Communities rarely create identical oversight systems, but most review processes fall into four main categories: (1) Citizens investigate allegations of police misconduct and recommend a finding to the head of the police department; (2) Police officers investigate allegations and develop findings, and citizens then review and recommend the head of the police department approve or reject the findings; (3) Complainants may appeal findings established by the police department to citizens who review them and make recommendations to the head of the police department; and (4) An auditor investigates the process the police department uses to accept and investigate complaints and reports to the police department and the community on the thoroughness and fairness of the process. In many jurisdictions, police departments oppose citizen oversight and believe police departments should have the final say in matters of police discipline, policies and procedures, and training. Moreover, because citizens lack experience as police officers, oversight members may have difficulty in fairly determining whether police officers have engaged in misconduct. Both police administrators and police officers also indicate that the oversight process causes lengthy delays in dealing with police misconduct. Nonetheless, the oversight process can help establish and maintain a police department's reputation for fairness and firmness in addressing allegations of police misconduct. Police departments can take steps that may facilitate a successful relationship with oversight members, for example, initiating citizen oversight systems, becoming involved in the oversight planning process, and demonstrating a willingness to work cooperatively with oversight members. Benefits of citizen oversight for police departments are examined in relation to the police image, internal investigations, and policies and procedures. 6 endnotes and 3 photographs