Editor’s Note: This week’s PoliceOne First Person essay is from PoliceOne Member Rick McDowell. In PoliceOne “First Person” essays, our Members and Columnists candidly share their own unique view of the world. This is a platform from which individual officers can share their own personal insights on issues confronting cops today, as well as opinions, observations, and advice on living life behind the thin blue line. If you want to share your own perspective with other P1 Members, simply send us an e-mail with your story.
By Rick McDowell
Police1 Member
Rural law enforcement agencies face a variety of stressful dilemmas unique to the size and makeup of a department. Many rural departments are training grounds for new officers, a near-retirement post for some, and occasionally, the last refuge for troubled officers.
Limited tax bases in many small communities keep wages embarrassingly low. That same scarcity of financial resources also translates into small training budgets.
Chiefs and Sheriffs in these rural departments struggle daily to keep officers motivated and interested in long-term employment. In short, they struggle with turnover.
Putting Things in Perspective
A 12-person department which loses three officers has lost a quarter of its enforcement capability. Comparatively, a quarter of the Houston Police Department — with its 5,400 officers (as of 2012) — would sustain a loss of 1,350 officers at one time.
The loss of information, experience, and manpower would most likely create an extraordinary crisis for the department.
Rural departments face this same dilemma on a frequent basis. Without preparation and foresight, the loss of more than three officers from a small department has the potential to cripple a small-community law-enforcement entity.
Preparation through cross-training each officer in a small department is the path to greater stability. Further, when an officer leaves a department specific operating procedures should be established for a transfer of information directly from the officer of all cases, investigations, and pending cases.
Information loss is not only common within small departments; officers left behind are tasked with piecing together fragmented cases.
I’ve worked for rural police and Sheriff Departments for more than 20 years. A common thread running through these small departments is that there will be personnel changes. Sometimes change is expected — other situations call for more immediate change.
Rural and small departments usually consist of patrol staff, a limited supervisory staff, one or two investigators, and the chief.
Most small agencies require each officer to investigate misdemeanor cases he or she catches, leaving felony and intricate cases to the investigator. The command staff is left to supervise and take up slake when needed.
When an officer leaves, he or she may be leaving several unfinished cases behind. Supervisory and investigative staff that leaves may be leaving several cases behind, as well as technical information on the day-to-day operations of the department, and intelligence information that has been restricted.
Preventing Information Loss
Without a systematic method of training and information sharing, vital information, skills, and intelligence will be lost. Developing an information-sharing system within a department costs nothing, provides officers valuable training in areas he or she may not be familiar with, and will promote an efficient department during times of change.
The citizens of a community officers are sworn to serve and protect ultimately will pay the price for a department’s lack of preparedness. Conversely, those same citizens stand to benefit from a department’s foresight.
A policy of cross-training each officer within a department is a logical method to prevent information loss. New and rookie officers are trained by officers and supervisors who understand the law, departmental policies, and standards.
The training officer passes his or her knowledge to the officers below and in turn the officer or supervisor above the training officer passes his or her knowledge to the training officer.
Starting at the top of an organization, the chief or Sheriff should educate the person directly below him or her on how to be the chief or Sheriff. A systematic exchange of information, skills, and procedures should be passed down in steps.
Each person who is in a position of leadership passes his or her job function and information down to the person directly below him or her in a cascading flow of knowledge. Taking this step will not eliminate information loss problems but will provide a strong backup when changes occur.
Some officers may see the exchange of knowledge as a threat to job security. Reassurance of job stability and listing the benefits of information exchange many times will solve the issue.
Normally an exchange of job information increases officer moral. Learning a supervisor’s job skills, knowledge, and procedures prepares lower ranking officers for future promotions and sends a message that officer is seen as a competent and valuable employee. Cross-training costs nothing more than time but can have an invaluably beneficial effect.
I have had the opportunity throughout my career to hold supervisory and investigative positions. Promotions within small departments usually came quick and with little instruction or mentoring. Two years into my career I was promoted to night patrol sergeant.
Until that time I was assigned to the day shift and had not worked a night for over a year. I was excited, proud, and overcome with a desire to save the world and be the best patrol sergeant the department had ever seen. At the first opportunity I met with the other night sergeant eager to learn the tricks of the trade. I can still remember the first meeting with the experienced sergeant.
I approached the sergeant and said, “I would appreciate any advice and help you can give me.”
The sergeant smiled at me and said, “[BLEEP] you! I learned the hard way, and you can too!”
I did learn the hard way, and fortunately for me I learned before something bad happened.
Another example of promotion without information came much later in my career at another department (although with less directed antagonism). I was working as a night shift sergeant for this particular department and had built up over 20 years experience.
The department detective was asked by the chief to resign, leaving the opening. I knew from experience that the detective slot required four times the work I was currently doing but at the same pay scale.
The chief offered me the job but I turned the position down.
Because of the lack of qualified candidates at the department, the chief congratulated me on acquiring the detective position anyway.
The prior detective left no information on cases, dispositions, or investigations, just a pile of case files. The first day on-the-job, a major theft ring was busted, a house was raided, over a hundred items of stolen property was seized, and three suspects were arrested that required Mirandizing and questioning.
The chief’s comment that day was, “Welcome to CID.”
Because I was required to start cold and piece cases together, eight months elapsed before the workload became somewhat manageable. Both of these examples based on lack of information sharing took weeks and months to overcome. More importantly, the public was done a disservice through inefficiency of the department.
Small and rural law enforcement agencies face unique and trying problems with staffing — even a small turnover can leave a department dangerously undermanned. Officers who remain should have the training to take over any position within the department to maintain safety of the community and fulfill the obligation to protect and serve the public.
Training and information sharing does not cost a department but will pay off at the end of the day through continuity of service. A basic pyramid concept of training starting with the head administrator of a department down to the patrol officer will create efficiency, better moral, and a professional organization that will be respected by the community it serves.
More than ever, small and rural departments are expected to adapt and overcome problems other larger departments do not face. These problems can be overcome through policies that require each leader in a department to share his or her knowledge, skills, information to the officer below.
A continual process of sharing information not only makes sense but also promotes the public safety when security is needed the most.
References
The city of Houston (2012). Official site for Houston, Texas. Retrieved December 11, 2012 from http://www.houstonpolice.org/go/doc/2133/289249/Houston-Police-Department-Home
