Systematic Pattern Response Strategy

Protecting the Beehive By ROBERTO SANTOS, M.S.

T raditional police strate-gies for crime reduction have focused on ad- dressing individual incidents, such as calls for service and crime investigations. The goal is to resolve incidents as they arise and arrest offenders so they can be punished for their crimes. Patrol officers primar- ily carry out this work with the guidance of first-line supervi- sors. Mid- and upper-level man- agers focus on the allocation of resources and the resolution of personnel issues, becoming involved in street-level work mainly during critical incidents.

Over the past 30 years, innovative approaches (e.g., problem-oriented, community- oriented, disorder, and intelli- gence-led policing, along with Compstat) have been devel- oped that seek to apply crime- reduction strategies beyond isolated incidents.1 In 2004, the National Research Council review of police approaches found that crime-reduction strategies that employ data and analysis to identify issues larger than incidents (i.e., patterns and problems); focus their efforts in particular places, times, and on

12 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin

© Thinkstock.com

February 2011 / 13

specific offenders; and priori- tize police efforts prove much more effective than traditional methods that are not focused.2 Although numerous specific examples of effective crime- reduction efforts implemented for crime patterns and larger problems exist, the basic nature of policing (responding to calls and investigating crimes) has not changed, and few, if any, police departments have insti- tutionalized crime-reduction efforts at a larger level than an incident.3

With the limited and shrinking resources that po- lice executives face today, it is necessary, more than ever, for organizations to employ sys- tematic crime-reduction efforts to become more efficient and effective. One method is the systematic pattern response strategy. This is part of a larger model of crime reduction— the Stratified Model of Prob- lem Solving, Analysis, and Accountability—that addresses immediate, short-term, and long-term problems.4 This model takes into account the results of police research on traditional, problem-oriented, hot spots, and intelligence-led policing, as well as Compstat, and presents a structure for all police ranks within an organi- zation to systematically address a range of problems.5

To address crime and disor- der beyond the incident level,

the Stratified Model first distin- guishes different kinds of problems for which crime-re- duction strategies can be imple- mented. The problems vary based on their complexity and temporal nature (more complex problems develop over longer periods of time). Importantly, to be most effective, a police de- partment must address concerns at all levels because if smaller, more immediate problems are resolved successfully, they will not become larger, long-term ones.6 Thus, the model breaks down activities generating po- lice response into three catego- ries based on their complexity and temporal nature. 1. Immediate activity: Indi-

vidual calls for service and crimes (individual incidents)

2. Short-term activity: Patterns (groups of similar crimes

taking place in a relatively short time frame linked together by modus operandi, offender, location type, and property taken)

3. Long-term activity: Prob- lems (set of related activi- ties occurring over a longer period of time resulting from individuals’ routine behavior and the systematic opportunities for crime cre- ated by their behavior) The primary conceptual

component of the Stratified Model is that various ranks within the police organization are responsible and held ac- countable for implementing appropriate strategies for ad- dressing the different levels of problems. Higher ranks in the organization that have more au- thority and experience address more complex issues, and the

“

”Detective Lieutenant Santos serves with the Port St. Lucie, Florida, Police Department.

Patterns represent the core component

of the Stratified Model and crime-reduction

efforts because they are realistic and manageable

for police response….

14 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin

traditional hierarchical structure of the organization ensures that the implementation of crime- reduction strategies takes place.7 Separating and distinguishing the types of problems allows a variety of personnel within the agency to provide different analyses, responses, and ac- countability. To help illustrate this model, the author highlights one aspect, patterns.

ADDRESSING PATTERNS Patterns consist of two

or more similar crimes related by modus operandi, victim,

offender, location, or property that typically occur over days, weeks, or months and focus on offenses wherein victims and perpetrators do not know one another, such as stranger rape, robbery, burglary, and grand theft.8 Patterns represent the core component of the Strati- fied Model and crime-reduction efforts because they are realis- tic and manageable for police response; research has shown that addressing hot-spot pat- terns, in particular, can prove successful;9 and the police, the community, and the media are

most concerned about their immediate resolution (e.g., a serial robber or burglar oper- ating in the past 2 weeks in a specific area). Because patterns occur in the short-term, effec- tive responses also must happen quickly and with purpose. In addition, if stopping patterns from continuing is important, an appropriate amount of resources must be allocated.

The Beehive Effect The author offers his strat-

egy, the Beehive Effect, as a way that police organizations could react to crime patterns. When threatened, bees respond by exiting the hive with enough resources (bees) to expel the threat and protect the colony. Not sparing any chance of failure, they do not send one or two bees to investigate the threat nor react days after it occurs. Instead, they respond immediately with a significant amount of force. The resources necessary to protect the hive are enormous, immediate, and aggressive. The bees respond with purpose, teamwork, and one goal in mind: to swarm and eradicate the threat. Finally, because every time the response is the same (immediate and severe), everyone knows not to threaten a beehive. The author believes that police organiza- tions also should take this approach.

Figure 1

Source: Adapted from R. Boba, R. Santos, and L. Wyckoff, “Implementing and Institutionalizing Compstat in Maryland: Training Modules,” http://www.compstat.umd.edu (accessed April 30, 2010).

Stratified Model of Problem Solving, Analysis, and Accountability

Level of Problem Complexity

Chief

Incident Pattern Problem

Officer

Rank

February 2011 / 15

Similarly, when a pattern is identified (e.g., five related residential burglaries in an area during a week or three street robberies of elderly people by the same suspect), it represents a threat to the community and, as a result, to the police. The Beehive Effect would dictate that police respond immediately to a pattern every time with an appropriate amount of resources to neutralize the threat. All divisions in the police organiza- tion would respond coopera- tively to patterns based on their capabilities so that a collective and comprehensive response occurs. The response would be automatic and institutionalized throughout the organization. To further break down the Beehive Effect and the approach to pattern responses, four impor- tant aspects require specific attention.

1. Systematic and appropriate identification of patterns

2. Coordination of appropriate and effective responses

3. Accountability for ensuring responses occur consistently for every pattern

4. Evaluation of successful elimination of crimes and future patterns

Identification and Bulletins Importantly, patterns are not

counts of crime or identified via statistics or percent change

but by a crime analyst through a qualitative methodology.10 Police agencies must recognize that officers cannot be respon- sible for identifying patterns during their normal duties be- cause they do not have the time or the access to crime databases and must focus on other priori- ties. Thus, to facilitate a system- atic pattern response system, personnel must be assigned to conduct pattern analysis on a

in a specific location and linked by time of day, day of week, property taken, modus operandi, or other means. Crime analysts identify many types of patterns, as several examples illustrate.11

• Series: A run of similar crimes committed by the same individual against one or various victims or targets (e.g., robbery of convenience stores by one offender)

• Spree: A pattern character- ized by a high frequency of criminal activity to the extent that it appears almost continuous and seems to involve the same offender, usually over a short time span with no “cooling off” period (e.g., seven cars burglarized along the same street in one night)

• Hot spot: A specific loca- tion or small area where an unusual amount of criminal activity occurs committed by one or more offenders (e.g., residential burglaries in a 3-block area in a week)

• Hot product: A specific type of property targeted in the same or different types of crime (e.g., flat-screen TVs taken in commercial and residential burglaries)

• Hot target: A type of place frequently victimized but not necessarily in the same area (e.g., day-care centers

continual basis. These crime analysts are trained in pattern identification methodology and have specific knowledge of the databases available in a police department. To this end, agen- cies must invest in the analysis capacity to consistently and ef- fectively respond to patterns.

A pattern is not a cluster of residential burglaries in a particular area, but a group of residential burglaries occurring

”

Importantly, patterns are not

counts of crime or identified via statistics

or percent change, but by a crime analyst through a qualitative

methodology.

“

16 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin

where purses are being taken from vehicles while mothers drop off their children)

Once an agency identifies a pattern, it can summarize and format the information into a succinct, relevant pat- tern bulletin used to direct responses. Although the substantive information within the bulletin changes based on the type of pattern and crime, the format and basic com- ponents remain consistent. Each bulletin is actionable, wherein it provides informa- tion that compels response and guides resources toward the appropriate times, days, areas, and offenders. The bulletin is disseminated throughout the

police organization as soon as it is completed, rather than on a set publication schedule, so that immediate response can begin. Systematic Response

Once an agency has identi- fied a pattern threat, it should immediately and appropriately respond. The patrol division should take the lead because it is operational 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Other divisions, such as criminal and special in- vestigations, crime prevention, and public information can sup- port patrol’s response in ways appropriate to their functions. By sharing the workload, each division contributes a realistic amount of resources that to- gether can result in a significant level of response.

Part of the development of a systematic pattern response sys- tem includes identifying the ap- propriate and effective potential responses for short-term crime patterns. Through research and practice, police have identified many effective tactics for short- term issues. These responses can be implemented whenever and wherever the pattern occurs or during normal waking/busi- ness hours.12 They can be bro- ken down into a list or “recipe” of responses and allocated to the appropriate division within the police agency, such as—

• employing, in the areas and times where a pattern oc- curs, directed patrol (in cars, on bikes, or on foot) that can make field contacts to deter offenders and pro- vide potential investigative leads;13

• using surveillance in a par- ticular area at a specific time to make an arrest;14

• conducting “sting” or “bait” operations where people or property have been targeted in a particular pattern;15

• clearing cases by using an arrest in one case to clear others in the pattern;

• contacting potential victims directly about the crime pattern and ways to protect themselves (according to research, crime prevention

© Thinkstock.com

February 2011 / 17

education works best when targeted at specific victims, times, and areas);16 and

• distributing pattern infor- mation to the public to encourage citizens to pro- vide additional information (“tips”), to warn offenders, and to offer crime preven- tion advice.17 The author’s agency, the

Port St. Lucie Police Depart- ment (PSLPD), requires re- sponses to patterns from each division, with patrol taking the lead and overseeing the coor- dination of them. Creating the resources (e.g., purchasing bait vehicles, creating crime preven- tion flyers, staffing specialized units) and developing policy on the requirements (immediate and coordinated) ensure the depart- ment addresses patterns immedi- ately, as well as consistently.

Not all responses, however, are required or appropriate for each pattern because the type of pattern and the seriousness and number of crimes in the pattern varies. For example, a series of street robberies in a residential neighborhood requires much more resources and response than a spree of car burglaries occurring in a night at an apart- ment complex. The PSLPD fol- lows standard procedures when assigning the responses to its divisions based on their orga- nizational charts and resource levels:

Neighborhood Policing Bureau (Patrol)

• Directed marked patrol in the pattern area (car or bike)

• Unmarked patrol in the pattern area

• DART (Directed Area Response Team): special- ized unit (one sergeant and six officers) stops people in pattern area and conducts surveillance

Crime Prevention and Public Information

• Potential victims contacted directly via reverse 911, letters, flyers, and in person

• Media alerts

Accountability System In the Stratified Model, an

accountability system ensures that pattern responses are imple- mented immediately, system- atically, and appropriately. The PSLPD began a Compstat-like process in 1999, but, more re- cently, has adapted it to facili- tate crime reduction as outlined in the Stratified Model. Al- though district patrol command- ers are ultimately responsible for the overall crime-reduction efforts, shift lieutenants (corre- sponding with when the pattern occurs) take the lead in patrol and are assigned the responsi- bility of making sure that pat- tern responses are overseen by sergeants and implemented by patrol officers and that support divisions and units are deployed appropriately.

Documentation is an im- portant aspect of accountability that not only provides a record of the work being done but also recognizes efforts and reinforc- es the system. The PSLPD has taken advantage of its intranet system to facilitate documenta- tion of pattern responses. When the crime analysts identify a pattern, they immediately

Criminal Investigations Bureau

• Crimes in each pattern area assigned to one detective

• Known offenders in pat- tern area contacted

• Bait car deployment in the pattern area

• Unmarked patrol/surveil- lance in the pattern area

”

By sharing the workload, each

division contributes a realistic amount of resources that

together can result in a significant level of

response.

“

18 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin

post the pattern bulletin on the agency’s intranet system for sworn personnel to review. A pattern discussion board pro- vides offi cers the capability to post discussion threads of infor- mation about their responses, as well as their knowledge of the pattern area, known offenders, and fi eld interviews conducted. It also allows supervisors to monitor whether appropriate

responses are taking place. The threads enable commentary to occur in “real time,” allowing information once passed hap- hazardly by word of mouth to be reviewed by all personnel. This helps inform all police personnel about the progress of pattern responses.

Offi cers, detectives, special- ized units, crime prevention personnel, and anyone else

implementing part of the pattern response record the relevant information on the thread for everyone to see. This informa- tion also is archived, and the responsible sergeant or lieuten- ant creates a summary of the pattern from the thread informa- tion once it has been resolved. The patrol captain responsible for the area in which the pattern occurred receives this informa- tion so it can be discussed in the monthly meeting.

Response Evaluation As part of the accountabil-

ity structure, weekly “action oriented” meetings are held to systematically coordinate and review progress of pattern- response strategies among the police divisions, and monthly meetings are used to evalu- ate their effectiveness. The PSLPD’s weekly meetings bring together patrol, investi- gations, and crime prevention captains and lieutenants to review the responses in prog- ress, evaluate those coming to a close, discuss needed resources, and coordinate new responses that must be implemented. The monthly meetings make sure that responses are implemented consistently across regional ar- eas, that adequate resources are provided, and that the responses are effective. In each monthly meeting, the patrol captains present the responses and their

Figure 2

February 2011 / 19

results of any patterns occur- ring that month. The command staff uses a series of maps and statistics to determine whether pattern responses are effective or whether larger problems are emerging.

Figure 2 is an example of a map of one district for 3 months illustrating theft-from-vehicle offenses. It shows several isolated patterns in Zones 22 and 23 of District 2, while the reoccuring patterns in Zone 21 indicate that the responses may not be deployed effectively or quickly enough or that a dif- ferent or immediate approach may be necessary. Importantly, the accountability processes facilitated through the intranet system, as well as in the weekly and monthly meetings, remain ongoing and consistent to en- sure accountability and evalua- tion occur at every level of the organization.

Strategy Effectiveness The PSLPD has made

substantial strides over the past 6 years implementing and routinizing the pattern response strategy, as well as the other aspects of the Stratified Model. Some of the achievements include a significant increase in the crime analysis function. Two analysts create 5 to 10 pat- tern bulletins and 10 to 20 other analysis bulletins each month. Communication has improved

considerably among different divisions through the coordina- tion of responses in the field and the weekly and monthly meetings. Also, major progress has occurred in the number of pattern responses, their consis- tency, and coordination among divisions, along with account- ability at all levels. Accountabil- ity meetings are more focused and centered on crime-reduction

responses and their effective- ness and not simply bent on re- viewing statistics or identifying clusters of crimes on a map.

Some evidence that the PSLPD’s strategies are work- ing is based on the most recent property crime statistics. Theft from vehicle has been one of the most frequent crimes and a major focus for pattern response in Port St. Lucie. A

82 percent increase in these crimes occurred between June 2004 through May 2005 and June 2007 through May 2008 (a 3-year period). From June 2007 through May 2008 and June 2008 through May 2009, a 1 percent increase of these crimes occurred, during which time the PSLPD implemented the pat- tern response system and the sharp incline seemed to taper off. The most recent comparison of June 2008 through May 2009 and June 2009 through May 2010 shows, for the first time in 5 years, a declining trend in these crimes, with a decrease of 22 percent. Also, interviews and discussions with personnel in the department revealed that, overall, officers and supervisors feel their strategies have be- come more effective. Moreover, they have received positive feedback from citizens about the information being provided on crime and disorder in their neighborhoods.

CONCLUSION Faced with diminishing

resources, police executives will need more efficient and focused approaches to implement crime- reduction strategies. The Strati- fied Model of Problem Solving, Analysis, and Accountability is a systematic approach to ad- dressing crime and disorder at various levels (e.g., incidents, patterns, and problems) that

”

Documentation is an important aspect

of accountability that not only provides

a record of the work being done

but also recognizes efforts and reinforces

the system.

“

20 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin

can be infused into the existing structure of police organiza- tions with little cost. Patterns, arguably, represent the core component of the Stratified Model, as well as police depart- ments’ crime-reduction efforts, because they are realistic for police response, they rely on existing police resources. Also, research has shown that police can successfully address them, and everyone is concerned and supportive of their immediate resolution.

An effective systematic pat- tern response strategy is auto- matic and institutionalized into the daily business of policing and is analogous to a swarm of bees protecting its hive. A po- lice department invests in crime analysis to consistently identify patterns. It responds to patterns with immediacy and coordina- tion, as well as with purpose and teamwork. As part of the accountability structure, weekly meetings are action oriented, and monthly meetings are used to evaluate response effective- ness. As a result, implementing an effective Systematic Pattern Response Strategy in this way accomplishes the Beehive Effect.

Endnotes 1 H. Goldstein, Problem-Oriented

Policing (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1990); R.C. Trojanowicz, Community

Policing: A Contemporary Perspective (Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing, 1998); G.L. Kelling and C. Coles, Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Re- ducing Crime in Our Communities (New York, NY: Free Press, 1996); J.H. Ratc- liffe, Intelligence-Led Policing (Cullomp- ton, UK: Willan Publishing, 2008); and W.J. Bratton and P. Knobler, Turnaround: How America’s Top Cop Reversed the Crime Epidemic (New York, NY: Random House, 1986).

2 W. Skogan and K. Frydl, Fairness and Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence (Washington, DC: The National Acad- emies Press, 2004).

Dr. Rachel Boba and its implementation of the Stratified Model. Also, the Stratified Model is the basis of an ongoing initia- tive by the state of Maryland through the Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention and the University of Maryland to implement and institutionalize Compstat in all Maryland police agencies, http:// www.compstat.umd.edu (accessed April 30, 2010).

6 H. Goldstein, Problem-Oriented Policing (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1990).

7 R. Boba, R. Santos, and L. Wyckoff, “Implementing and Institutionalizing Compstat in Maryland: Training Modules,” http://www.compstat.umd.edu (accessed April 30, 2010).

8 For additional information on pattern identification methodology, see R. Boba, Crime Analysis with Crime Mapping (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2008).

9 D. Weisburd and A. Braga, Police Innovation: Contrasting Perspectives (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

10 R. Boba, Crime Analysis with Crime Mapping.

11 Ibid., 153-155. 12 Ibid. 13 M. Scott, U.S. Department of Justice,

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, The Benefits and Consequences of Police Crackdowns (Washington, DC, 2004).

14 G. Newman, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Po- licing Services, Sting Operations (Wash- ington, DC, 2007).

15 Ibid. 16 K. Bowers and S. Johnson, The Role

of Publicity in Crime Prevention: Findings from the Reducing Burglary Initiative (London, UK: Home Office Research Study No. 272, 2003).

17 E. Barthe, U.S. Department of Jus- tice, Office of Community Oriented Polic- ing Services, Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns (Washington, DC, 2006).

3 R. Boba and J. Crank, “Institutionaliz- ing Problem-Oriented Policing: Rethink- ing Problem Identification, Analysis, and Accountability,” Police Practice and Research 9, no. 5 (2008): 379-393.

4 Ibid.; and R. Boba, R. Santos, and L. Wyckoff, “Implementing and Institutional- izing Compstat in Maryland,” http://www. compstat.umd.edu (accessed April 30, 2010).

5 The Port St. Lucie, Florida, Police Department received the International Association of Chiefs of Police inau- gural Excellence in Law Enforcement Research Award in September 2008 for its partnership with police researcher

”

Some evidence that the PSLPD’s

strategies are working is based on the

most recent property crime statistics.

“

Copyright of FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin is the property of Superintendent of Documents and its content

may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express

written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.