at least known to be in the car. But a foot patrol
officer on the telephone or on a portable radio could be anywhere -including home in bed. For these reasons, foot patrol supervisors must work at monitoring their charges. The following are some techniques which can be used to ensure that foot patrol officers are doing the job:

• Conduct a roll call at the beginning of each shift. In principle, foot patrol officers could travel directly to their patrol areas and begin work. But this is not a good idea. Most officers will do their jobs, but a few will find it an open invitation to "goof off." By having a roll call, supervisors ensure that officers get their messages and begin work at the proper time.
• Set clear management objectives with the officers each week and insist that the objectives be met. A simple form can be developed for this purpose.
• Insist that clear duty logs be maintained as evidence of what foot patrol officers have actually accomplished. Copies of forms used for specific purposes, business security checks, for example, can also be kept on file.
• Contact neighborhood residents to see if the foot patrol officer is performing adequately. A simple questionnaire distributed at random can achieve this goal.
• Check neighborhood publications to see if officers are keeping the public informed as they are supposed to.
• Make unannounced spot checks to see if officers are following their routines properly.

Transfers
Some officers are not suited for foot patrol through they are hard workers. Doubtless such officers could make a better contribution to the department elsewhere. For instance, an officer might not be adept at dealing with people on a one-to-one basis, but might, at the same time, have demonstrated admirable courage and presence of mind in an emergency. A supervisor should certainly consider recommending that such an officer be transferred.

Supervisors should also be kept alert to the possibility of "burnout." Foot patrol officers are often in close personal contact with difficult people. Furthermore, citizens can be very demanding. Citizens want and expect service, and there are inevitably more neighborhood problems than the officer can handle. A supervisor has to protect his or her officers from unreasonable and excessive demands, all the time keeping in mind that even the best officers can become listless and burned out.

When this occurs, a transfer is usually in order. Ideally, though, the officer should be transferred to a job where the knowledge he or she gained in the neighborhood is not lost to the department. A motorized assignment in the same neighborhood would be an excellent transfer assignment.

Transfers are not negative. Indeed, when they are done wisely and consistently they can be very beneficial to the department. They can:

• Alleviate burnout.
• Allow officers to identify their strengths and areas of effectiveness.
• Provide for better communication and understanding between the divisions of the police department.
• Provide officers with the satisfaction of learning new skills.
• Help command officers identify new supervisory talent.

Union Contracts
Most union contracts are geared to older models of policing. Thus, some of the most important foot patrol and community policing techniques may violate standard contract clauses. The following are some of the problem areas that have been identified to this point:

Job descriptions. Foot patrol officers are often asked to conduct routine investigations-yet problems can arise if "investigator" is a precisely defined job classification.
Shift preference clauses. Many contracts provide that union members have shift preference on the basis of seniority.
Under such an arrangement, it can be difficult to recruit experienced officers for foot patrol.
Shift changes. Many union contracts specify that an officer be informed a certain number of days before a shift change. Normally, this is a very reasonable expectation, but a foot patrol program often requires that officers attend a neighborhood meeting on short notice. If the contract has a shift change clause, it is difficult for a supervisor to require the officer's attendance.
Compensation. Foot patrol officers may have flexible schedules. They may, for example, attend a weekend event and receive 11 comp" time off during the week. Supervisors will want to know if this sort of arrangement requires some other form of compensation under the terms of the contract.

Politics
How best to handle the political situation in the community is a topic about which no outsider could offer sensible advice. Foot patrol supervisors should, however, be aware that local politicians will find it tempting to try to use the foot patrol program. Foot patrol officers know the community well, are respected, and are in day-to-day contact with a lot of voters. Politicians may well try to have the foot patrol officers do favors for selected individuals or help with election year canvassing. Supervisors who are aware that this might happen, can take precautionary measures to ensure that officers maintain neutrality and professional detachment.

Special Interests
Demands made by individuals other than politicians will occasionally be a problem. Various neighborhood residents will seek to monopolize the foot patrol officer's time. Merchants, for example, know that the presence of an officer is good for business since it makes customers feel more secure. Consequently, they do what they can to keep the officer on or near the premises.

School administrators know that foot patrol officers can be extremely helpful in curbing certain undesirable activities in the schools. Therefore, they are quick to enlist the officer's aid. Merchants and school officials, in fact all of the citizens of the community, have a right to the officer's services and help. But no group can be allowed to dominate.

Legal Liability
This is not now a major problem, but as the police become involved in a wider range of activities administrators must keep the possibility of legal liability in mind. In Flint, for example, foot patrol officers regularly conduct field trips for the youth of the city. Since many of the youths are under 17, it is necessary for them to provide proof that they have permission to go on the trip and to provide a waiver of liability. An example of a waiver of liability form used in Flint is included in Appendix E.

The advent of new forms of foot patrol is an important and exciting development. There are, however, two final problems worthy of discussion: 1) the danger of being unresponsive to change and 2) the danger of unrealistically high expectations.

Social situations in contemporary America are enormously changeable. The mobility of our citizens, the dynamism of a free-market economy, and rapid changes in technology can alter the makeup of a community markedly in a very short period of time. This being so, police administrators will have to anticipate and make allowances for change. A patrol strategy which works well in a neighborhood now, may be less than adequate five years from now if the neighborhood changes. Obviously, talented administrators will monitor developments so that they can make necessary adjustments.

A failure to adapt to change will cause severe problems. Yet if anything, the problem of unrealistically high expectations is even more serious and difficult to avoid. When the foot patrol program is being planned, it is necessary to "hype" it to some degree-to stress its positive potential. But to do so is to run the risk of inflating citizen expectations. Expecting too much of foot patrol in the first place, residents may then become cynical and frustrated if there are not immediate and dramatic improvements.

To avoid this, early sponsors of foot patrol must temper their enthusiasm with realism. They must educate the public as to what can realistically be accomplished. Modern communities are complex entities which resist manipulation. Police practices do influence crime rates, but so do many other things. Even an expertly policed community will experience a rise in crime if there is a noticeable decline in the local economy.

The problem is further complicated by the inherent uncertainty of crime statistics. Professionals in the field of criminal justice know that crime statistics are not in themselves a reliable gauge of a program's effectiveness. Unfortunately, the media and some members of the public have an almost superstitious reverence for these numbers. They are ready to see a rise in crime rates as evidence that a program is failing.

Police administrators need to publicize the fact that these statistics reflect only reported crime and may or may not reflect trends in actual crime. If, for example, citizens have little confidence in the police, they often do not report crimes. Crime rates then appear low, though no one would argue that the situation was desirable or healthy.

Conversely, citizens with confidence in the police tend to report more crime. Crime rates then go up though no one would argue that the social situation had deteriorated at all. This last point deserves special emphasis since it would be far from an unexpected consequence of foot patrol. As citizens become familiar with the individual officer they develop greater confidence in the police and report more crime. Thus the paradox: a rise in crime rates may actually be a sign that a foot patrol program is succeeding.

The best test of a police program is, finally, the degree of citizen satisfaction with
their community. If, as a result of foot patrol, citizens feel protected in their homes and safer on the street, and if downtown shopping centers have become more pleasant and orderly, then the program may be deemed a success. The idea, after all, is to promote peace and tranquillity in the life of the community.

Foot patrol and community policing techniques should not be viewed as a convenient "quick fix" for community problems which can be just as conveniently discarded if things do not go perfectly at first. Rather, they should be viewed as an intrinsically sound approach to policing which will benefit everyone in the long run. The Flint experiment showed that a properly managed foot patrol program undertaken with the support of the community will work. Furthermore, it only makes sense. It makes sense that an officer intimately acquainted with the life of the community can perform important police functions more effectively. And it makes sense in a time of reduced police budgets to create a network of coordinated community services to deal with community problems.

Worked with the community to reduce speed limits and install stop signs in areas where they were needed.

Participated in school activities. Implemented safety programs in grades K-6, and visited classrooms to give safety tips.

Participated in the Police Athletic League.

Maintained liaison with block clubs and the neighborhood watch. In several instances officers helped citizens get these organizations started.

Counseled juveniles and made referrals.

Made home visitations as needed, particularly to shut-ins and the elderly.

Found funds to purchase dead bolt locks for elderly citizens.

Encouraged area businesses to contribute funds for community gatherings.

Conducted security checks in businesses and private homes.

Participated in fund raisers for the schools.

Established neighborhood foot patrol committees to deal with community complaints.

Aided in the preparation of a slide presentation explaining the foot patrol officer's role in the community.

Investigated the operation of foster care homes.

Distributed leaflets developed by the Flint Police Division of Community Relations and other service agencies. These included leaflets on: The Tel-Med Program; Operation ID; child development and safety; nutrition; and accidental poisoning.

Planned picnics and field trips to sporting and cultural events for the young.

Assisted in the elimination of "eyesores" such as junk cars, damaged sidewalks, condemned buildings and stray dogs.

Investigated motorcycle gangs and gambling and prostitution operations.

Helped turn a vacant field into a playground for area children.

Used SNAP funds to purchase smoke alarms and publish a community newsletter.

Conducted a career interest survey in the local junior high school.

Participated in a "Snow Fest" at a local park.

Implemented a "porch light" program for elderly citizens.

Showed a planned parenthood film to teenagers.

Participated in a "Plant-A- Garden" project.

Initiated a special safety program for Halloween.

Used aerial maps to pinpoint problem areas from the complaint forms.

Participated in bicycle safety programs.

Wrote articles for community newsletters.

Set up counseling at the YWCA at no cost to the city.

Investigated and helped close down a family clinic which was engaged in prescription fraud.

Organized youth snow shoveling teams to aid senior citizens.

. . .

 

	DEPARTMENT OF POLICE  210 E. Fifth St.     ph: 313 766-7313  Max A. Durbin, Chief of Police  Program Administrator:   Bruce L. Benson, Ph.D.                                        Deputy Chief  Program Coordinator:   Lt. Robert McFadden  "THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD FOOT PATROL" 766 - 7136
Hello. My name is ______________________________________, and I'm proud to introduce myself as your Neighborhood Foot Patrol Officer. I may be contacted by phone at ____________. The Neighborhood Foot patrol is a new program, not an old program warmed over. It is much more than just the idea of the old "beat cop." This new concept has as its basis the idea of direct, personalized service to our community.      Let me acquaint you with some of my responsibilities and duties:  Organize the resources of the Flint Police Department, other agencies, and this community to reduce crime and solve neighborhood problems. Conduct public education programs on crime prevention. Maintain contact with citizens' groups operating within neighborhoods and involve them in planning, designing, and evaluation neighbrohood crime prevention programs. Patrol streets to strengthen lines of communication with citizens and prevent crime and delinquency. Receive complaints and requests for service from Flint residents. Attend neighborhood block clubs and offer services. Attend school advisory councils in assigned areas. Investigate selected crimes. Prepare written crime prevention material for community newsletters.      If you need the police in an EMERGENCY, call Police Radio at 732-9911.  If you have other crime or community problems, however, please call me at my local office at __________.  I look forward to getting to know you on a first-name basis, and to meeting the needs of this community.       My primary goals as a Neighborhood Foot Patrol Officers is to help organize resources to prevent and reduce crime. Please work with me to accomplish these goals. By working together, we'll continue to make Flint a better place to live.  Sincerely,  ______________________________________  Your Neighborhood Foot Patrol Officer

 

Date: ______________        Hello.  I'm your Neighborhood Foot Patrol Officer, and my name is __________________. I stopped by to check your property today at ____________ a.m./p.m. I would especially like to mention to you:  _______________________________________________________________________  _______________________________________________________________________  _______________________________________________________________________  _______________________________________________________________________  _______________________________________________________________________  _______________________________________________________________________  _______________________________________________________________________  _______________________________________________________________________  _______________________________________________________________________       I serve as your personal Foot Patrol Officer. My Foot Patrol Sergeant is also available in this area to serve you. If we can help you with anything in particular, please contact me at my local phone at _____________, and leave a message if I'm out walking; or call the central Neighborhood Foot Patrol office at 766-7136.

 

APPENDIX E
Waiver of Liability Form
 
 

WAIVER OF LIABILITY      (Passengers ages 17 and under must receive written consent from a parent or guardian before boarding the bus).       I/we hereby give my/our approval and consent to be a passenger on the Flint Police Department bus or van.      I/we assume all risk and hazard incident including transportation t and from the planned activity while a passenger on the Flint Police bus/van. I/we hereby release, absolve, indemnify and agree not to hold responsible persons transporting me or my child ot and form any planned activity, and the City of flint or Flint Police Department from any claim arising out of injury to me/my child except to the extent covered by accident or liability insurance.  PASSENGERS' SIGNATURES (Guardian's signature if 17 years old or under):

 

1.    ________________________________  2.    ________________________________  3.    ________________________________  4.    ________________________________  5.    ________________________________  6.    ________________________________  7.    ________________________________  8.    ________________________________  9.    ________________________________  10.  ________________________________  11.  ________________________________  12.  ________________________________  13.  ________________________________  14.  ________________________________  15.  ________________________________  16.  ________________________________  17.  ________________________________  18.  ________________________________  19.  ________________________________  20.  ________________________________

21. ________________________________  22. ________________________________  23. ________________________________  24. ________________________________  25. ________________________________  26. ________________________________  27. ________________________________  28. ________________________________  29. ________________________________  30. ________________________________  31. ________________________________  32. ________________________________  33. ________________________________  34. ________________________________  35. ________________________________  36. ________________________________  37. ________________________________  38. ________________________________  39. ________________________________  40. ________________________________

 

     The following bibliography is not exhaustive. It is, rather, a valuable listing of basic sources which supplement the discussion in the manual.

Kelling, George L. et al. The Newark Foot Patrol Experiment.
         Washington, D.C.: The Police Foundation, 1981.

Private Funding for Police Training.  New York, New York:
          Criminal Justice Center, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 1983.

Trojanowicz, Robert, John Trojanowicz and Forrest Moss.
           Community Based Crime Prevention.  Pacific Palisades,
           California: Goodyear, 1975.

Trojanowicz, Robert et al. An Evaluation of the Neighborhood
           Foot Patrol Program in Flint, Michigan. East Lansing,
           Michigan: The National Neighborhood Foot Patrol
           Center, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State
           University, 1983.

Wilson, James Q. and George L. Kelling. "Broken Windows:
           The Police and Neighborhood Safety." The Atlantic
           Monthly, March 1982, pp. 29-38.

²For a fuller discussion of community resources refer to Robert C. Trojanowicz, John Trojanowicz, and Forrest Moss, Community Based Crime Prevention (Pacific Palisades, California: Good Year, 1975).
 
³The discussion of private funding is indebted to the excellent monograph, Private Funding for Police Training(New York: The Criminal Justice Center, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 1983). Permission to use this material has been granted by the Criminal Justice Center.

⁴The address of the New York City office is: The Foundation Center, 888 Seventh Avenue, New York, N.Y. 101W