近年来，随着城市管理体制改革的不断深化，北京市城管职权逐步下放至街 乡镇，在街乡镇成立综合行政执法队，并以街乡镇名义行使相关职权，这在很大 程度上解决了基层政府“看得到却管不了”、执法成本高、效率低等问题。 为规 范这支“新”队伍，确保基层能“接得住、管得好”，不偏离城管体制改革的初 心，北京市城管执法局出台了一系列规范性政策和制度来指导基层综合行政执法 队伍执法规范化，力促队伍政治优、业务精、能力强、素质高， 最大化发挥综合 行政执法效能。街道办事处是城市基层社会治理的主阵地，而街道综合行政执法 队是其唯一一支具有执法权的队伍，因此，研究这支队伍贯彻执行规范化政策和 制度过程中存在的问题、原因及改进措施，能够进一步促进队伍执法更加规范， 有力推动执法改革创新，更好地适应地区日新月异的新形势、新变化， 不断推进 城市治理体系和治理能力现代化步伐。

本文详细梳理了国内外关于城管执法队伍相关文献资料，对涉及的理论概念 一一阐述，依据综合行政执法改革之后，国家、北京市出台的一系列规范化政策 和制度，提出利用新公共服务理论、史密斯政策执行过程模型来搭建队伍执法规 范化路径。

以街道综合行政执法队伍执法规范化为内容，精心设计问卷及访谈提纲，围 绕队伍执法规范化目标，以北京市 x 街道综合行政执法队为例，结合调研数据， 利用大数据平台数据查询、12345 市民服务热线工单统计获取数据，运用新公共 服务理论、史密斯政策执行过程模型，深入挖掘街道综合行政执法队伍在规范化 过程中存在的问题及其原因，并提出对策。

通过分析原因为：一是政策自身因素，分别是规范性文件不健全、法规体系 过于庞杂、执法手段缺乏约束力和强制力、考核监督不太合理、晋升激励措施不 到位；二是政策执行主体因素，分别是党建作用未能充分发挥、队伍力量不足、 学习培训落实不到位；三是政策执行环境因素，分别为舆论环境差、x 街道客观 环境复杂、办公环境不符合标准； 四是政策执法客体因素，分别为执法对象法律 素养不高、群众对执法队伍认识偏颇。

提出对策为：一是完善政策，分别为推动规范性文件实施、出台城市管理专 属法律、不断优化考核监督机制、落实队伍晋升激励措施； 二是发挥政策执行主 体作用，分别为将党建融入业务、优化队伍人才结构、开展多样化的培训； 三是 营造良好政策执行环境，分别为改善舆论环境、提升工作环境质量； 四是提升政 策执行客体认知素养，分别为提高执法对象法律素养、正向引导群众对执法队伍认识。

In recent years, with the  deepening of the reform  of the urban management system,  the   functions  and  powers  of  urban  management   in  Beijing  have  been gradually  delegated  to  the  streets  and  towns,   and  comprehensive  administrative enforcement  teams  have  been  established  in  the  streets  and  towns,  and  relevant functions and powers have been exercised in the name of the streets and towns, which to  a  large  extent  solved  the  problems  of  grassroots  governments  "seeing  but  not managing", high law enforcement costs and low efficiency. In order to standardize this "new" team, ensure that the grassroots can "catch and manage well", and do not deviate  from  the  original  intention  of the  urban  management  system  reform,  the Beijing Municipal Urban Management Law Enforcement Bureau has issued a series of  standardized  policies  and   systems  to   guide  the  grass-roots   comprehensive administrative law enforcement team to standardize law enforcement, promote the team's political excellence, professional excellence, strong ability and high quality, and maximize the effectiveness of comprehensive administrative law enforcement. Sub-district offices are the main front of urban grassroots social governance, and the sub-district integrated administrative law enforcement team is the only team with the power   of   law    enforcement.   Therefore,    studying    the   problems,    causes   and improvement  measures  in  the  process  of  implementing  standardized  policies  and systems of this team can further promote more standardized law enforcement and effectively promote law enforcement reform and innovation. Better adapt to the new situation and new changes in the region, and constantly promote the modernization of urban governance system and governance capacity.
This paper reviews the relevant literature on urban management law enforcement teams at home and abroad in detail, expounds the theoretical concepts involved one

by  one,  and  proposes  to  use  the  new  public   service  theory  and   Smith  policy implementation process model to build the standardization path of law enforcement teams according to a series of standardized policies and systems issued by the state and Beijing after the comprehensive administrative law enforcement reform.
Based  on  standardizing  integrated  administrative  law  enforcement  by  street teams in Beijing x Street as an example this paper carefully designed questionnaires and interview outlines aligned with goals for standardizing these teams' operations. By combining research data with big data platform queries and statistics from citizen service  hotlines  (12345),  this  study  utilizes  new  public  service  theory  alongside Smith's policy implementation process model to deeply explore problems encountered during standardization processes within integrated administrative law enforcements teams at street level while proposing countermeasures.
The reasons are as follows: first are policy-related factors including imperfect normative documents; overly complex legal systems; lackluster binding force behind means   for    enforcing   laws;    unreasonable   assessment    supervision;    inadequate promotion    incentive    measures.Secondly    are    main    factors     affecting    policy implementation such as failure to fully leverage party building roles; insufficient team strength; inadequate learning/training implementations.Thirdly environmental factors impacting   policy   implementation    include   poor   public    opinion   environments; complicated  objective  environments  specific  to  x  Street  area;  substandard  office environments.Lastly object factors influencing policy-based enforcements include low legal literacy among those being enforced upon coupled with biased understanding among general public regarding these enforcements.
Countermeasures  proposed  include:  improving  policies  through  promoting normative   document   implementations   alongside   promulgating   exclusive   urban management laws while continuously optimizing assessment/supervision mechanisms plus implementing promotion incentive measures for these teams; Leveraging party building into business activities while optimizing talent structures within these teams plus diversifying training initiatives; Creating favorable conditions for implementing policies  by  enhancing  public  opinion  environment  alongside  improving  working environment  quality;  Enhancing  cognitive  literacy  among  those  subject  to  policy implementations through improved legal education coupled with positive guidance aimed at correcting biases held by general populace regarding these enforcements.