CompStat—or COMPSTAT, short for Compare Stats— is a police management system created by the New York City Police Department in 1994 with assistance from the New York City Police Foundation. Under CompStat, the department keeps a daily-updated digital record of crimes reported and in weekly meetings the department's leadership gathers to review trends in the data. It was credited with decreased crime rates in NYC during its early years, though scholarship is divided on whether it played a role. It has been criticized for leading to data manipulation and increased stop-and-frisk searches. Variations of the program have been used in police departments worldwide.

Origins

CompStat is a management system created in April 1994 by Bill Bratton and Jack Maple, whom Bratton met while he was chief of the New York City Transit Police and later hired as the New York Police Department's top anti-crime specialist when he became Police Commissioner in 1993.[1] CompStat began as weekly meetings at One Police Plaza where officers were randomly selected from precincts and quizzed about crime trends in their districts and how to respond.[1] At the time, the NYPD collected crime statistics every 6 months; under threat of transfers, they began to collect information daily.[1] In February 1994, the department heads provided a hand count of major crimes in the first 6 weeks of 1993 and 1994.[2]

Maple drafted junior staffer John Yohe to modify an existing program to analyze the data.[1] CompStat was named after a program called "compare stats".[2] It was originally run on Informix's SmartWare desktop office system before being replaced by Microsoft's FoxPro database for business.[2] The Patrol Bureau's staff computerized the information provided by department heads and created the first 'CompStat' book, collating the information by precinct, patrol borough, and city.[2] The New York City Police Foundation significantly funded the NYPD's initial development of the program;[3] they also acquired and gifted the department the first CompStat system.[4]

The weekly CompStat sessions were initially open to the public and commanders would be denigrated by management if they had failed; three-quarters were dismissed over 18 months for failing to bring the numbers down.[5] The sessions were closed to the public in the late 2000s but since 2010 have been more amiable with commanders sent DVD recordings of sessions for review.[5]

Impact

CompStat shifted the focus of the NYPD from 'service and the beat cop' to 'crime and commanding officers': a greater emphasis was placed on issuing formal arrests and summonses and the NYPD shifted towards a centralized and top-down scientific management approach.[2] Crime rates decreased while CompStat was implemented, leading to widespread public praise of the program.[5] At the same time, civilian complaints against the NYPD increased.[2] Scholars have inconclusively debated whether CompStat played a role.[2][5] Proponents of CompStat have argued that the program was responsible for the decrease, others have noted decreases in other cities with different policing models during the same period.[2][1]

An anonymous survey of retired high-ranking police officials found that pressure to reduce crime prompted some supervisors and precinct commanders to distort crime statistics.[6] In 2010 NYPD officer Adrian Schoolcraft released recordings of his superiors urging him to manipulate data: his captain demanded an increase in summonses issued under threat of retaliation.[7][8][9] In 2014 Justice Quarterly published an article stating that there was statistical evidence of the NYPD manipulating CompStat data.[10] A 2021 study found that CompStat led to an increase in minor arrests but no impact on serious crime and led police to engage in data manipulation.[11] In Floyd v. City of New York (2013), Judge Scheindlin ruled that CompStat led to pressure to conduct more stop-and-frisk searches without review of their constitutionality and "resulted in the disproportionate and discriminatory stopping of blacks and Hispanics".[5]

Bratton heavily marketed CompStat and used it to market himself in the press.[5] In 2004, a survey found 11% and 32% of small and large police departments respectively had adopted a CompStat-like program.[5] A 2011 survey by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERFS) found that 79% of their member agencies utilized CompStat and 52% had begun using it between 2006 and 2010.[2] The program has been adopted globally, notably in the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Australia, and Mexico.[5] A report by the Brennan Center for Justice in 2016 found that mass incarceration had a minimal effect on reducing crime in the United States but CompStat had a modest one. It noted that the NYPD's implementation might be an outlier due to its size and unique implementation.[12] The program has also been adopted as an all-purpose management technique; in 2010 Mayor Bloomberg had every city service subjected to a CompStat-like evaluation.[5]

In popular culture

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d e Smith, Chris (2018-03-02). "The Crime-Fighting Program That Changed New York Forever". New York Magazine.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i Eterno, John A.; Silverman, Eli B. (2006). "The New York City Police Department's Compstat: Dream or Nightmare?". International Journal of Police Science & Management. 8 (3): 218–231. doi:10.1350/ijps.2006.8.3.218. ISSN 1461-3557.
  3. ^ Vitale, Alex S. (2005). "Innovation and Institutionalization: Factors in the Development of "Quality of Life" Policing in New York City". Policing and Society. 15 (2): 99–124. doi:10.1080/10439460500071754. ISSN 1043-9463.
  4. ^ Walby, Kevin; Lippert, Randy K; Luscombe, Alex (2017-09-15). "The Police Foundation's Rise: Implications of Public Policing's Dark Money". The British Journal of Criminology. 58 (4): 824–844. doi:10.1093/bjc/azx055. ISSN 0007-0955.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Didier, Emmanuel (2018-07-30). "Globalization of Quantitative Policing: Between Management and Statactivism". Annual Review of Sociology. 44 (1): 515–534. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053308. ISSN 0360-0572. S2CID 150164073.
  6. ^ Chen, David W. (2010-02-08). "Survey Raises Questions on Data-Driven Policy". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2023-12-19.
  7. ^ Baker, Al; Rivera, Ray (10 September 2010). "Secret Tape Has Police Pressing Ticket Quotas". The New York Times. Retrieved 2016-06-02.
  8. ^ Parascandola, Rocco (2010-09-11). "Cop in scandal: No fines, no jobs". NY Daily News. Retrieved 2016-06-02.
  9. ^ Colleen Long and Tom Hayes (October 9, 2010). "Cop who made tapes accuses NYPD of false arrest". Associated Press.
  10. ^ "Police Manipulations of Crime Reporting: Insiders' Revelations" (PDF). Justice Quarterly. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
  11. ^ Eckhouse, Laurel (2021). "Metrics Management and Bureaucratic Accountability: Evidence from Policing". American Journal of Political Science. 66 (2): 385–401. doi:10.1111/ajps.12661. ISSN 1540-5907. S2CID 243672885.
  12. ^ Roeder, Oliver; Eisen, Lauren-Brooke; Bowling, Julia (February 12, 2015). What Caused the Crime Decline? (Report). Brennan Center for Justice.
  13. ^ "Lynne Thigpen Biography". Movies & TV Dept. The New York Times. Retrieved February 18, 2016.[dead link]
  14. ^ "The District". TV.com. Retrieved 2016-06-02.
  15. ^ Makris, Constantine (2000-02-11), Limitations, Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, Christopher Meloni, Mariska Hargitay, Richard Belzer, retrieved 2023-12-21
  16. ^ "#127 The Crime Machine, Part I by Reply All". Gimlet Media. Retrieved 2018-10-12.
  17. ^ "#128 The Crime Machine, Part II by Reply All". Gimlet Media. Retrieved 2018-10-12.

Further reading

Categories