Informing the public by providing clear information in a timely and accessible manner (i.e. on the department’s website, through social media, in multiple languages) can help build trust and legitimacy. There are many situations in which a department may want to inform the community, such as updating them on crime trends, on-the-ground operations or new departmental policies.

Although there are reasons a department may choose to inform the community, this method of engagement also has a downside: it is typically a one-way street. The department shares information and the community receives it. Often, the public will want to engage on a deeper level or have a say in the final outcome.

Still, there are definitely situations in which informaing is the way to go. There is a lot of basic information the community would benefit from knowing, which doesn’t require ongoing dialogue after sharing. Examples include: posting the department’s policy manual online; publishing use-of-force statistics; making up-to-date information about major departmental strategies and initiatives accessible through multiple channels; presenting a breakdown of officer training to the public; or providing an easy-to-navigate annual budget document, among others. Proactively informing community members can buy a department a lot of trust.

If your department is considering any type of information-sharing with the public, the tools below will provide a framework and examples of how to design and successfully execute the type of engagement you are planning.

There are some matters for which departments should inform the public on an ongoing basis. Examples of this include monthly crime statistics or updates on implementation of a new program, such as one involving diversion.

Often, a good way to provide ongoing information is simply to post it on the department’s website. This is a good approach for sharing information the public might want to access at any time, such as a department’s data and transparency policy, or its policy manual.

Beat meetings should be held regularly and can be used for updating smaller groups about things like localized crime trends or problem-solving efforts. However, if the public is called to a meeting and comes, it is probably best to go beyond the inform step. People who come to meetings want to engage, which can impact their expectations for follow-up and a department’s responsiveness to concerns raised.

Departments will also want to inform the public in a one-off fashion at times, such as when there is an event to announce, or to tell them about something that has happened. A good tool for this is a press conference.

Social media is a helpful way to keep the community informed, both in one-off situations and on a continuing basis. Departments should develop standard practices for using social media so that the public has consistent access to important information.

None of these tools need to be used in isolation; they are often most effective when used together, as they should be for matters of importance.

Keeping the public informed is important, but it is not always enough. Members of the public—particularly those groups that are disproportionately impacted by policing—often will want to share feedback on issues that affect them, such as changes to policy or decisions about new programs. Proactive engagement by departments that seeks feedback from communities can contribute to overall public trust and support. Not every situation is appropriate for consultation, but it is important to understand when and how to consult community members.

Consulting the public can provide valuable feedback to improve departmental decision-making. It need not overwhelm the department. Most people will want to weigh in at a fairly high level, and not get lost in the details. As such, consulting the public typically is a one-off engagement, though there are instances where it can be ongoing.

Consult the public when a policy change or decision will directly affect them. This can be everything from new parking rules or procedures for filing an accident report, to adopting a new technology, like license plate readers or body-worn cameras.

There are a lot of ways to get public input. These include surveys, an online comment period, beat meetings, and town halls. A small group or table discussion format (such as the World Café method) can be particularly useful for conversation to elicit community views. Consider holding multiple meetings across the city, aiming to reach different communities. If something is complex, the department may want to create an ad hoc public committee to advise it.

It’s also important to realize that consultation can be as simple as picking up the phone and checking in with community members to share ideas and gather informal feedback, or having an impromptu meeting of relevant stakeholders.

Here are some tips to help with consultation:

• If hosting a formal meeting, it often is useful to share materials in advance, when possible, so that participants can have time to prepare and bring thoughtful questions and comments to the meeting.
• It may be useful to have subject matter experts available (both from within law enforcement, as well as advocates from outside law enforcement). Be careful, though, to make sure that sessions are structured so that they don’t dominate or steer the conversation.
• Don’t talk at people—engage them in conversation.
• Livestreaming the meeting, as well as recording it to be posted on the department’s website and social media channels, can help make the information and discussion accessible to those who aren’t able to attend.
• "Notice and comment" procedures can be employed by the department or a third-party to solicit feedback and increase transparency around policy- or rule-making. While this can be a formal endeavor, it allows everyone the chance to have a voice.

When selecting the forum and format for consulting the public, remember that accessibility and representation from various community stakeholders, particularly those affected by the issue at hand, is critical to the legitimacy and success of your engagement.

Collaborating with the public to identify problems and solutions typically involves more robust dialogue than a department would engage in when seeking to inform or consult the community. Collaborating tends to require some form of ongoing engagement. This can be more work, but it has payoffs in better solutions and long-term relationship building.

Ongoing collaboration can be valuable when trying to solve a particularly thorny problem or bring segments of the community fully on board. Examples might include developing a crime prevention strategy for a business corridor or developing strategies for working with at-risk youth.

A collaborative effort can be part of a larger engagement strategy that begins by informing or consulting with the community. Departments can use high-level feedback received during larger public forums as a foundation from which to build longer-term collaborative engagement. They also can go back to the broader community with the results of an extended collaborative effort.

Collaboration can occur in a number of ways. A department could invite selected stakeholders to discuss a policy change with police leadership in small or individual meetings. The department also could assemble a task force or working group that meets regularly with a specific mandate to address the policy change at hand. Or, the department could provide a draft policy and request written comments from specific interest groups, such as the ACLU, the police union, and others.

Some important things to keep in mind when designing a collaborative effort:

• Collaboration works best in smaller group settings.
• Gather the relevant stakeholders who can discuss issues at length in a way that combines individual expertise and experience, with an understanding of community preferences.
• Be sure to include people and groups most likely to be affected. For example, if the issue is how to utilize school resource officers, include young people, parents, and school administrators. Also include officers or union officials, if officers will be affected.
• Invite people with differing views to participate. Make sure to include critical perspectives on civil liberties and racial justice.
• Establish a clear understanding of what the goals are. Set this out in a document that will guide deliberations.
• Don’t expect that everyone necessarily will come to consensus. People may have views that cannot be reconciled. Still, when a final decision is made, people will appreciate that an open and transparent process was respectful of competing view. A procedurally just process builds legitimacy.

Empowerment means sharing final decision-making authority with the community—co-producing public safety. Empowerment can be used to decide almost anything, from whether to have school resource officers and how to use them, to the manner in which the department resolves complaints against officers.

Empowerment can occur in one-off settings. It can be as simple as letting stakeholders vote on something at a meeting or series of meetings held on a particular issue. More commonly, though, empowerment results from an ongoing process. It often works best if there are formal structures to solicit feedback and engage in the decision-making process with the community.

There are two challenges that need to be overcome around empowerment: a cultural one and a question of legal authority.

Culturally, police officials are used to making decisions, and it can feel uncomfortable to share that authority with others, especially when you cannot be sure of the outcome. But it can be worth it, because sharing decision-making authority with the community can develop deep trust and legitimacy. And the community then will jointly own the outcomes, instead of the department having to take all responsibility.

Often, though, the decision to empower the community will not rest with the department, even if the department is willing to try it. Departments possess the decision-making authority they have because it has been given to them lawfully, and the law may not permit delegating that authority elsewhere. For this reason, empowerment may require action by other public officials, such as the mayor or city council.

For informal empowerment, assuming the department can authorize it, a chief concern is ensuring the decision-making group is representative of the community. It will not do to gather people with one set of views and consider a matter settled by them. If the community is empowered to make a decision, it is essential to ensure that those given authority truly represent the full range of community views.

Because of these complications, formal empowerment often is best. Some ways that formal empowerment can work include:

• Establishment of policy board devoted to a particular issue, such as the Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission;
• Employment of a police commission that actually has policy-making authority, such as the Los Angeles Police Commission.

Empowerment has not been the norm in policing, though some jurisdictions are in the early stages of trying it out. Cities and departments can learn from other jurisdictions that have had some experience.