Consolidation merits consideration by State and municipal policymakers as a method of improving police and fire protection. Consolidation provides faster and improved fire and police service, eliminates duplication of separate services, and encourages better systems support. Types of consolidation include complete consolidation, in which a public safety department replaces separate police and fire departments; partial consolidation, where police and fire departments are retained as separate divisions of the new public safety organization; and functional consolidation, where separate police and fire departments are retained, but duties of one department are assigned to members of another. Examples of cities that have successfully implemented some sort of consolidated public safety program include descriptions of the programs set up in Brown Deer, Wis,; Center Line and Dearborn, Mich.; the Detroit suburbs; Durham, N.C.; Des Peres, Mo.; El Dorado, Kans.; Fraser and Oak Park, Mich.; and cities in Illinois, Pennsylvania, and California. Failures of consolidation efforts have heen attributed to the low morale of personnel, poor management techniques, and other factors. Consolidation efforts may also meet opposition from vocal interest groups who view the efforts as costly, impractical, and harmful to existing jobholders. Those attempting consolidation must win the support and commitment of the public, city council, and media; must undertake their activities in a good administrative climate; and must involve employees in the planning stages. State laws which restrict consolidation efforts are outlined and a bill calling for home rule authority to enable the consolidation of police and fire forces is presented. A list of consolidated departments in the United States and over 80 references are appended.