Applying the lessons of community policing to icepocalypse

As we review the good news and bad news from the recent ice storm, the heartening stories of neighbors helping neighbors often contrast with the seeming isolation of many of our elected leaders. The notable bright spots in that otherwise dismal official response were the updates from City Council President Carol Wood and East Lansing Mayor Nathan Triplett, both of whom used Facebook effectively to communicate everything from the local of warming centers to the logic of whether to claim emergency disaster status.

Meanwhile Facebook postings confirmed that many average citizens pitched in to help. Folks with power opened their homes to others without. Neighbors checked on the elderly and infirm in their neighborhoods and provided transportation to folks trapped in their homes. As we became two societies - one with power, one without - the haves pitched in to help the have-nots.

It reminded me of the days working with the late Bob Trojanowicz on implementing community policing. The issues then were typically crime and disorder, but I remembered thinking that the same lessons could be applied to dealing with natural disasters like an ice storm.

The S.A.R.A. model

In the early 1990s, I was part of a Department of Justice team that worked to reduce violence in 60 public housing communities where gunfire was becoming a nightly occurrence. Mothers were putting their kids to bed in the bathtub in the hope the tub would stop the bullets.

Organizing began with identifying key stakeholders and bringing them together to develop effective responses to local issues. Dr. Herman Goldstein of the University of Wisconsin contributed the S.A.R.A. model - Scanning, Analysis, Response, Assessment. Identify the problem, scan the community so that you understand the underlying dynamics that can inform your response, then analyze the pressure points where intervention can make a positive difference.

Only after completing the two phases of scanning and analysis could the community team make the jump to discussing responses. Many local efforts fail because people start by suggesting solutions before we understand the dynamics we need to understand to craft responses that work. All too often the loudest person in the room dominates. With the S.A.R.A. model, you must take the time to gather information, including data that can help illuminate the issues. Also important in the response phase is using that data to build in a series of assessments that can allow you to make course corrections along the way.

In the case of the ice storm, for example, one issue worth understanding is how people access information about where to find a warming center or how to avoid carbon monoxide poisoning from generators. Posting resources online makes sense for people with smartphones, but how do you get the word to people who don’t?

Among the questions to answer are: How many people have smartphones? Can they be mobilized into an effort to inform others without? How do folks without these devices receive information? What form should updates take? How can you transmit the information to people with special needs - people who speak different languages, the hearing or visually impaired?

Unless you take the time to gather relevant data and analyze the implications, your responses will suffer.

Mapping the community

One of the tactics contributed by the restorative justice movement is the idea of mapping the community. In many cases, an energized group of teenagers can go out and identify neighborhood assets and liabilities.

In the case of the ice storm, the neighborhood map could include a listing of people with generators or other alternative power sources. It also pays to note the location of people with useful skills - the electrician, the dentist, the nurse.

Maps should also identify problem areas. There’s the steep hill that always becomes impassable when it’s icy. Is there a barrel with sand and a shovel that can be rolled out? The map should also include the location of people with special needs - the elderly or infirm or families with young children.

The goal is also to engage the young people in the community in updating the maps. You need to know that there is a pregnant woman about to give birth in case the ice storm hits when she’s close to delivering. Encouraging young people to play an active role in helping the community also helps build strong relationships and thereby stronger communities.

Building resilient communities

Those groups of young people can also be mobilized into action teams when needed. Neighborhoods can stockpile resources - snow shovels, rock salt - at a community center so that teams of youngsters can go door-to-door, checking on the priority locations identified on the neighborhood maps. Young people can also be trained to identify hazards - the low-hanging branch threatening the power line.

The plans should be designed to include a role for everyone. Local businesses can participate by donating goods and services to reward the young people who participate. Maps can include the locations of businesses that can help (we sell generators - we will give a free meal to any power company lineworker).

Important as well is that the process of organizing builds resilience. A community that pulls together to deal with the threat of an ice storm also builds the capacity to handle problems with crime and disorder. Communities with this decentralized and personalized form of problem solving can also work proactively to prevent problems.

The beauty of applying the lessons learned from dealing with crime to dealing with natural disasters is that you avoid the problems on finger-pointing and false starts that often derail well-meaning efforts. Combining strategies like the S.A.R.A. model and neighborhood mapping keep communities focused on finding solutions that can be measured and monitored to make sure they work. The goal is to be flexible, incorporating feedback into changing the neighborhood plan to adapt to changing conditions.

Harnessing the community’s goodness

At the time when I traveled the United States working with local groups in public housing, the murder rate topped 22,000. The number of murders in the United States now is less than 15,000, despite millions more people, at least in part because communities have embraced these strategies. If these ideas can work with an issue as deadly serious as murder, it can work with ice storms, tornadoes and the other disasters likely to increase as extreme weather becomes more commonplace.

The good news as well is that a sense of mastery goes a long way toward helping reducing the anxiety and uncertainty that add to our fears. Building in the communication strategies to educate communities beforehand and update them throughout the crisis can go a long way toward assuring us that we can control our destiny. We cannot prevent the next ice storm, but we sure as hell can be better prepared.

——-
Bucqueroux was the Associate Director of the National Center for Community Policing at Michigan State University’s School of Criminal Justice.