By Ralph Rector, David Muhlhausen and Dexter Ingram

One of President Bill Clinton's priorities when taking office was to put 100,000 additional police officers on America's streets to help fight crime. On September 13, 1994, the President signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (P.L. 103-322), authorizing the Attorney General to implement a six-year, $8.8 billion grant program to enable state and local law enforcement agencies to hire or redeploy 100,000 additional officers for community policing efforts.11 Attorney General Janet Reno announced the establishment of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) in October 1994 to administer these grants. Since then, the COPS program has developed into a set of different federal grants that had cost American taxpayers $7.5 billion by the end of fiscal year (FY) 2000.12 It is reasonable for policymakers, community leaders, and taxpayers to question how effective the COPS program has been in meeting its objective of placing 100,000 additional police officers on the street.13 As recently as August 14, 2000, President Clinton reaffirmed this objective and then took credit for having succeeded in placing "more than 100,000 new community police officers" on the streets14 (though in congressional testimony, the COPS Office sometimes redefines the objective of the program to be the funding of 100,000 officers).15 This objective has been closely tied to the overarching goal of reducing crime.16 To meet this objective, it is reasonable to expect COPS grants to be targeted to the communities most plagued by violent crime. At a fundamental level, the issue of whether or not the COPS program has indeed achieved its goals can be addressed by analyzing two assertions: 1. More Police. Many of the supporters of the COPS initiative assert that its grants are responsible for adding 100,000 police officers to community patrols. To test for the accuracy of this assertion, Heritage analysts estimated the number of new police. 2. Lower Crime. Supporters also assert that the COPS program awarded grants to the communities with the greatest need. Heritage analysts tested the accuracy of this assertion by examining awards in terms of per capita population and crime rates. Confounding the goal of putting 100,000 additional police officers on the street is the possibility that recipients will supplant the funds--substitute funds from one source for another. In the case of COPS grants, supplanting occurs when state and local governments use program funds to hire officers they would have hired using their own money if the COPS program did not exist.17 In the 1994 Crime Act, Congress specifically prohibited states and local governments from using federal funds to supplant local funds.18 Determining whether supplanting has in fact occurred is necessary for the effectiveness of the program to be evaluated accurately. How well the Justice Department has allocated the COPS funding can be discerned by analyzing crime rates and population sizes for communities that received the grants, as well as by observing the concentration of grants among law enforcement agencies. Thus, determining whether the COPS grants went primarily to communities that have high violent crime rates, rather than to safer communities, is important to the analysis. To answer these questions, Heritage analysts first combined U.S. Department of Justice data on the COPS grants that have been awarded to police agencies across the country with data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reports on violent crime, officer employment, and population. This merged micro-database makes possible an analysis of crime rates and COPS grants on an agency-by-agency basis.

Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation, 2000, 28p.

By Beth Redbird and Kat Albrecht

Racial disparity in arresting behavior is a significant concern for people of color. It also delegitimizes law enforcement, increases tension between police and citizens, and can even increase crime. Efforts at police reform stall, in part because racial disparity in policing was previously unmeasurable. The authors present three new measures of racial disparity in arrest, measured across more than 13,000 agencies nationwide, allowing for reliable analysis of disparity across time and geographic space. These measures are validated against Department of Justice law enforcement misconduct investigations, the “gold standard” for assessing racial disparity in policing.

Evanston, IL: Institute for Policy Research,  Northwestern University, 2020. 48p.

By Gabrielle T. Isaza,  Robin S. Engel,  Nicholas Corsaro,  M. Murat Ozer

  This report summarizes the details of a problem analysis conducted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police/University of Cincinnati (IACP/UC) Center for Police Research and Policy (the “Center”) on domestic violence patterns for the Tulsa Police Department (TPD). The TPD identified domestic violence as an area requiring further understanding given the seriousness of the crime, and frequency as measured by citizen-generated calls for service. For the TPD, domestic violence-related incidents represent their third most frequent call for service, consuming substantial police resources. Prior to recommending an appropriate intervention strategy to reduce domestic violence, it is critical to better understand details regarding the specific domestic violence problem in Tulsa. For police agencies, a problem analysis includes the systematic examination of the underlying conditions of local problems they are tasked with solving. Problem analyses generally rely on information gathered from various sources, and should include examinations of both qualitative and quantitative data. The problem analysis process is critical for developing solutions that fit the problem in each community, because what works in one jurisdiction may not fit a similar problem in another setting (Boba, 2003). The following study documents a problem analysis based on a series of statistical analyses conducted on five-years of domestic violence data reported to the TPD (2013-2017) and victimization data gathered by the Family Service Center in Tulsa. Domestic violence is defined as an incidence of assault and battery against individuals connected to the suspect by one of fifteen different categories of relationship (see Oklahoma Statute §21-644). These variations in relationships cover both common (e.g. husband-wife or child-parent) and seemingly more distant (e.g. spouse-former spouse of partner or former roommate) relationships between individuals. Unfortunately, the automated data used by the TPD does not include a field for the relationship between the victim and offender. TPD data included reports for incidents, arrests, victims, calls for service, and field interview reports. These analyses were supplemented with domestic victimization data provided from the Family Service Center. The main findings of this problem analysis are summarized below. . Domestic violence-related calls for service were the third most frequent call received by the TPD (n=109,623; preceded by traffic stops and alarms) between 2013 and 2017. These reports were relatively stable over the five-year period, with an average of 21,942 calls per year. . Citizen-generated indicators of domestic violence (i.e. calls for service and incident reports) remained relatively stable over the five-year period, while the TPD-generated responses (i.e. FIR and arrest) to these crimes decreased noticeably over the same period of time. Arrests for domestic violence declined by 40.9% from 2013 to 2017, and FIRS similarly declined by 46.8% from 2013 to 2017.. TPD-generated incident reports indicate that 84.5% (n=13,381) of identified suspects were suspected of only committing one domestic violence offense, whereas 15.5% (n=2,447) were suspected of committing two or more offenses. . TPD-generated victimization reports indicate 83.8% (n=15,564) individuals were victimized once, and 16.2% (n=3,008) were victimized two or more times. . These findings demonstrate that the “repeat phenomenon” of domestic violence victimization in Tulsa is similar between victims and suspects. That is, victims are just as likely to be victimized more than once (16.2%) compared to offenders involved in more than one offense (15.5%). . Victimization data provided by the Family Safety Center indicates large increases in the number of services provided (180.6% increase) and the number of individuals receiving services (118.1% increase), likely due to the expansion of victim-services provided in Tulsa during the five-year study time period. Note that the increase of use of victim services is inconsistent with the downward trend in TPD domestic violence arrests. . Data from the FSC also indicates that the percentage of Black victims receiving FSC services (19.3%) was lower than expected given the victimization data captured by the TPD (31.6% for single incidents and 40.6% for repeat incidents), suggesting that Black domestic violence victims may be less likely to request or to receive services. . Analyses also show that 15.5% (n= 2,447) of the individuals suspected of domestic violence offenses were repeat offenders, and they accounted for 23.2% of the domestic violence incidents reported during the study period. . When offenders did commit a subsequent domestic violence offense for which an arrest occurred, the time between arrests was extremely long (an average of over 500 days). However, as the number of repeat domestic violence offenses increase per an offender, the number of days between these arrests decreases. Nonetheless, the average time between offenses is substantially long, indicating that focused deterrence approaches to repeat domestic violence offenders may not be effective in Tulsa (Sechrist, Weil, and Shelton, 2016).  Police data demonstrate that while a person was a victim in one incident, the same person was also commonly reported as the suspect in another domestic violence incident. Approximately 3,205 unique victims (17.2% of all domestic victims) were also charged as a suspect in a different domestic violence case.  Approximately 15% (8 out of 53) of offenders in domestic violence homicide incidents had a previous arrest for domestic violence.  A review of the relationship between the victim and suspect identified in the field interview reports indicates that the most common relationship type is current spouse/cohabitant (43.3%), followed by former spouse/cohabitant (20.3%), and dating (18.0%). Very few cases involve other types of relationships.  Field interview reports (FIR) revealed a substantial number of cases (36.7%), which involve the suspect threatening a future action—these represent an avenue for follow-up by TPD officer   

Cincinnati: International Association of Chief of Police (IACP) / University of Cincinnati (UC) Center for Police Research and Policy. 2019. 41p.

By Hannah D. McManus,. Murat Yildrim, Nicholas Corsaro, Robin S. Engel,

This study documents a multi-faceted examination of incidents of residential burglary and individual robbery reported to the KPD from 2013 to 2017, including descriptive statistics and multivariate analyses. The goals of this research are four-fold: (1) describe trends in reported residential burglary/individual robbery incidents over time, (2) describe case characteristics in reported residential burglary/individual robbery incidents, (3) identify case-level characteristics of residential burglary/individual robbery incidents that predict case clearance rates, and (4) identify neighborhood-level characteristics that predict case clearance.  

Cincinnati, International Association of Chief of Police (IACP) / University of Cincinnati (UC) Center for Police Research and Policy 2020. 47p.

By John R. "Rick" Brown, Robin S. Engel, et al.

The Colorado Springs Police Department (CSPD) commissioned this report in partnership with the City of Colorado Springs to provide a proactive, independent systematic review of the patterns and trends associated with use of force by the CSPD. In response to Request for Proposal, Consultant Services (R20-093 IP), Assessment of Colorado Springs Police Department’s Use of Force released on July 20, 2020, the Transparency Matters, LLC (hereafter TMLLC) team was selected to complete this work. This report documents the results from comprehensive analyses of use of force incidents reported by the CSPD, specifically focusing on understanding how, when, why, and against whom officers use force, as well as the context of police encounters with the public, from both the community and officer perspectives. The purpose of this study is to examine current practices and identify opportunities to reduce the frequency and severity of use of force incidents, racial/ethnic disparities in force, and injuries to both officers and citizens through improvements to policies, training, and supervision. This report includes nine sections: (1) Introduction, (2) Review of CSPD Policies and Practices, (3) Data and Research Methods, (4) Physical Force and Weapons Used, (5) Types of Force, Force Effectiveness, and Injuries, (6) Pointing of Firearms, (7) Community Perspectives, (8) CSPD Officer Perspectives, and (9) Recommendations. This executive summary provides an overview of the primary findings from each of these report sections. 

Lancaster, PA:Transparency Matters and University of Cincinnati, 2022. 280p

By Institute for Intergovernmental Research

 This publication presents abbreviated case studies of large and small law enforcement agencies that have undergone or are currently conducting change initiatives to address a wide range of pressing issues common to law enforcement, such as backlogged sexual assault cases, lack of community trust, inadequate information and intelligence sharing, and increases in violent or juvenile crime. These issues and others prompted change initiatives among the 13 agencies interviewed for this resource. In September 2022, executives from several of the case study agencies met in Washington, D.C., for a working session to provide additional insights learned through the change experience (see appendix A for a list of roundtable attendees). The experiences of these agencies are documented in this publication with the hope that law enforcement executives and managers will find the strategies, actions, and lessons learned helpful in adapting to changes in their internal and external environments.

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. 2023. 60p.