Can Additional Resources Lead to Higher Levels of Productivity (Arrests) in Police Agencies?

• Author: Yang Zhang, Jihong Solomon Zhao,Quint Thurman
• DOI: 10.1177/0734016810391902
• Published date: 01 June 2011
• Date: 01 June 2011
• Subject Matter: Articles

Can Additional Resources

Lead to Higher Levels of

Productivity (Arrests) in

Police Agencies?

Jihong Solomon Zhao

1

, Yang Zhang

1

, and Quint Thurman

2

Abstract

While most police chiefs might be willing to make such a claim that there is a positive relationship

between COPS grants and police arrests, empirical research on this topic is very limited. Following

from an earlier study by Zhao, Scheider, and Thurman (2003), this research makes several

contributions to the current literature. First, it includes additional years of data from police agencies

receiving federal funding to examine the effects of additional resources on arrests. Second, making

use of the two waves of census data (1990 and 2000) allowed time-varying analysis of the relationship

between police arrests and demographics. Finally, a hierarchical statistical method for longitudinal

analysis (HMLM) was used in the analysis of police arrest data from 5,871 cities during 1993 and 2000

when the involvement of federal government for promoting community policing or quality of life

policing was unprecedented. Our primary findings s uggest a positive relationship between COPS

hiring grants and all four types of police arrests during the period of study though COPS funding

usually accounted for only a small percentage of the total budget in a police department ( GAO,

2005). More specifically, the hiring grant, the largest part of the COPS funding project, had

consistently significant impact on police arrests after controlling for the socioeconomic variables

and crimes. In addition, the hiring grant was significant predictor of all four categories of arrests,

indicatingthat additional manpowerdid have a direct casual relationship with number of police arrests.

Keywords

police arrest, COPS grant, police productivity, deterrence theory

Introduction

Historically, both public and private sectors are subject to economic cycles of feast or famine.In a

financialdownturn, administratorscan expect to be asked to ‘‘domore with less.’’During an economic

upturn, there is a tendency for organizations to seek additional resourcesbased upon the rationale that

1

College of Criminal Justice, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, USA

2

Department of Criminal Justice, Texas State University at San Marcos, TX, USA

Corresponding Author:

Jihong Solomon Zhao, Beto Criminal Justice Center, Huntsville, TX 77341, USA

Email: jzhao@shsu.edu

Criminal Justice Review

36(2) 165-182

ª2011 Georgia State University

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0734016810391902

http://cjr.sagepub.com

‘‘more can be done withmore.’’ Police chiefs, for example,often claim that if given additionalfunding

for personneland equipment, they couldserve the public betterand make communities safer.However,

the extent to which abundant resources may translate into increasedpolice productivity is an empirical

question that onlya few have attempted to answer (e.g., Zhao, Scheinder, & Thurman, 2003).

Police productivity can be measured in a variety of ways. These measures typically include num-

ber of arrests, calls for service, average response time to calls for service, and number of crime pre-

vention programs. In this study, we chose police arrests since criminal apprehensions often are

perceived as the primary means for controlling local criminal incidents (Walker, 1977). Accord-

ingly, many researchers have done so as well when examining how police productivity impacts

crime rates. The overall findings from several studies suggest that an increase in police arrests is

negatively associated with local crime rates such as in New York city (e.g., Corman & Mocan,

2002; Kelling & Sousa, 2001; Rosenfeld, Fornango, & Rengifo, 2007) and in other urban settings

(Sherman & Rogan, 1995; Skogan, 1976; Weisburd et al., 2006; Weisburd & Green, 1995).

Three primary explanations seem to suggest why we might expect such a positive relationship.

First, police work by its very nature is labor intensive. Personnel costs account for approximately

85–90%of a police department’s total operating budget in any U.S. agency (Swanson, Territo, &

Taylor, 2008). In addition, whenever arrests occur the apprehension of criminal offenders is one of

the most labor-intensive activities initiated in the policing environment. This may involve several

hours of agency time (e.g., transportation and booking) and often includes the involvement of several

patrol officers and civilian personnel. Additional resources that are targeted to hire police officers

seem to increase police arrests. Second, the adaptation of technology can sometimes lead to higher

levels of organizational productivity, including those responsible for public safety. Travis and Lang-

worthy (2008, p. 487) observed that ‘‘Perhapsthe greatest change in the history of American policing

came as a result of the application of technology to the police work.’’The introduction of automobiles

and two-way communications early in the 20th century are well documented as turning points in the

professionalization of American policing. More recently, one of the most noticeable advancements in

police work has been the addition of mounted computer terminals in patrol cars. These terminals

provide wireless communication, integrated high-performance Global positioning system (GPS), and

the capacity for online database searches (Walker & Katz, 2008). Patrol officers are linked to real-time

information and are equipped to send reports directly from the field. Improvements in communica-

tions technology enhance information gathering and thereby increase police officer productivity by

reducing less productive time doing paper work at the station.

Finally, organizational change to community policing represents a deliberate approach that

attempts to address crime problems in a community at a grassroots level, including a broad emphasis

on social disorder and incivilities (Greene, 2000). So rather than focusing simply on calls for service

reported to the police, the organization employs a proactive posture that places importance on con-

trolling behavior that may lead to serious crime if unchecked. Research on the relationship between

the implementation of community policing and social disorder reduction has shown such an

approach to be effective (Cordner, 1997; Eck & Spelman, 1987; Katz, Webb, & Schaefer, 2001).

The current study builds upon previous research to better understand this phenomenon (Zhao

et al., 2003). Here we include Census data from 1990 and 2000, additional years of federal fund-

ing, arrest data prior to the introduction of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grants,

and comparable arrest data from non-funded agencies to determine the extent to which COPS

funding contributed to increases in police productivity (arrests) and what specific categories of

police arrest were most significantly associated with COPS funding. In addition, annual UCR vio-

lent and property crimes were also included in the model. The primary reason to include UCR

crime data is to control for the crime trend since police arrests can also be a function of crime.

A nested statistical method for longitudinal analysis (HMLM) is used in the analysis of police

arrest data from 5,871 cities from 1993 and 2000.

166 Criminal Justice Review 36(2)