Community policing and the organizational structure of campus law enforcement agencies

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which community policing within campus law enforcement agencies is influenced by the organizational structure, agency characteristics and campus characteristics.Design/methodology/approachThis study utilizes ordinary least squares regression modeling to examine community policing implementation. Data were drawn from a sample of 242 US colleges and universities included in the 2011–2012 Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) Survey of Campus Law Enforcement Agencies (SCLEA).FindingsFindings show that within-campus law enforcement agencies, greater levels of community policing are associated with more formalization, larger numbers of employees, a higher task scope and higher rates of on-campus property crime.Research limitations/implicationsUse of secondary data and reported crime rate limits the study. Future research should implement specialized surveys and qualitative methods to identify the specific needs and implementations of community policing.Originality/valueThis paper adds to the limited body of literature on the community policing in campus law enforcement through more recent data and the inclusion of campus community variables.

Campus law enforcement: the relationship between emergency preparedness and community policing

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between emergency preparedness and community policing within campus law enforcement agencies, as well as agency and campus characteristics that impact the level of emergency preparedness activities.Design/methodology/approachUsing data from the 2011–2012 Survey of Campus Law Enforcement Agencies, this study employs ordinary least squares regression modeling to examine emergency preparedness and community policing relationships within 298 campus law enforcement agencies.FindingsCommunity policing is the greatest predictor of emergency preparedness in campus law enforcement agencies. This finding refutes arguments that emergency preparedness and community policing are incompatible policing innovations.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is limited by the use of secondary data. Future research should utilize survey measures to better isolate the roles and functions of community policing and emergency preparedness.Practical implicationsThe findings have implications for campus law enforcement agencies to view emergency preparedness and community policing activities as interrelated. Specifically, agency administration can benefit by taking a holistic approach to campus policing and preparedness.Originality/valueThis paper extends the current research in municipal policing to the campus police environment. This paper also adds to the limited body of literature on the relationships between community policing and emergency preparedness.

Introduction: “Everybody knows about Mississippi goddam”

The introduction offers an overview of the shootings of May 15, 1970, and the effort by students to protect the evidence and memory of what happened. An HBCU in the most racially repressive state, Jackson State College opened in the midst of the counterrevolution against Reconstruction and was determined to provide a first-rate education. The school struggled against white supremacy from the beginning. Activism following World War Two, the Brown decision, and the civil rights movement produced an epic backlash, including violence against activists, leading to the growing dominance of Black Power as an organizing philosophy. Activism on campus had long been repressed by the administration, acting on behalf of the all-white Board of Trustees, but by the end of the decade the campus was changing, influenced by Black Power and a new president, and opportunities to grow and express racial consciousness emerged. It was this campus law enforcement assaulted.

Campus Crime and Victimization

Federal law requires colleges and universities to annually report their crime statistics. Case law further defines what liability these institutions face for failing to adequately and promptly respond to student victimization. Administrators and campus law enforcement should be aware of the factors associated with student victimization and the context in which it takes place. There are several theories found in the criminological literature that can inform these stakeholders. Furthermore, there are specific community policing programs that campus law enforcement can implement to help prevent student victimization within a harm-reduction framework. This chapter discusses crime and victimization on campus, federal reporting requirements, theories of student victimization, and related policy implications for institutions of higher education.

Crime and Victimization on College Campuses

Federal law requires colleges and universities to annually report their crime statistics. Case law further defines what liability these institutions face for failing to adequately and promptly respond to student victimization. Administrators and campus law enforcement should be aware of the factors associated with student victimization and the context in which it takes place. There are several theories found in the criminological literature that can inform these stakeholders. Furthermore, there are specific community policing programs that campus law enforcement can implement to help prevent student victimization within a harm-reduction framework. This chapter discusses crime and victimization on campus, federal reporting requirements, theories of student victimization, and related policy implications for institutions of higher education.

A quantitative assessment of institutions of higher education disaster preparedness and resilience

Objective: Assess levels of disaster preparedness in institutions of higher education (IHEs) in the United States.Design: An anonymous, 57-question survey targeted individuals responsible for emergency management at IHEs across the US descriptive statistics and bivariate chi-square analysis were reported. Using the established threshold score of the initial Cities Readiness Initiative from the CDC, an individual respondent’s composite score of 70 percent or higher across 23 specific questions within the 57-question survey was labeled as “prepared.”Results: Chi-square analysis identified variables associated with lower preparedness levels at IHEs not achieving the minimum 70 percent score. Having a campus law enforcement officer serve the additional role of emergency manager had a negative association with being prepared [χ 2 (1) = 10.18, p 0.001]. Having emergency management as a separate university function from campus law enforcement had a positive relationship with being prepared [χ 2 (1) = 18.55, p 0.001]. Staffing the emergency management function with a professional having less than 3 years of emergency management experience had a negative association with being prepared.Conclusions: Our results indicate that minimizing the mission of emergency management by simply tasking a campus law enforcement officer with the extra responsibility of emergency management or entertaining less professionally qualified personnel to lead emergency management’s complex mission can lead to disastrous results. Not only is preparedness impacted, but also resilience when facing disaster situations. Our nation continues to strive to become more resilient when facing such adverse events, as formally embraced and emphasized in the 2017 National Security Strategy. Research continues to offer best practices and unfortunately continues to highlight gaps. While the higher education community is not one of the 16 federal critical infrastructure sectors, identified gaps such as those presented in our findings as well as those published by the National Academies of Sciences are cause for alarm. Not only are higher education campuses generating invaluable contributions to society in general, bio-innovation, public health, and medicine, to name a few, they are a core stakeholder in resilience research and implementation. Yet, research continues to indicate preparedness and therefore resilience gaps in this sector. The authors propose implications for practice, policy, and research to assist IHEs in achieving a more comprehensive, sustainable level of resilience.