Richland Police Department: 2009 Municipal Achievement Awards
Municipal Achievement Awards
2009
Richland Police Department
PROJECT CATEGORY:
Public Safety
PROJECT TITLE:
PARSTAT; Incorporating Increased Accountability
and Effective Crime Fighting Strategies Into a Values Based
Organization
PROJECT STATEMENT:
Since 2006 the Richland Police Department has used the Performance and Accountable
Response to Statistics (PARSTAT) process as its primary crime-fighting strategy. This
process has helped the department do a much better job of delivering its product of safety
and service to the community. It has increased accountability in a values-based organization,
while helping to reduce crime significantly.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
A police department must determine how it can most effectively and efficiently provide
service to its community. The type and level of service are unique for each department and
community. The Richland Police Department (RPD) took a hard look at itself, questioning
what its product should be, how well it delivered that product and whether it could do better.
RPD acknowledged that it needed significant change. The department, as well as the City of
Richland organization, recognized the need to transition from a rules-bound organization to
one that is values-based. The police department faced the additional challenge of changing
its culture from a stagnant, reactionary mode to one that is more proactive and directed in its
effort. The goal was to create a process that increased accountability and helped the
department better provide its product of safety and service.
The RPD implemented a process called PARSTAT, which significantly increased
accountability and used successful crime-fighting strategies. The police department’s effort
created a values-based organization that does a much better job identifying and solving
problems. The end result has been a significant drop in serious crime and collisions, despite
increases in population and calls for service. Residents continue to be pleased with the
police department’s level of service, and surveys show they feel exceptionally safe living in
Richland.
1
Richland Police Department: 2009 Municipal Achievement Awards
Background
Historically, an increasingly mobile society forced officers into patrol cars. The advent and
implementation of 9-1-1 technology contributed greatly to the emphasis on rapid response to
crimes and calls for service. Officers raced from call to call to take reports. Consequently,
positive contact with the community declined in importance. Response times became a
standard barometer by which agencies judged their own, and other agencies’, performance.
Officers hurried from one call to another and became conditioned “report takers.”
Within the RPD, officers were expected to respond in person to all calls for service.
Meanwhile, the department introduced non-essential, ancillary programs1 that took officers
away from the core patrol function. Crime-fighting strategies were fragmentary. Patrols were
generally random, without department-wide coordination of effort directed towards problem
identification and solution. Problems were most often identified based upon the perspective
of individual officers and supervisors. Problem identification and solution varied from
individual to individual. Superficial investigations became too common on routine cases. The
principles and practices of good policing that had long been in the repertoire of effective
police officers were no longer the norm. The agency’s culture soon grew to that of being a
reactionary, rather than a proactive, police department. Frustrations grew as the department
was repeatedly asked to do more work with fewer resources. The crime rate generally
continued to increase.
Supervisors had responsibility, but often lacked the proper authority to manage their own
squads. Supervisory accountability was significantly lacking. The department had little
rigorous follow-up or assessment to ensure that staff was obtaining desired results.
Supervisory staff meetings were infrequent and normally served the purpose of downward
communication.
Organizational Change
Beginning in 2002, the RPD, as well as the city, began a transformation from a rules-bound
organization to one that is values-based. In addition, the police department underwent a
cultural change; from a reactionary, “wait for the big one to come,” report-taking mindset to
one that evolved into a proactive, investigative approach to crime fighting. The department,
over time, began to use a management model that became known as VMP3; Values,
Mission, Product, Priorities and Process.
 Values: The city identified its core values as integrity, excellence and teamwork. RPD
integrated these into all operational facets.
 Mission: RPD developed a new mission statement, with input from the entire
organization.
 Product: RPD identified safety and service as its primary “product.”
 Priorities: RPD identified its priorities as 1) crime, 2) traffic and 3) quality of life issues.
Supervisors, as well as line personnel, were given increased responsibility, flexibility and
authority to deliver our product to the community based upon the organization’s values,
mission and priorities. This included the ability to deviate from policy or established practice if
an employee can articulate that the change was reasonably necessary in order to meet the
department’s values, mission or priorities.
2
Richland Police Department: 2009 Municipal Achievement Awards
Supervisors learned the difference between customer service and customer satisfaction, as
well as the difference between real safety versus perceived safety. Supervisors were also
taught about obligated and unobligated time, and how unobligated time should be used for
proactive, directed patrols. It became no longer acceptable for officers to drive randomly
around town, waiting to handle the next call for service.
Seeking an Effective Process
RPD faced a major challenge: to design a process that best met the department’s needs.
The department needed a process that improved problem identification, provided a wellcoordinated approach to problem solving, addressed less serious crime and quality of life
issues as well as serious crime, increased accountability within the organization and
accurately measured success and failure. Staff did extensive research, including site visits to
New York Police Department, New Jersey, Washington State Patrol and Los Angeles Police
Department.
The answer for RPD lay with the Computerized Statistics (CompStat) process that NYPD first
introduced in 1994. This process incorporated the “Broken Windows” theory2, which suggests
there is both a high correlation and causal link between community disorder and more
serious crime. Analysis of statistics allowed staff to identify problems and effectively assign
resources. CompStat integrates four crime reduction principles into virtually every function
and activity that the agency undertakes:
 Accurate and timely information and intelligence.
 Rapid deployment of resources.
 Implementation of effective tactics.
 Relentless follow-up and assessment.
CompStat significantly increases accountability within an organization and measures
success by reduction in crime statistics. The NYPD, and many other departments that
adopted the CompStat process, enjoyed significant reduction in crime over extended periods
of time. CompStat, as a management tool, has been applied throughout entire city
organizations with success3.
RPD command staff was concerned about the potential for “human toll” that is sometimes
associated, fairly or unfairly, with the CompStat process. If not applied properly, the process
has the potential to become adversarial and confrontational. Therefore, the RPD elected to
focus on effort, rather than on pure statistical results. The theory is that success, both
statistically and anecdotally, will follow if proper effort is put forth. This affords flexibility if
statistical results are not achieved due to factors outside an employee’s control. This theory
is consistent with a values-based organization. It is very important that accountability remain
a part of the process – but accountability is focused on effort, not statistical results.
The RPD redesigned the CompStat process to meet the unique challenges of the
department and its community. This revised process was named PARSTAT; Performance
and Accountable Response to Statistics.
Laying a Foundation for PARSTAT
The department recognized the need to increase unobligated time so that proactive, directed
efforts could be devoted to specific problems. RPD had to implement changes to lay the
foundation for a successful implementation of PARSTAT. These changes included:
3
Richland Police Department: 2009 Municipal Achievement Awards





Re-assignment of officers from non-essential, ancillary assignments to the core patrol
function.
Development of a Proactive Anti-Crime Team4 (PACT).
Implementation of a Differential Response Strategy, which includes:
o Authorizing officers to take telephone reports on incidents that meet specified
criteria.
o Allowing officers to hold non-emergency calls that meet specified criteria.
o Establishing a station officer assignment; this officers handles all telephone report
calls and walk-in customers.
o Implementing Merchant Crime Reports; businesses may mail, fax or drop off
simplified crime reports that meet the criteria.
o Directing citizens to the city attorney’s office or prosecutor’s office for direct filing
of charges that meet criteria; these incidents are included for Uniform Crime
Reporting purposes.
o Using citizen volunteers to handle certain found property cases and issue parking
infractions.
Implementation of a new Records Management System that made it possible to retrieve
statistical data.
Creation of a Crime Analysis software system with pin mapping capabilities that would
aid in identification of crime series and trends.
Implementation of PARSTAT
RPD began implementation of PARSTAT early in 2006. To be consistent with a valuesbased organization, RPD slowly phased in PARSTAT. Command staff purposely gave
supervisors and officers time to adjust to this new process; they did not want to overwhelm
supervisors and officers with too much change, which had included, since 2002, the switch to
a values-based organization, the previously described cultural shift and now implementation
of a new philosophy of policing. The department accepted that supervisors and officers
would make mistakes as they learned this new philosophy.
The PARSTAT process is manifested in two types of meetings that RPD staff conducts:
Weekly Strategy Meeting
A Crime Analyst gathers and an Administrative Sergeant prepares data on all crimes that
occurred in the past week for weekly review. Staff reviews the data from crime analysis and
quality control perspective. Staff also analyzes the data to detect trends so that RPD can
devote appropriate resources to prevent problems from occurring. Thus, the department is
proactive - rather than just reacting to numbers. Staff sees real-time graphs for each Part I
Crime; these graphs identify crime numbers in relationship to pre-established annual goals5.
People who attend this meeting include: Chief of Police (as his schedule allows), Division
Captains, Administrative Sergeant, Detective Sergeant, Community Services Sergeant, onduty Patrol Sergeant, PACT Sergeant, U-PACT Corporal, Crime Analyst and a
representative from the Department of Corrections. With these people in attendance, the
team can make immediate decisions about needed follow-up, or identify resources they need
to dedicate to problems. The team works out specific details at the meeting. Thus, RPD has
no delay in trying to determine who will do what, at what time. The weekly strategy meetings
are scheduled so attendees can participate while on-duty, preventing overtime costs. The
meetings normally last 30 minutes. Staff generates a weekly objectives form after each
4
Richland Police Department: 2009 Municipal Achievement Awards
meeting. This identifies crime problems and what proactive, directed efforts are assigned to
take place for the upcoming week. All department personnel receive the form.
A Crime Analyst pulls statistical data in preparation
for a strategy meeting.
A sample of crime pin mapping used to
identify theft trends for a specific time frame.
Formal PARSTAT Meeting
Patrol squads rotate between day and night shift every six -weeks. The formal PARSTAT
meeting occurs the week preceding the shift rotation. It is purposely scheduled this way to
increase communication between patrol squads and help prepare them for the problems that
have occurred on the shift they are about to assume. All command staff and supervisory
teams are required to attend the meeting. Staff analyzes statistical data on Part I and II
Crimes for the month-to-date with comparison to previous years and in relationship to
established annual goals. Staff also reviews general crime trends from the past six weeks,
rather than analyzing individual crimes as occurs in the weekly strategy meetings.
Additionally, staff reviews such data as number of calls for service, Metro Drug Task Force
statistics, code enforcement statistics, station officer statistics, patrol squad staffing levels
and statistics, DUI data and collision data. Collision data includes identification of the top
collision intersections and collisions categorized by day of the week, time of the day and
causative factors. Attendees see pin mapping for all crime categories. Supervisory teams
provide a formal report to the command staff on what problems they identified over the past
six weeks, what steps they took to resolve the problems and how successful they may or
may not have been. Those present discuss progress toward, or results from, formal project
plans6. They also discuss these supervisory functions:
 On-site observations supervisors made of their officers during traffic stops, crime scene
investigations, court testimony, interviews and field contacts.
 Number, type and resolution of officer complaints that were received.
 Number and type of use-of-force incidents officers were involved in.
 Notable actions that officers may have performed.
Off-duty supervisors are allowed to adjust their work schedule to attend, or can receive
overtime. Meetings normally last about two hours. Staff posts the meeting’s PowerPoint
presentation on a computer drive so that all officers can view the content of the meeting. The
Strategy and PARSTAT meetings are open for any employee to attend.
5
Richland Police Department: 2009 Municipal Achievement Awards
Accountability is critical for PARSTAT to be successful. It is important that RPD hold
personnel accountable for efforts they put forth in identifying and solving problems. Thus,
accountability is a necessary component of the strategy and PARSTAT meetings.
The meetings also serve as a forum for command staff to continuously assess supervisors
and officers. While command staff asks supervisors questions in front of their peers, they
take care to neither reprimand nor ridicule staff. Common-sense management practices
prevail. During the meetings, supervisors identify positive or commendable actions that
officers may have performed during the review period. The Chief will often contact those
officers and thank them for their efforts.
Measuring the Success or Failure of PARSTAT
As previously mentioned, each police department and each community has unique situations
and challenges. What works for one may not work for another. Ultimately, the police
department and the community determine the success or failure of any philosophy, strategy
or process.
The challenge for the RPD’s 58 commissioned officers is to serve more than 46,000
residents who live in an area that covers 34.4 miles with 271 miles of roadway. While the
crime rate has fluctuated over the years, from 2002 to 2005 Richland experienced a 16%
increase in Part I crimes. Crimes per 1,000 residents rose from 34 to 37. The population
increased 8% during that time.
Since PARSTAT was implemented in 2006, Richland’s Part I Crimes decreased 27% and
crimes per 1,000 residents declined from 37 to 25. There was a 16% reduction in collisions.
The total for 2008 Part I Crimes (1,156) was the third lowest going back to 1980; the lowest
was 1,085 crimes in 1993. This has been accomplished despite a 6% population increase
and a 35% increase in calls for service since 2005. The 25 crimes per 1,000 residents
compares favorably to the 41 crimes per 1,000 residents that existed as recently as 2001.
An important component of PARSTAT is
distribution of accurate and timely information
to officers.
PARSTAT requires rapid deployment
of resources and implementation of
effective tactics to arrest violators.
Statistics is only one possible measurement of success. As stated above, the community
ultimately assesses the success of its police department. The RPD has always enjoyed a
good relationship with its citizens, receiving a 90% or higher rating of satisfaction with police
services in past community surveys. In a 2008 community survey, 99% of respondents
indicated they feel very safe or somewhat safe in their neighborhoods during the daytime,
and 95% feel that way after dark. This constituted a 2% and 3% increase from the same
6
Richland Police Department: 2009 Municipal Achievement Awards
question asked in a 2006 survey. In the 2008 survey, residents identified Public Safety (low
crime rate and safety) as one of the three most desirable things about living in Richland.
The RPD does not contend that PARSTAT is solely responsible for the decrease in crime
and collisions, or for the feeling of safety that the community shares. Only time will tell if
Richland can maintain these low numbers and its citizens’ feeling of safety. But the
department does know that PARSTAT has improved the effectiveness and efficiency of its
operation. PARSTAT provides a much better, coordinated effort in problem identification and
solution. The process forces constant evaluation of the strategies and tactics that RPD uses
to provide its product of safety and service to the community. It also increases accountability
to ensure that all members work as a team to meet the mission of safeguarding and
protecting those who live, work, visit and commute in Richland. And, it has been successfully
implemented in an organization that is now values-based.
Based upon all measurements of success, PARSTAT works for Richland. Implementation of
PARSTAT was possible because the Richland Police Department has become a flexible
organization that can make operational adjustments. The department is comfortable with,
and capable of, anticipating change and meeting new demands for service.
1
Non-essential ancillary programs for the RPD included the DARE assignment, Off-Road Vehicle
assignment and motorcycle traffic unit.
2 “Broken Windows” is a term coined by James Q. Wilson and George Kelling in their March 1982
article entitled “Broken Windows: The Police and Neighborhood Safety.”
3 The City of Baltimore spearheaded development of the CompStat process as a management tool in
all municipal departments with their CitiStat program.
4 Rather than evenly distributing patrol officers among all four patrol squads (RPD works 12-hour
shifts), the department conducted an analysis to determine how many officers would be needed for
each patrol squad to handle calls for service. Staff assigned extra officers to a plainclothes proactive
anti-crime team (PACT) consisting of one sergeant and four officers. Later, RPD formed a uniformed
proactive anti-crime team (U-PACT), consisting of a corporal and two officers. PACT is designed to be
a truly proactive team and does not respond to radio calls for service unless it is a priority, in-progress
call. U-PACT is designed to provide proactive, directed patrols to problem areas unless assisting
patrol squads with in-progress or priority calls.
5 The RPD established the following 2009 goals: 1) 5% reduction in Part I Crimes, 2) 10% reduction in
collisions, and 3) 10% increase in DUI arrests. Progress towards these goals is evaluated at each
weekly strategy meeting.
6 A supervisor devises a formal project plan for any problem that requires devoting multiple
department resources for its resolution.
7