Recently, Shaw and McKay's theory of community social organization has enjoyed renewed prominence. Modern proponents of the theory have looked to factors such as family disruption and urbanization, in addition to low economic status, ethnic heterogeneity, and residential mobility in order to predict the breakdown of social organization. The term "community social organization" is currently defined as the extent to which residents of a neighborhood are able to maintain effective social control and realize their common values. In describing the continuous nature of community social organization, modern theorists look to two dimensions: the prevalence, strength, and interdependence of social networks and the extent of collective supervision that the residents direct and the personal responsibility they assume in addressing neighborhood problems. When structures of community social organization are prevalent and strong, crime and delinquency should be less prevalent and vice versa. The scholars who support promotion of community social organization geared toward crime reduction advocate macrolevel inputs such as jobs, education, and housing. Promotion of law enforcement, however, is notably missing from their list. Greater resources for housing and even employment may not be enough to repair seriously damaged communities without an organizational "spur." Governmental entities, including law enforcement agencies, are uniquely situated to provide resources and direction for affirmative organizational efforts. In fact, participation by residents in formal community policing programs is an example of the type of activity that predicts social organization improvement. 42 footnotes