The audit selected a sample of 2,368 rape, robbery, burglary, and theft cases from the period January 4, 1982, to November 10, 1982, and then surveyed complainants/victims. They also interviewed a random sample of detectives to determine if they possessed a workable knowledge of policy and uniform crime reporting guidelines relating to unfounded criminal incidents. The audit findings showed that investigative reports were too brief, of poor quality, and lacked documentation of victim contact. Supervisory review of detective's reports was also inadequate, as evidenced in cases where the victim's gender in the detective's report differed from the final report. Detective division crime reporting practices did not provide adequate controls to ensure victim/complainant contact. The auditors found low levels of victim contact and erroneous information in some investigative reports, such as nonexistent addresses and persons. Because of an apparent emphasis on quantity rather than quality in investigations, standardized narratives had become commonplace. Moreover, detectives seemed to feel that they were expected to unfound, clear, or reclassify a certain percentage of their cases. The number of cases classified as unfound because of lack of cooperation indicates detectives' insensitivity to the victim's plight. The case management system adopted by the detective division in 1980 was intended to streamline paper flow, but lacks a feedback mechanism to inform supervisors of outcomes and has inadequate review processes. The report includes tables, a glossary, eight references, and solvability factors models for burglary and robbery.