Expert answer:Budget paper
Solved by verified expert:Critique the strategies suggested there and explain how you would apply them to creating a police budget in your own community. APA 4 page
police_department_budgeting___a_guide_for_law_enforcement_chief_executives_2002.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
[FINAL DRAFT]
Police Department Budgeting:
A Guide for Law Enforcement Chief Executives
November 2002
Police Executive Research Forum
Washington, D.C.
Contents
Introduction ………………………………………………………………….. 1
Review………………………………………………………………………….. 2
Successful Budget Strategies …………………………………………………….2
Survey ………………………………………………………………………….. 6
Roundtable Findings……………………………………………………. 10
Making the Case ………………………………………………………………………10
Building Relationships……………………………………………………………..13
Seizing Opportunities……………………………………………………………….17
References………………………………………………………………….. 22
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
Introduction
Police departments are major participants in municipal budgeting. According to
the U.S. Department of Commerce, police departments spent $20.9 billion in 1991-92.
To a degree, municipal agencies in the budget process compete with each other for limited resources. In that competition, police departments have a definite advantage: the
public’s interest in safety. Even as crime rates fall nationwide, most police departments
continue to be successful in obtaining federal, state, and local funding. Yet not all departments are equally successful.
Under a grant from the National Institute of Justice of the U.S. Department of Justice, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) undertook this project to discover why
and how some police departments are much more successful than others in obtaining
funding. The methodology was both quantitative and qualitative. In 1998, PERF sent a
survey to all municipal or metropolitan police departments serving more than 50,000 persons. The response rate was 61 percent. In April 1999, PERF held a one-day focus
group session with police executives from five agencies. Four criteria were used to select
the participants: their departments had been highly successful in increasing their budgets
during fiscal years 1997 and 1998; they represented different forms of local government;
they were geographically diverse; and they were diverse with respect to the size of population served.
This report summarizes the literature on budgeting by police departments and
other government agencies. It then presents the findings of the 1998 PERF survey. Finally, it offers highlights of the 1999 focus group of police executives.
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
1
Review
Law enforcement agencies gauge their budgetary success in two ways: (1)
whether they have maintained a harmonious working relationship with the local government chief executive and budget staff and (2) how successful they were in expanding
their prior year’s base budget or, in times of fiscal retrenchment, how successful they
were in defending their base against cuts. Duncombe and Kinney found that state agency
heads believed that keeping a good relationship was much more important than increasing appropriations (1987: 27). Still, getting budget requests funded is an important barometer of budgetary success.
Successful Budget Strategies
Research suggests that police agencies primarily employ these budget strategies:
•
Use crime and workload data judiciously.
•
Capitalize on sensational crime incidents (ideally not occurring locally).
•
Carefully mobilize interest groups.
•
Plan strategically.
•
Participate carefully in the federal grant process.
•
Maintain a close working relationship with the local government chief executive
and governing board members.
•
Involve all levels of the police department.
Use Data Judiciously. Government executives and police professionals have re-
ceived considerable guidance on measuring and evaluating police performance. Numerous organizations and researchers have developed measures of patrol services, investigations, traffic services, drug control, crime prevention and control, community policing,
and overall police effectiveness.
How do performance indicators relate to budgetary outcomes? Greene, Bynum,
and Cordner found that increased workload was the second greatest factor contributing to
an increase in positions (1986: 537).
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
2
Capitalize on Sensational Crimes. Research on the effect of sensational crimes
on police funding decisions has been limited, and results are mixed. One survey indicated that critical incidents were not a significant factor in budgetary success (Greene et
al., 1986: 537). However, the study also found that certain critical incidents, such as
killings of police officers, were responsible for a “massive infusion of resources into the
problem area despite economic conditions, public ideology, or political considerations”
(Hudzik et al., 1981).
Mobilize Interest Groups. Government agencies often mobilize interest groups to
build support for their budget requests. Wildavsky and Caiden note that federal agencies
influence policy makers by finding a clientele, serving it, expanding it, and securing
feedback from it (1997: 57-58). Federal agencies are described as forming either iron
triangles or issue networks. An iron triangle is a fixed relationship between legislative
committees, the agencies they oversee, and their allied interest groups. Issue networks,
on the other hand, is a loose-knit, changing relationship between interest groups, involved
citizens, experts, and agencies concerned with a particular issue (Heclo, 1979: 102). Police departments tend to form issue networks, not iron triangles. Hudzik found that law
enforcement agencies formed relationships with particular constituents to secure funding,
but that such relationships were highly transitory, rising to support an agency one year
and disappearing the next (1978).
Police departments have always had a natural constituency of neighborhood
groups, civic organizations, and business groups concerned about crime. Moreover, the
widespread adoption of community policing has greatly expanded both the formal and
informal ties that police departments have to the community. Police agencies place
school resource officers in public schools and meet routinely with established neighborhood organizations, civic groups, business groups, and victims’ organizations. In addition to these permanent relationships, police officers form temporary issue networks with
community groups to address particular problems, often identified by the citizens themselves. Once the problems are solved, the coalitions dissolve.
Because police departments are so visible in the community and crime is so emotionally laden, police departments enjoy considerable public support, which sometimes
manifests itself in the budget process. Police departments have effectively blocked fund-
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
3
ing cuts by taking their case to the public (Green et al., 1986). Interest group support can
also help police departments obtain more funding.
Plan Strategically. Strategic planning explores policy alternatives, emphasizing
the future implications of present decisions (Bryson, 1995: 5). It also develops a statement of long-range goals and objectives and is a sound management practice that should
occur before the budget cycle. The long-range strategic plan enables decision makers to
make better one-year, operating budget policy decisions. Bryson surmises, however, that
most budgets are formed without strategic thought (1995: 152). The reason may be similar to that behind Rubin’s finding that some mayors did not want budget performance targets published because they feared that their political opponents would unfairly dwell on
missed targets (1990).
Participate Carefully in Federal Grants. Police departments access a variety of
external funding sources, primarily grants from state and federal government agencies,
foundations, and business groups. Often funds are spent on sophisticated technology,
which may increase a police department’s effectiveness or efficiency. Technology may
free up officers’ time, yet technology also may require expensive support. After obtaining a grant, a police executive may find it difficult to obtain additional funding from local
government for support and maintenance. Therefore, police executives must take care to
think through all the related costs before accepting government grants.
Maintain Close Relationships. It is important for police executives to maintain
close working relationships with both government chief executives and elected board
members. Those relationships may have to be tailored to the particular officeholders.
For some, crime may be an overriding concern, while for others it may not be. Responding quickly and accurately to governing board members is critical.
Involve All Departmental Levels. In the 1980s and 1990s, a marked shift occurred in organization behavior in both the private and public sectors. Viewing the success of the Japanese, especially in manufacturing, American businesses and government
agencies adopted such successful techniques as total quality management (TQM), quality
circles, reengineering, team engineering, and strategic planning. One cornerstone of
these reforms has been employee empowerment. In Reinventing Government, David Os-
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
4
borne and Ted Gaebler document the success of public agencies that have used empowerment and competition to improve performance.
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
5
Survey
Following two waves of pre-tests, the mail survey was administered to 490 municipal police agencies. The sample comprised all police departments serving populations of 50,000 or more. One follow-up to non-respondents was carried out by mail.
The survey yielded 297 responses (61 percent). Consistent with the survey population, responding agencies ranged in size from 100 personnel to 46,431, with a mean of
862 (including both sworn and civilian personnel). Twenty-nine percent of respondents
had fewer than 200 personnel, 41 percent had 201-500, and 30 percent had more than
500. The service populations for the responding agencies ranged from 47,500 to 1.822
million, with an average of 208,037.
Key findings are presented in the following categories: personnel spending,
budget size indicators, budget growth, budget growth indicators, budget processes, capital
budgets, and additional resources.
Personnel Spending. Police agencies responding to the survey spent, on average,
85 percent of their budgets on personnel, ranging from 61 to 98.5 percent.
Budget Size Indicators. The study found a strong correlation between operating
budgets and several other indicators: workload (Part I UCR and calls for service), population, and tax revenue. Differences in tax revenue, service population, total number of
personnel, and calls for service explained about 90 percent of the variation in agency
budgets.
Budget Growth. Most departments reported increases in their operating budgets
from one year to the next. To identify agencies successful in the budgetary arena, PERF
added the percentage budgetary increases from 1996 to 1997 with increases from 1997 to
1998. Among respondents, the average budgetary increase over that period was 12.7 percent, ranging from a decrease of 9.6 percent to an increase of 60 percent. In this study,
29 police agencies reported large gains—that is, 20 percent or more for the two-year period.
Budget Growth Indicators. Departments with large gains in operating budgets
differ in some important ways from the average department in this study. The agencies
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
6
reveal no distinction by tenure of the police chief, agency size, or political structure. The
most significant difference appears to be population growth. Only 25 percent of departments in this study reported a major increase in population (10 percent or more) from
1992 to 1997. However, among police departments with large increases in their operating budgets, 52 percent had experienced that large amount of population growth.
The policy objectives of police departments highly successful in the budgetary
arena also differ from those of the average respondent in the study. PERF’s study asked
respondents to indicate up to three policy objectives of the agency’s chief executive. Departments with the objectives of increasing agency staffing and modernizing the department fared somewhat better in the budgetary process than other agencies. Among all
agencies, the most commonly reported objective was to implement or expand community
policing. Seventy-four percent of all respondents reported this as one of the chief’s primary policy objectives, while only 55 percent of departments with large budget expansions reported community policing as among the top policy objectives.
Major crime events, such as killings of police officers and increases in crime, may
also positively affect police funding. The PERF survey found that agencies with large
budget increases were slightly more likely to have experienced such critical events.
Budget Processes. The local budgetary process is the relevant policymaking
arena for police chiefs, according to Greene et al. (1986). When in danger of losing resources, those authors say, police agencies can benefit significantly by taking their case
to the public because police services are a visible local function. Police in this study reported that community groups often have an active voice in the local police budgetary
process: 68 percent of respondents reported that neighborhood groups took an active role,
42 percent said business groups did so, and 34 percent reported civic groups as taking
such a role. These constituents were heard primarily through public hearings (reported
by 62 percent of respondents), lobbying of council members or the mayor (reported by 59
percent), and letter-writing (reported by 41 percent).
The form of budget used also seems to affect police departments’ strategic approach to budgeting. The line-item budget is typically considered a mechanism of control (Pursley, 1993; Rubin, 1990; Hudzik, 1978), while program or mission-oriented
budgets are more likely to relate policy goals to budgets and hence are useful for police in
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
7
meeting policy objectives, such as community policing. In PERF’s study, 51 percent of
respondents reported that line-item was the sole budget format; 10 percent reported using
a program budget format; 5 percent used a performance budget, which is zero-based or
target; and 2 percent named a mission-driven budget. Thirty-two percent reported using a
combination of these budget formats; two-thirds of those respondents combined program
and line-item budgets.
Other budgetary practices, too, may constrain the ability of police departments to
engage in linking policing objectives with funding. Over half of respondents reported
that budgetary limits or targets are typically set by the mayor, city manager, or finance
director. In a third of agencies, budgetary targets or limits are negotiated between the
city manager or mayor and department heads, while in 11 percent of agencies, targets or
limits are determined by revenue projections. In 92 percent of cases, revenue projections
precede or coincide with expenditure projections, providing either an explicit or implicit
goal for the budgetary process.
Despite numerous controls of police objectives by the budgetary process, more
than half the agencies in this survey (55 percent) have a written strategic plan, and another 13 percent have some form of strategic plan that may be incorporated in council
goals or capital improvement plans. Stamper (1992: 154) urges that budgetary processes
be the “preeminent management function” and be linked closely with planning processes,
especially long-range planning. In contrast to Hanna (1987: 34), who says that police
chiefs have little control over budget decisions, “which are ultimately made outside the
police department,” the existence of long-range strategic plans suggests that police may
have an activist role in shaping the jurisdiction’s budget.
Capital Budgets. Operating budgets are not the only budgetary issue. In this
study, 71 percent of respondents reported they have separate budgets for capital expenditures, 17 percent said they do not, and 13 percent reported they have a somewhat separate
capital budget, often depending on the value of items purchased or varying from year to
year.
Among departments with separate capital budgets, major technology items (such
as dispatch systems or mobile data terminals) and major equipment purchases are the
most commonly included expenditures. But capital budgets also include expenditures for
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
8
buildings (75 percent of respondents), vehicles (59 percent), and property (48 percent).
Despite their inclusion of large-cost items, capital budgets were typically dwarfed by operating budgets. For 1997-1998, among the 164 agencies reporting separate capital and
operating budgets, capital budgets exceeded operating budgets in only one department.
Additional Funding Resources. Even operating and capital budgets together do
not tell the entire story of the police budget process. Grants are relatively common
among police departments, as is shown in the table below. Funds from the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)
are widely tapped, as are funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). About 47 percent of departments reported receiving discretionary grants
from the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Drug Enforcement Administration, Office for Victims of Crime, and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
In addition, some departments routinely tap into non-government sources of funding. About 8 percent of agencies reported grants from private foundations in amounts
ranging from $500 to $242,760. About 10 percent of police agencies received grants
from local corporations in amounts ranging from $414 to $7,641,214. Police departments
with these outside funding sources reported receiving a range of $1 to $32 per capita.
Success in obtaining grants was somewhat related to having a full-time grant seeker.
Overall, 28 percent of respondents reported having a full-time employee or contractor
charged with seeking out grants, while 38 percent of the agencies with higher grants per
capita reported having at least one full-time grant seeker.
Sources of Grants to Police Departments
Funding Source
Departments Receiving Funds (n=299)
Range
BJA
155
$1,231-$28,277,320
COPS
200
$2,622-$99,317,610
HUD
88
$3,366-$62,682,000
NHTSA
67
$1,049-$6,680,701
Foundations
24
$500-$242,760
Businesses
30
$414-$7,641,214
Discretionary Grants
139
$6,161-$21,620,099
Other Sources
130
$5-$64,892,873
P O L I C E D E P AR T M E N T B U D G E T I N G : A G U I D E F O R C H I E F S
9
Roundtable Findings
The PERF survey identified police departments with especially high increases in
annual operating budgets. To learn how departments find budget success, PERF invited
executives from five such departments to a roundtable meeting in spring 1999. Participants were as follows:
• …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades