1. Compare and contrast the application of information technology (IT) to optimize police departments’ performance to reduce crime versus random patrols of the streets.

Information Technology and Performance optimization of Police department Increase in crime rate, which is widespread demands policing to be proactive rather than reactive. It requires change from traditional to strong strategically methods combined with better intelligence. This initially led to the innovation of predictive policing in 1994 by NYPD. NIJ defines Predictive Policing as “taking data from disparate sources, analyzing them and then using the results to anticipate, prevent and respond more effectively to future crime” This paved way for evolution of COMPSTAT (Computer Statistics) which used all crime related data as its input to anticipate a crime. (Willis, J., et al, 2004)

Traditional methods include random patrolling which has limited ability to identify crime because patrolling entire location may not be possible. This would involve additional Police personnel and lot of time. Accurate anticipation, timely targeted action and reduce resources for random patrolling turns into achievable goals.

2. Describe how COMPSTAT, as an information system (IS), implements the four (4) basic IS functions:

Input - Data gathering process which is building block of COMPSTAT comprises of information compiled from variety of sources like police incidents, arrest reports, suspect debriefing, telephone calls, and field interview reports. Pushing the inputs to Incident Reporting System will help to maintain a database for future reference. Crime analysts were responsible for inputting the data and felt personally responsible for their accuracy; Data errors could be discovered as a result of the close collaboration among members of the CAU, who were familiar with the geography and nature