Madison Police Department Policy and Procedure

MADISON POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURE REVIEW City of Madison, Wisconsin TECHNICAL PROPOSAL In Response to: RFP #: 8504-­‐0-­‐2016-­‐BP Submitted by: Police Foundation 1201 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20036-­‐2636 Submitted to: City of Madison Purchasing Services City County Building Room 407 210 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. Madison, WI 53703 August 8, 2016 Section 3.1 – General Information Forms
a. Form A – Signature Affidavit
b. Form B – Receipt of Forms and Submittal Checklist
c. Form C – Contractor Profile Information
Section 3.2 – References, Performance, and Litigations
1) List any and all contracts your firm has done for the City of Madison
Not Applicable
2) References – See Form E (attached)
3) Disclosure of contract Failures, Litigations
Not Applicable
Form E: References, continued
RFP# 8504-0-2016-BP Madison Police Department
Reference #1: US Department of Justice Collaborative Reform Initiative
Description of the Performed Work: In 2015, the Police Foundation was awarded a grant to provide
Collaborative Reform Initiative Technical Assistance (CRI-TA) in selected jurisdictions around the
country. This effort aims to independently and objectively analyze and assess individual law
enforcement department policies, procedures, and tactics, with the goal of issuing recommendations
that will 1) help change the ways that law enforcement agencies build community partnerships and
enhance transparency; 2) transform organizational structure, policies, practices, and culture through
administrative rule-­‐making; and 3) institutionalize reforms with integrated accountability measures.
Under this agreement, the Police Foundation completed a collaborative reform assessment of the St.
Louis County (MO) Police Department, and is currently completing a collaborative reform
assessment of the North Charleston (SC) Police Department. The result of each assessment is a
comprehensive report (e.g. Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department) to help the
department utilize recommendations to improve policies and practices that institutionalize
community policing.
Reference #2: Delaware Department of Safety and Homeland Security
Description of the Performed Work: The Police Foundation partnered with Vigilant Resources
International to analyze crime data and propose crime-reduction strategies for the Wilmington Public
Safety Strategies Commission. The Commission was created by the Delaware legislature to address
high levels of violent crime in the state’s largest city. Interviews were conducted of police officers
and leaders, and civic and community leaders. Detailed data analyses were performed to show hotspots, crime trends, and other factors. Other similar jurisdictions were examined for crime strategies.
A report with 110 recommendations was prepared and approved by the Wilmington Public Safety
Strategies Commission (https://www.policefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/WPSSCFinal-Report-3_31_15.pdf). The report’s findings were recommended for adoption by Wilmington
City Council members.
Reference #3: US Department of Justice Critical Incident Reviews
Description of the Performed Work: In 2015, the Police Foundation began providing Critical
Response Technical Assistance (CRTA) to law enforcement agencies across the country, as assigned
by the US Department of Justice COPS office. The purpose is to assess the department’s response
and provide guidance and support to law enforcement agencies specific to a high profile event, major
incident, or that which is the result of a long-term issue. Lessons learned as a result of these analyses
and assistance are shared nationally through a published report. To date the Police Foundation has
provided critical response technical assistance to the San Bernardino Police Department following
the terrorist attack, and to the Minneapolis Police Department following civil unrest in the 4th
precinct. The San Bernardino report is pending release by DOJ. The Minneapolis work is ongoing.
Reference #4: Jackson County Sheriff’s Office – Strategic Planning Services
Project Description: The Police Foundation facilitated the development of a Strategic Plan for the
Jackson County Sheriff’s Office. We gathered information through interviews of county leaders,
sheriff’s office command staff, police supervisors and line employees; conducted resident and
employee focus groups; observed staff activities; and participated in ride-alongs with patrol. The
project reviewed and analyzed the information gathered, as well as police data, to develop a five-year
plan, which incorporates short range (years 1 and 2), medium range (years 3 and 4) and long-range
(year 5) recommendations.
POLICE FOUNDATION Form E Table of Contents
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND TEAM QUALIFICATIONS........................................... 3
1) Proposed Plan of Work ...................................................................................................................................... 5
2) Proposed Project Schedule .............................................................................................................................. 23
3) Project Management Methodology ................................................................................................................. 25
4) Team Experience .............................................................................................................................................. 26
5) Individual Staff Qualifications ........................................................................................................................ 29
6) Prior work with Moderately-Sized Urban Police Department similar to the City of Madison – Potential
Challenges, Unique Characteristics and Culture ......................................................................................... 35
7) Previous Experience Analyzing Police Department Culture ....................................................................... 36
8) Previous Projects Using Statistical Modeling and Systems Analysis to Determine Causal Relationships
Between Department Factors and Specific Outcomes ................................................................................. 37
9) Examples of Recommendations Involving Innovative Reforms .................................................................. 37
10) Previous Experience Working with Diverse and Vulnerable Populations ............................................... 37
11) Issues Regarding Presentations or Answering Questions, Including Those from the Media ................. 38
Assumptions .......................................................................................................................................................... 38
Designated POC .................................................................................................................................................... 39
RESUMES ............................................................................................................................... 39
St. Louis County Collaborative Reform Initiative Report - Executive Summary……...……...…………….77
POLICE FOUNDATION 2 T ECHNICAL P ROPOSAL
AND
T EAM Q UALIFICATIONS
Introduction: The Police Foundation respectfully submits this proposal in response to the
Request for Proposals (RFP) #: 8504-0-2016-BP to provide a Policy and Procedure Review of
the Madison (WI) Police Department. The purpose of this project is for a team of experts to
conduct a comprehensive review of Madison Police Department’s (MPD) policies,
procedures, practices, culture, and training to obtain an understanding of the current status of
the Madison Police Department, and to identify places for improvement and means of
improvement. This includes determining how to improve outcomes in many areas, including,
but not limited to, elimination of racial disparities in treatment of residents and
disproportionate contact with youth of color, minimization of use of force, dealing optimally
with people with mental health problems or who are under the influence of alcohol or other
drugs, optimal understanding of and responses to culturally-related behavioral variations, and
respecting rights of civilian witnesses. Following the comprehensive review, the Police
Foundation will generate a final report that includes our methodology, findings,
recommendations to address identified challenges, and specific strategies to implement the
recommendations.
The Police Foundation has assembled a highly qualified team with extensive expertise and
experience in police-community relations, best practices in policing and law enforcement
operations, use of force, implicit bias, specialized police responses to people with mental
illness and/or substance abuse issues, problem-oriented policing, internal investigations, and
recruiting, training and promotional practices. Our team’s familiarity with local law
enforcement department operational requirements, as well as our expertise and practical
experience in 21st century policing issues, community policing and engagement, diversity, and
police legitimacy, provide us with the experience and knowledge to efficiently and effectively
complete the tasks as described in the RFP.
Background and Understanding: In establishing the President’s Task Force on 21st Century
Policing, President Obama “spoke of the distrust that exists between too many police
departments and too many communities,” and that, “too many individuals, particularly young
people of color, do not feel as if they are being treated fairly.”1 While not rising to the level of
pattern or practice, the somewhat tenuous historical relationship between minorities and the
Madison Police Department (MPD), has led some community members to echo the sentiment
expressed by President Obama and accuse the police department of institutionalized racism
and excessive use of force.
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the population of the City of Madison was 233,082.2 An
overwhelming majority—78.9 percent—identified as “White alone”, with 75.7 percent
identifying as “White alone, not Hispanic or Latino,” 7.4 percent identifying as “Asian alone,”
7.3 percent identifying as “Black or African American alone,” 6.8 percent identifying as
“Hispanic or Latino,” 3.1 percent identifying as “two or more races,” and 0.4 percent
1
President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. 2015. Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century
Policing. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
2
United States Census Bureau. Quick Facts: Madison, Wisconsin.
http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/55025,5548000. Accessed July 13, 2016.
POLICE FOUNDATION 3 identifying as “American Indian and Alaska Native alone.” In addition to being predominately
White, the population is overwhelmingly young, with only 9.6 percent of residents 65 years
and over. One of the primary contributors to the youthful population is the University of
Wisconsin-Madison, which draws almost 40,000 undergraduate and graduate students.3
In Madison, the implications of institutionalized racism and excessive use of force,
particularly against the minority population, were exacerbated on March 6, 2015, when Tony
Robinson Jr. was fatally wounded in an officer-involved shooting. With only inconclusive
video from the dashboard camera of the responding officer, the lingering tensions over other
national events involving police and African-Americans were fueled again. Following the
shooting, an already volatile community began a series of protests and rallies outside the CityCounty Building, the state Capitol, and the house where the incident occurred. Some city and
county officials also signed a joint statement challenging the community as a whole to rally
together to end the “shameful racial disparities” that were believed to be the “root cause” of
incidents like Robinson’s and other racial unfairness in Madison.4
Lending credence to the suggestions of racial disparities within Madison, the Wisconsin State
Journal conducted a review of Madison Police Department arrests from 2013 and 2014 last
year, and found that officers arrested Whites at a rate of 2.6 per 100 residents annually,
compared to an arrest rate of 4.3 arrests per 100 residents for Hispanics and 27.6 per 100
residents annually for African-Americans.5 Coupled with an earlier finding that from 2008 to
2012 the MPD exonerated officers of excessive use of force complaints in 78 cases and
sustained one, and deemed two unfounded and had no finding in 27 cases, the Madison Police
Department was placed in a challenging position.6 Even since the release of this RFP, the
officer-involved shooting of Michael William Schumacher and the current investigation of
two officers related to their arrest of Genele Laird have raised questions about the proclivity of
MPD officers to use force instead of problem-solving techniques and de-escalation.
Despite these continuing challenges involving—and against—the Madison Police Department,
leaders within the agency have acted to address the relationship between the police and these
segments of the Madison community. As early as March 2013, Chief (ret.) Noble Wray
launched a Chief’s Blog to engage the community directly and to share, “insights and the
important and impactful activities of the Department.”7 Following Chief Wray’s departure—to
the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office), U.S. Department of
Justice—Chief Koval continued the blog. Chief Koval has not only continued to leverage the
blog to explain the actions of the department and directly answer questions, share stories about
3
University of Wisconsin. UW Facts and Figures. http://www.wisc.edu/about/facts/. Accessed July 13, 2016.
Savidge, Nico. Local officials call for end to area’s ‘shameful racial disparities’. Wisconsin State Journal. March 14, 2015.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime_and_courts/local-officials-call-for-end-to-area-s-shamefulracial/article_5fe9152d-d1a6-5194-b688-d38485ce3b2d.html.
5
Savidge, Nico. Analysis: Blacks in Madison arrested at more than 10 times rate of whites. Wisconsin State Journal. August
31, 2015. http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime-and-courts/analysis-blacks-in-madison-arrested-at-more-than-timesrate/article_fd52f630-9647-5541-8114-a2541b8a8924.html.
6
Cullen, Sandy and Dennis Punzel. Newly released police records shed additional light on Paul Heenan shooting. Wisconsin
State Journal. March 2, 2013.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime_and_courts/newly-released-police-records-shed-additional-light-on-paulheenan/article_315e18ac-82e0-11e2-b277-0019bb2963f4.html .
7
Noble Wray. “MPD Launches Innovative New Website.” Chief Wray’s Blog. March 18, 2013.
http://www.cityofmadison.com/police/chief/blog/?Id=872 .
4
POLICE FOUNDATION 4 the department, and provide insights on policing issues nationwide, but he has also taken a
proactive approach to highlight the community policing work of the department. Following
the release of the Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, Chief
Koval led the MPD in an assessment of the department’s initiatives and practices as they
compare to the Final Report’s recommendations and action items. Chief Koval has taken an
active role in highlighting the holistic approach needed to appropriately address the city’s
underprivileged populations and to defend the department against accusations of racism. It is
in the tenor and defense of the police department by the Chief—particularly in suggesting
better uses of the funds set aside for an assessment of the department—that some have
perceived as defensive, accusatory, and in the minds of the most vocal critics, unwilling to
consider change.8
The Madison Police Department has 457 commissioned personnel, approximately 113 civilian
staff, and 20 crossing guards, with a mission and “commitment to providing high quality
police services that are accessible to all members of the community.”9 The Department is
divided into many functional areas, including Investigative Services, Centralized Patrol
Services, Traffic and Specialized Services, Training, Community Outreach, Records, and
Finance. Of the total workforce, 82.5 percent is Caucasian and just over 80 percent of the
sworn officers are Caucasian. Meanwhile, 9.17 percent of the total workforce is African
American and just over 10 percent of the sworn officers are African American. Hispanics
(4.41 percent of the total and 5.00 percent of the sworn officers), Asians (2.47 percent of the
total and 2.6 percent of the sworn officers), and Native Americans (1.42 percent of the total
and 1.74 percent of the sworn officers) account for the rest of the department.10 It is notable
that over 55 percent of Department staff have been with the agency for 10 or more years.
1) PROPOSED PLAN OF WORK
The Police Foundation has assembled a highly qualified team of consultants – law
enforcement practitioners, management experts, and academics - with expertise in law
enforcement and public safety agency assessments, addressing bias in policing, and direct
involvement in the President’s 21st Century Policing Task Force. Our team’s renowned
leadership in the field, familiarity with public safety office operational requirements, and
expertise in public trust best practices, provide us the experience and knowledge to efficiently
and effectively complete the following tasks as described in the Request for Proposals (RFP).
Upon notification of award, the Police Foundation will assemble the following individuals to
form the Police Foundation Madison Team (hereafter referred to as the PF Team).
• Jennifer Zeunik, Program Director
• Al Lewers, Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager
• Frank Straub, PhD, Director of Strategic Studies
• Breanne Cave, Senior Research Associate
8
Becker, Abigail. Madison alders call Chief Mike Koval’s remarks on study proposal ‘divisive,’ ‘inappropriate’. The Cap
Times. June 7, 2016. http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/madison-alders-call-chief-mike-koval-sremarks-on-study/article_4124ece9-ed4d-56f6-b4fe-2d0bdf6d2fcf.html. Accessed July 19, 2016.
9
City of Madison Police Department Mission Statement. http://www.cityofmadison.com/police/about/mission.cfm. Accessed
July 14, 2016.
10
Madison Police Department. 2015 Annual Report: Madison Police Department.
http://www.cityofmadison.com/police/documents/annualReport2015.pdf. Accessed July 13, 2016.
POLICE FOUNDATION 5 •
•
•
•
•
•
Craig Fraser, PhD, Project Manager, Management Studies
Rebecca Benson, Senior Policy Analyst
Ben Gorban, Policy Analyst
Joyce Iwashita, Project Assistant
Rick Braziel, Police Foundation Executive Fellow
Melissa Reuland, Police Foundation Research Fellow
The Police Foundation (PF) proposes to use a variation of the Scanning, Analysis, Response,
Assessment (SARA) model to complete the policy and procedure review of the Madison
Police Department. This approach focuses on information gathering, best practices
identification, gap analysis, and recommendation development. This approach focuses on
information gathering from various sources to include, but not limited to the community, city
officials and the police; challenge/issue identification; gap analysis; best practice
identification; collaborative recommendation development; and implementation
recommendations. Our approach is tailored specifically to meet the needs of Madison,
Wisconsin, and will ensure the completion of the project in a timely manner, allowing
recommendations to be implemented without delay.
1A) Section 2.5.2 – Requirements for Review and Assessment of Current Police
Department Policies and Practices.
The Police Foundation will utilize the approach described above to gather information,
review, and assess current MPD policies and procedures.
Task 2.5.2.1 The Police Foundation will complete a full assessment of the MPD Standard
Operating Procedures (SOP) and Code of Conduct.
To do this, the PF Team will be onsite, conducting comprehensive data collection and
research - obtaining documentation of all policies and procedures; utilizing direct
observation; conducting interviews and focus groups with police department staff; and
administering surveys with police personnel, community leaders, community members,
elected officials, and stakeholder groups. In addition to reviewing the SOP and Code of
Conduct, the PF Team will also examine departmental reports, internal correspondence,
department and unit policies and procedures, personnel records, media and social media
coverage, including, but not limited to:
• Laws, regulations and ordinances establishing the MPD;
• MPD’s mission, goals and policing philosophy;
• Budget documents for the last five years to determine the city’s intent for the provision
of police services, as well as the latest budget (so that recommendations may be made
in light of anticipated funding); and
• Internal directives describing the purposes and functions of the MPD.
These documents will be referred to throughout the course of the project to determine the
extent to which they align with current and projected staffing and organizational needs.
The PF Team will also conduct interviews and focus groups, observe roll calls, and
participate in ride-alongs with patrol staff and specialized units in diverse neighborhoods
during all shifts; administer surveys to all levels of the department; and observe informal
POLICE FOUNDATION 6 interactions between members of the department. These efforts, as well as the information
collected from the community in Tasks 2.5.2.4 – 2.5.2.6, will help to identify and document
informal (non-written) policies, procedures, and practices that either enhance or inhibit
adherence to written policies and procedures. Additional methodological details are
provided in Section 2.5.3.
Review of the gathered information will help determine whether or not MPD’s core
functions effectively contribute to mission accomplishment. The PF Team will then conduct
a gap analysis, comparing analyzed data to community policing principles, model law
enforcement policies, lessons learned, best practices, and national standards. The PF Team
will utilize a broad set of resources, including the Report of the President’s Task Force on
21st Century Policing, the Police Executive Research Forum’s (PERF) Use of Force: Taking
Policing to a Higher Standard – 30 Guiding Principles, as well as best practices and lessons
learned from the law enforcement community and criminal justice research communities,
including those across public and private sectors, such as the Police Foundation,
International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), PERF, National Criminal Justice
Resource Service (NCJRS), the Commission for the Accreditation of Law Enforcement
Agencies (CALEA), and Academia.
Topics not covered by current written policies and procedures, areas that are insufficient or
not aligned with best or promising practices, and areas where inappropriate informal policies
inhibit adherence to written policies will be identified. Recommendations to address these
topics and areas will be developed, based on best or promising practices.
Task 2.5.2.2 The Police Foundation will review and assess all MPD training curricula and
procedures of training, including pre-service training, in-service training, specialized
training, and field training.
This will include reviewing all training policies, procedures, and processes, all curricula,
instructor qualifications and evaluations, training schedules, and procedures for
documenting and assessing trainees. Areas of focus will include training on use of force,
implicit bias, fair and impartial policing, procedural justice, police legitimacy, community
engagement and partnership, youth issues, cultural diversity, specialized police responses to
people in crisis (mental health, substance abuse, etc.), building community trust, and other
forms of training applicable to working with people from vulnerable or marginalized
communities.
The PF Team will interview training staff, observe training, and interview or survey MPD
staff who have recently gone through academy training, field training, specialized in-service
training, and post-promotional training, to gain insight into training on specific focus areas.
After gathering this information, the PF Team will compare findings to police training best
practices to identify gaps and areas for improvement. The assessment will identify any areas
where new training or changes in existing training or training policies and procedures are
needed, including recommendations to include coaching or mentoring strategies.
Recommendations will also address training and professional development practices to
strengthen internal knowledge and improve community relationships.
POLICE FOUNDATION 7 Task 2.5.2.3 The Police Foundation will assess MPD’s current recruitment, hiring,
promotion, and retention processes, both internally and in relation to the Police and Fire
Commission.
The PF Team will review recruitment, marketing, and hiring policies, procedures and
processes at MPD, including recruitment information and material provided on websites and
recruiting events. We will interview members of the department involved in recruitment,
marketing and hiring, as well as those who have recently gone through the process, to gain
insight into specific policies and procedures, from various internal perspectives. In addition,
we will gather information from community members to understand perceptions and
expectations of law enforcement officer skills and abilities, and ways that the department
can better attract qualified, diverse candidates (this will occur in conjunction with Tasks
2.5.2.4 -2.5.2.6 and 2.5.2.10.1). We will also interview selected community members
engaged with the police officer recruiting process, for example, local college counselors or
community employment groups to see how they determine who to refer to MPD.
The PF Team will analyze recruitment and hiring data to determine if hiring outcomes can
be improved with regard to more qualified applicants, applicants and officers that reflect the
diversity of the community, and applicants that best reflect 21st Century community policing
principles and the MPD’s philosophy and mission.
The PF Team will assess the capacity of MPD’s current processes to properly screen
candidates, including the currently utilized screening instruments and processes. We will
also examine department job descriptions to ensure they align with current best practices
and MPD philosophy, and gather information regarding the role of the Police and Fire
Commission in the hiring and promotional processes.
The PF Team will examine promotion and retention processes to ensure that quality and
suitability, rather than embrace of existing culture or cultivation of superiors, forms the basis
for promotion, and that those raising unpopular critiques are not penalized. The criteria used
by the department for evaluation of performance of officers will be assessed to ensure that
community building activities are encouraged, and to ensure that citations and/or arrests
alone are not incentivized.
Task 2.5.2.4. The Police Foundation will complete a detailed assessment of the internal
culture.
The PF Team will gather information from a variety of sources to assess MPD’s internal
culture. The information gathered and reviewed in Section 2.5.2.1 will be particularly
important, and will be supplemented by interviews and focus group sessions with the
following individuals and groups including, but not limited to:
• Chief of Police
• MPD Command Staff
• MPD Patrol Officers
• MPD Investigative Bureau Detectives
• MPD Civilian staff
• Madison Mayor
• Ad Hoc Committee members
POLICE FOUNDATION 8 •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Association of Madison Police Supervisors representative(s)
Madison Professional Police Officers Association representative(s)
Fraternal Order of Police representative(s)
Community stakeholders (identified through open-source media articles and referrals
from listed interviews)
Nonprofit and public sector partner organizations (mental health, substance abuse,
social services)
Community members with recent interactions with MPD
Dane County Sheriff
University of Wisconsin – Madison Police Chief
In addition, the PF Team will implement a community survey and an MPD staff survey
(civilian and sworn) that will inform this task. Details regarding these surveys are provided
in Section 1C.
The PF Team will also conduct ride-alongs, attend and observe roll calls, and observe dayto-day interactions to identify cultural practices within the department and assess the extent
to which they impact the internal and external perceptions of the agency.
This task will examine the policy preferences – formal and informal - that guide the delivery
of police services in Madison, as well as the community’s expectations of service. Issues
examined may include:
• The approach(es) that have been successfully used by the police department to address
the city’s crime, violence and disorder problems;
• How patrol time should be expended (what is the desired mixture of calls for service
response, self initiated activity, community engagement and problem solving,
administrative tasks, free patrol time, traffic control and enforcement);
• How are priorities established to investigate and close crimes reported to the
department;
• Crime prevention activities – both short and long range – including community crime
prevention and education, crime prevention through environmental design, school
based programs, and gang suppression;
• The nature and level of the department initiatives in community policing and problem
solving;
• Preferences for specialized units versus the use of generalists and preferences for
decentralization versus centralization;
• And the functions and use of support units.
Through this information gathering, the PF Team will gain perspectives on the demographic,
and cultural factors that are unique to Madison. Furthermore, the policy preferences
expressed by the city and the department will influence final recommendations.
Task 2.5.2.5 The PF Team will gather information regarding actual MPD field practices
through observation, interviews with officers, analysis of MPD records, and interviews of
community members interacting with police.
These methods have been described in prior sections and the information collected will be
POLICE FOUNDATION 9 documented and examined to determine if field practices are implemented in accordance
with written policies and departmental training, and if they are implemented in accordance
with community policing best and promising practices including respect for civil and
constitutional rights, de-escalation and problem-solving techniques, and the principles
established in the Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, the Police
Executive Research Forum’s (PERF) Use of Force: Taking Policing to a Higher Standard –
30 Guiding Principles, with a particular focus on respect for diverse community members,
as well as officer safety.
Task 2.5.2.6 The PF Team will analyze MPD’s efforts toward community policing and
problem-oriented policing, to include statements and written policies regarding community
policing, community policing strategies, and observed community policing and community
engagement efforts.
This analysis will identify the department’s stated community policing and problem-oriented
policing goals and determine whether the department’s culture, structure, and staffing
support those stated goals. In addition to using information gathered in Tasks 2.5.2.1,
2.5.2.2, 2.5.2.4, and 2.5.2.5, the PF Team will assist the department in administering the
Community Policing Self-Assessment Tool (CP-SAT).11 Those findings, community
surveys, results of focus group feedback, minutes or reports from community
meetings/forums held during the past two years, community based websites, a compilation
of all media coverage—including social media—of police-community relations, MPD’s 21st
Century Policing Response and other resources available on the MPD website, and any other
available external documents related to police department operations and community
relations, to analyze the department’s intent, efforts, and impact with regards to community
policing, community engagement, and problem-oriented policing.
Task 2.5.2.7 The PF Team will examine the MPD’s internal accountability mechanisms,
including supervision and staff evaluation policies and protocols, internal investigations,
disciplinary processes, internal and external complaints processes, and commendations.
We will assess the adequacy of supervisory oversight and supervisory performance
monitoring – these processes must ensure officers are properly carrying out their
responsibilities and also must identify officers who are outliers in performance. The PF
Team will examine any tools (early warning systems) used by the MPD to identify officers
at increased risk for use of force complaints.
The PF Team will review the disciplinary process and examine randomly selected cases, as
well as high profile cases, to determine if the process is appropriately followed, and whether
it results in effective, efficient, and equitable outcomes. This review will include an
assessment of the internal review process when officer involved deaths, injuries, or
shootings occur. Based on findings from the review of the MPD’s disciplinary process, the
PF Team will identify gaps in the process or any perception of a lack of independence by
internal investigators. The PF Team will consider potential mechanisms that might increase
the perceived independence of the internal processes, including mechanisms under which
11
The CP-SAT is an online survey that captures information about community partnerships, problem solving, and
organizational impact that is intended to aid agencies in measuring progress in implementing community policing.
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.asp?Item=2673
POLICE FOUNDATION 10 such reviews would be conducted by an independent board or person.
In a similar fashion, the PF Team will review MPD’s complaint process to determine its
effectiveness, equity and relationship-building for both officers and civilians. This will
include interviewing officers and community members involved in complaints during the
prior three (3) years, as well as reviewing the written complaint process, observing
complaint-related interviews and investigations, and reviewing complaint investigation
records and files.
Task 2.5.2.8 The PF Team will examine and assess all MPD data collection, data usage, data
records, automation, and communication systems.
This task will be completed in conjunction with tasks and activities described in Section
2.5.3, involving the collection and analysis of data to measure outcomes and impacts of
MPD policies, procedures, and actions, and will also involve the assessment of data systems
and data collection from response and investigative perspectives.
The PF Team will examine dispatch and communication systems, including system
maintenance records, to determine system efficiency and reliability, as well as whether the
information collected by these systems is comprehensive enough to ensure an optimal police
response, and that it is being conveyed in a timely manner without error. Our team will
analyze communication errors, including those involving the 911 Center.
The PF Team will also examine what data is being collected and how the data collected is
being used, to include crime analysis resources and tools, as well as policies and procedures
for using data to better understand patterns related to calls for service, incidents, officers,
victims, use of force, and the desired outcomes listed in 2.5.1. For example, the PF Team
will assess what data is collected and how it is used to inform crime strategy meetings,
patrol, investigative and specialized unit activities; what and how data is shared between
divisions of the department; what information is generated by responding officers, and how
the collective information is analyzed to guide resource allocation and crime prevention and
community policing strategies. The PF Team will also examine what information is shared
with the community, how the information is shared, and what feedback loops are in place to
inform the department’s business practices and operations based on community input.
After gathering this information and beginning to assess the outcomes and impact of
department activities, the PF Team will make determinations regarding the extent to which
the current data collection systems and the information captured is consistent and reliable,
and the extent to which the data is accessible and regularly used for analysis. The PF Team
will also assess the data collected in Tasks 2.5.2.4 – 2.5.2.8 to generate recommendations
regarding the efficiency of data processing and records management, and address outcomes
described in Sections 2.5.2.
Task 2.5.2.9 The PF Team will assess the equipment and technology currently used by MPD,
and how it is used, with a particular focus on less lethal weapons and other technologies that
may help reduce use of force and civilian injuries and fatalities.
This task will be completed in conjunction with the objectives outlined in 2.5.1. In addition,
POLICE FOUNDATION 11 the PF Team will assess the types and numbers of equipment and vehicles associated with
specialized response to critical incidents (eg. military surplus equipment or military-style
equipment), Tasers, traffic enforcement technologies (radars, license plate readers, etc.), and
crowd management equipment (eg. personal protective equipment, munitions, batons, etc.).
The PF Team will then assess the policies and procedures, trainings, certification and
recertification, and justifications for obtaining this equipment and technology. Similar to the
Community Policing and Body Camera Ad Hoc Committee, the PF Team will also assess
how the equipment and technology is being used by the department and how it is perceived
by the community.12
Task 2.5.2.10 The PF Team will evaluate the following MPD special initiatives and programs:
2.5.2.10.1 Community engagement with representatives of communities such as but not
limited to: African American, Asian, Latino, Native American, documented and
undocumented immigrants, refugees, LGBTQ, homeless, drug involved people, people
with mental health issues, youth in all communities, and people under Department of
Corrections community supervision. The PF Team will use information gathered in
Sections 2.5.2.1; 2.5.2.3; 2.5.2.4; 2.5.2.6; and 2.5.2.7 to assess MPD’s efforts and impact
with the diverse and vulnerable populations listed above. In addition, the PF Team will
seek and assess information regarding the MPD’s involvement in collaborative efforts
with other city/government agencies and community organizations, for example: safe
housing task force; mental health/police crisis teams; clergy – police partnerships; faithbased initiatives; use of violence disruptors/street outreach; collaborative partnerships
with the school system; etc.
2.5.2.10.2 Past and present MPD Trust Based Policing Initiatives, the Racial Disparity
Workgroup, and the work of the Diversity Inclusion Team. The PF Team will gather
written documentation related to these efforts and interview officers and participants in
these efforts to assess their impact and effectiveness.
2.5.2.10.3 MPD programming that serves people with mental health and/or drug abuse
issues. The PF Team will review MPD’s training and programs that address deescalation, as well as individuals with mental illness and/or substance abuse issues, and
determine what training is provided to which officers and how those officers are
deployed to address calls for service involving mental illness and/or substance abuse.
We will assess how MPD connects these individuals with services provided by local
agencies that serve these populations, and the adequacy of such resources from a police
perspective. This assessment will leverage the information gathered in Section 2.5.2.2,
and will also involve interviews with trained officers, local partners, individuals
involved in calls for service related to mental illness or substance abuse, and/or
interviews with family members of those individuals.
The PF Team will use this information to evaluate how MPD’s trainings and programs do or
12
Rivedal, Karen. Advisory committee votes against requiring Madison police to wear body cameras. Wisconsin State
Journal. September 3, 2015. http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime-and-courts/advisory-committee-votes-againstrequiring-madison-police-to-wear-body/article_3e009cdc-7808-530c-ae0a-035f7a6e6dd1.html. Accessed July 19, 2016.
POLICE FOUNDATION 12 not adequately work towards the goal of preservation of life.
In addition, the PF Team will examine MPD’s internal systems and resources for supporting
department staff with mental health issues or who are drug and alcohol dependent. This will
include critical incident debriefing, assessment of EAP and peer-to-peer counseling, and
anonymous referrals to community resources. The PF Team will determine the adequacy of
the systems and resources currently in place to safely support department members
struggling with these issues. In conjunction with Task 2.5.2.4, the PF Team will also assess
the internal culture and potential stigmas associated with using these—or similar—services.
1B) Section 2.5.1 – Objectives / Policy Review Criteria
As the Police Foundation Team conducts the tasks and activities described above, we will
utilize Madison’s identified outcomes and objectives to assess and analyze policies,
procedures, and actions. Our process for doing so for each objective is described below.
2.5.1.1 Current policing best practices should be implemented and adhered to.
After gathering information and data through a variety of methods, as described in the Tasks
listed above, the PF Team will conduct a gap analysis for each area of focus, comparing
analyzed data to community policing principles, model law enforcement policies, lessons
learned, best practices, and national standards. The PF Team will utilize a broad set of
resources, including the Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, the
Police Executive Research Forum’s (PERF) Use of Force: Taking Policing to a Higher
Standard – 30 Guiding Principles, as well as best practices and lessons learned from the law
enforcement community and criminal justice research communities, including those across
public and private sectors, such as the Police Foundation, International Association of
Chiefs of Police (IACP), PERF, National Criminal Justice Resource Service (NCJRS), the
Commission for the Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA), and Academia.
In addition to these national resources, the PF Team will review and utilize the Special
Community/Police Task Force Recommendations Regarding “Use of Force” report
published in February 2016 and the Dane County Workgroup Recommendations issued in
September 2015 in the report: Investigating Solutions to Racial Disparities and Mental
Health Challenges in the Dane County Jail and throughout Dane County’s Criminal Justice
System.
PF Team members will be assigned to the topics and areas of focus aligned with their areas
of expertise.
2.5.1.2 Use of force, particularly use of deadly force and fatalities from use of deadly force,
should be reduced to the maximum extent possible.
The PF Team will analyze officer involved shooting (OIS) incidents, OIS data, and all MPD
policies through the lens of limiting or reducing officer involved shootings in Madison. In
addition, the PF Team will engage, support, and train, as necessary, MPD regarding the
collection, storage, and ongoing analysis of data that can be used to inform training and
policing operations and polices to decrease incidents of OIS.
POLICE FOUNDATION 13 2.5.1.3 Racial equity in treatment of residents (as well as nonresidents visiting, working, or
attending school in Madison) should be achieved.
The PF Team includes staff with experience addressing issues of racial inequity and bias.
Our Team will examine police and community data to identify the extent of racial disparities
in police contacts, diversion access, citations, and arrests (including arrests for Department
of Corrections community supervision violations), including disproportionate contact with
youth of color. This data and the analysis findings will be utilized to support
recommendations to changes in policy or practice to eliminate identified disparities.
Appropriate recommendations regarding recruiting, hiring, and promotional processes, using
current police employee data, will be made to achieve racial equity within the department
and to reduce and eliminate bias. In addition, civilian and sworn officer training to address
implicit and explicit bias will be recommended as appropriate.
2.5.1.4 People with mental health issues, or who are under the influence of alcohol or other
drugs, should be dealt with optimally, ensuring their wellbeing to the greatest extent possible.
The PF Team includes staff with expertise in specialized police responses to individuals in
crisis, including those with mental illness and struggling with substance abuse, as well as
crisis intervention and de-escalation training. The Team will assess the information gathered
in the Tasks listed above to identify any recommended changes in policy or practice, or
changes in training resources and protocols. Information gathered from local partners and
mental health providers will inform this assessment, including information about diversion
to treatment and available local resources.
2.5.1.5 Ideals of community-oriented and, particularly, neighborhood policing should be
followed fully.
The Police Foundation understands that for the purpose of this review, the concept of
community policing is to be understood as is defined by Robert Trojanowicz and Bonnie
Bucqueroux: "Community policing is a philosophy of full service personalized policing,
where the same officer patrols and works in the same area on a permanent basis, from a
decentralized place, working in a proactive partnership with citizens to identify and solve
problems." This will be the approach we will use during the analysis of all information
collected in the Tasks described above.
2.5.1.6 Problem-oriented policing should be utilized wherever appropriate.
The PF Team will approach all relevant information and data analysis with a problemoriented policing lens, with an emphasis on meaningful community engagement. According
to University of Wisconsin Professor Herman Goldstein, behind every recurring crime or
quality of life problem there are underlying conditions that create it. In order for the police
to be more effective and efficient, they must gather information about and properly define
the “problem,” design an appropriate response based on the underlying condition(s) that
cause the problem(s), and commit to a rigorous evaluation of the implemented response.13 In
a more recent book, Handcuffed: What Holds Policing Back and the Keys to Reform (2016),
author Malcolm Sparrow explores the various approaches to policing: community, problemoriented, predictive, evidence-based, place-based, etc., and their compatibility with and
impact on police reform. The PF Team will reference Goldstein’s approach and explore
13
Goldstein, Herman. Problem-Oriented Policing (1990). New York: McGraw-Hill.
POLICE FOUNDATION 14 Sparrow’s observations in their analysis of MPD’s policies, procedures, and operations.
2.5.1.7 Evidence-based practices should be followed wherever possible.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2 above, best practices, evidence-based practices, and promising
practices will be referenced and recommended whenever possible.
2.5.1.8 Overly-aggressive policing should be avoided and instances of contacts, citations, and
arrests (including arrests for Department of Corrections community supervision violations,
and enforcement of immigration laws) in which harms may outweigh societal benefits should
be eliminated.
“Do no harm” will be the approach the PF Team utilizes to assess the information gathered
in the Tasks described above. The PF Team will assess the Department’s policies and
practices to ensure that potential negative impacts are considered when making enforcement
decisions. Opportunities for diversion to restorative justice or treatment-based approaches,
especially those that do not require further justice system involvement, will be identified in
existing policies and practices; recommendations to increase those diversions will be made,
as appropriate.
2.5.1.9 The rights of civilian witnesses should be fully recognized and respected.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2 above, community policing and community engagement
practices will be evaluated and best practices will be recommended, as appropriate. This
includes appropriate, respectful engagement with civilian witnesses.
2.5.1.10 People who are homeless should be dealt with in a manner that, insofar as possible,
seeks to ensure their wellbeing and autonomy, and that minimizes harm and criminalization.
The PF Team will approach the assessment of information and data regarding police
interactions with homeless individuals in a similar fashion as to that discussed in Section
2.5.2.10.3 above. Best practices, evidence-based practices, and promising practices will be
referenced and recommended, as appropriate.
2.5.1.11 Complaints against officers or other MPD employees should be investigated in a
transparent, timely, and entirely unbiased manner, and a "preponderance of the evidence"
standard should be used in proper fashion in determining whether to sustain complaints.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2.7 above, information and data gathered relevant to internal
investigations will be assessed according to best practices, evidence-based practices, and
promising practices, and recommendations will be made, as appropriate, to ensure that
internal investigations are timely, transparent and unbiased.
2.5.1.12 After an MPD officer has used lethal force, MPD should treat the deceased person’s
family and friends with sensitivity, compassion, and respect, should keep them fully informed
of developments (without delays) as the case unfolds, and should not take actions that
potentially endanger their privacy or safety.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2 above, best practices, evidence-based practices, and promising
practices will be referenced and recommended, as appropriate. The Police Foundation has
focused on this specific issue in prior work as a result of critical incident reviews, and has
identified specific best practices regarding this issue.
POLICE FOUNDATION 15 2.5.1.13 Outcomes averse to community members should be reduced by providing optimal
initial and ongoing training in understanding the communities being policed, implicit bias,
conflict resolution, nonviolent communication, de-escalating situations, community dynamics,
adolescent development, and other such forms of training that foster wise, equitable, and
minimally-coercive approaches.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2.2, all training will be examined, and, based on MPD needs and
the Madison community’s needs, relevant and appropriate training will be recommended, in
accordance with evidence-based findings.
2.5.1.14 Training and practices should result in understanding of and optimal sensitivity and
responses to culturally-related behavioral variations.
See Section 2.5.1.13.
2.5.1.15 Strengthening the community's own capacity to reduce violence and serious crime
should be a priority.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2 above, best practices, evidence-based practices, and promising
practices will be referenced and recommended as appropriate, including recommendations
for community partners and stakeholders, and community engagement practices.
2.5.1.16 Accountability of the MPD to the community, and the degree of control of the
community over the policies and practices of the MPD, should be maximized.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2 above, best practices, evidence-based practices, and promising
practices will be referenced and recommended whenever possible, with a focus on
community engagement and improved police-community relations.
2.5.1.17 The actions of MPD and its officers should consistently be guided by principles of
procedural justice, both in the development of policies and in interactions of officers with the
public.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2 above, best practices, evidence-based practices, and promising
practices will be referenced and recommended whenever possible, with a focus on police
legitimacy and procedural justice.
2.5.1.18 The above outcomes should be accomplished in a manner that attempts to avoid an
increase in serious and violent crime, and that provides for adequate officer safety.
As discussed in Section 2.5.2 above, best practices, evidence-based practices, and promising
practices will be referenced and recommended, as appropriate.
1C) Methodological Approach
The Police Foundation proposes the following methodological approach to gather and analyze
data to complete the tasks described in Sections 1A and 1B, informing the review and
assessment of the MPD.
2.5.3. Methodological Requirements
The Police Foundation will take a mixed methods approach to completing the Madison Police
Department Policy and Procedure Review.
POLICE FOUNDATION 16 As described in Sections 2.5.2.1. and 2.5.2.8., during the early stages of the proposed project,
the Police Foundation Team will review key MPD policies and data. These reviews are aimed
at gathering information about the content of these policies, as well as the content of data
management systems. Upon completion of these reviews, we will use a grounded theory
approach to identify themes surrounding each of the identified policy and practice areas. We
will incorporate our initial findings in developing survey instruments, questions, and measures
that will be used during later phases of the project.
Following these initial reviews, the PF Team will implement the following approach to
collecting, assessing, and analyzing data to achieve the objectives of this review.
2.5.3.1.(A) The PF Team will complete a thorough assessment and analysis of existing MPD
data and data collected by the PF Team from staff through interviews, focus groups, and a
survey.
Our assessment and analysis of MPD data is aimed at understanding the scope and
availability of data about crucial issues, including patrol deployment records; contacts;
diversions; citations; arrests; use of force; civilian injuries and fatalities; and investigation
methods including interrogations and identification procedures.
Data Assessment: We will assess the completeness of the data, including the time period
when records become available and the types of information that are commonly coded. We
will also assess processes for generating the data—for instance, how police officers and
dispatchers make decisions about how to code crime incidents. Also, we will assess how
data are validated, released, and used. On the basis of this assessment, we will make initial
findings regarding police practices on the basis of existing department data, as well as
suggestions for improving department data collection, reliability, the efficiency of reporting,
and coding practices.
Data Analysis: The PF Team will then take a mixed methods approach to analyzing the data
to understand and assess department practices, including the items listed in the below
sections (2.5.3.1.(B), 2.5.3.1.(C), 2.5.3.1.(D) and 2.5.3.1.(E), to include our methodological
approach to analysis.
2.5.3.1.(B) The PF Team will analyze officer initiated activities or contacts and civilian calls
for service.
To begin, we will interview patrol officers, data analysts, and supervisors in order to
understand how officer-initiated activities are tracked and coded by MPD personnel. The PF
Team will examine one year’s worth of data from the department’s computer aided dispatch
(CAD) system to carry out a quantitative analysis of officer-initiated activities to examine
the frequency and nature of the department’s recorded interactions with the community.
This analysis will focus on three key issues. First, the Team will analyze the extent of
variation in officer-initiated activities, and the disposition of these activities, across locations
and times of day. Second, we will create regression models in order to understand whether
characteristics of communities predict officer-initiated activities. Third, we will incorporate
POLICE FOUNDATION 17 questions in citizen surveys to assess their perceptions about officer-initiated activities in
their communities.
In addition, we will examine the CAD data to assess public generated Calls for Service
(CFS) to determine when and where they occur, and differences geographically among CFS
patterns.
2.5.3.1.(C) The Police Foundation will collect information and analyze MPD data regarding
training, complaints, and disciplinary actions.
We will interview training staff and observe training sessions, using qualitative methods to
assess how training practices line up with the evidence about effective policing tactics and
strategies, and to identify gaps in training that should be addressed by the department. We
will also review department training records to assess the extent of staff participation in
training events such as use of force and CIT training.
In addition, we will examine how formal MPD administrative and personnel policies are
implemented with regard to officer training, retention, promotion, and discipline. We will
review records surrounding citizen complaints to determine how the department collects,
investigates and responds to complaints against police officers. The PF Team will then
analyze archival data and carry out interviews with officers to assess how MPD responds in
cases when officers are injured or killed in the line of duty. This assessment will focus on
officer satisfaction with department policies, investigation outcomes, and the consistency
and transparency of the investigation process. Third, we will code key aspects of officers’
career experiences and performance (including variables such as arrests made, tenure, duty
assignment, citizen complaints) and develop regression models that examine how these
experiences predict retention, promotion, and disciplinary outcomes.
Lastly, we will attempt to link information about disciplinary incidents that result from
police-citizen interactions and data on citizen complaints to data on the duty assignment of
patrol officers—including the area of the city where they are assigned to work and their shift
assignment—in order to understand whether these factors place officers at particular risk of
misconduct or citizen complaints. We will examine the existence of any connections
between the type of complaint against an officer, the type of disciplinary actions taken, and
recurrence of offenses. We will identify any elevated levels of certain types of complaints or
offenses, including an assessment by geographic area, shift assignment, setting, etc. We will
examine the outcomes of the complaint investigation process to determine levels of findings
and any common disciplinary action trends. We will also assess officers’ perceptions of
disciplinary actions through interviews and/or the personnel survey.
2.5.3.1.(D) The PF Team will analyze MPD’s officer involved shooting data to examine
frequency over time, locations, race and ethnicities of involved subjects, injuries sustained,
and other relevant variables.
During the first stage of the research project, the PF Team will assess the quality and scope
of MPD officer-involved shooting (OIS) data to determine the time periods that it covers
and the methods used for coding incidents. Our initial assessment of this data will be based
on how well MPD coding methods and data collection practices match up with
POLICE FOUNDATION 18 recommendations made by Klinger et al. (2016) concerning the coding of these events. If
location data are available for OIS incidents, we will carry out a community-level analysis
of these events to determine whether neighborhood-level factors such as violent crime
predict OIS activity, as has been found in previous research.14 Third, if data are sufficiently
comprehensive to allow for comparisons, we will use data from the Major Cities Chiefs
Association/ Police Foundation Officer-Involved Shooting Data Collection Tool, which
includes incidents from over 42 police agencies in the United States and Canada, to assess
how OIS trends in Madison—including their frequency over time, the race and ethnicity of
subjects who are involved, and subject and officer injuries and deaths—compare to trends in
other major North American cities.
2.5.3.1.(E) The Police Foundation will examine existing MPD data to determine the extent to
which disparities with respect to race, ethnicity, age, gender, sexuality, sexual orientation,
gender identify, economic and housing status, and mental health status can be assessed with
regards to police contacts, diversions, citations, arrests, use of force, civilian and officer
injuries and fatalities, complaints, and discipline.
In the first stage of the research project, the Police Foundation Team will examine MPD
victimization/complaint, incident, arrest, use of force, and officer and citizen injury data to
determine how demographic information, information about sexuality and sexual
orientation, gender identity, economic and housing status, and mental health status are
recorded. Where possible, we will use descriptive statistics and regression models to assess
whether citizen characteristics predict policing outcomes such as police contacts,
complaints, citations, and arrests. Finally, the PF Team will also include items related to
both the citizen characteristics that are of concern for the purpose of this portion of the
analysis, and police contacts, diversions, citations, arrests, and other activities, in
community surveys to more directly measure whether citizens who have different
backgrounds have different experiences with the Madison Police Department.
2.5.3.1. (F) The Police Foundation will collect information and data from MPD staff using
interviews, focus groups, a survey, and observation.
Initially, as described in Section 1A, the PF Team will interview key personnel and carry out
focus groups about how MPD policies are understood by staff, and whether the staff identify
gaps in existing policies and practices that should be addressed. During these focus groups,
we will also ask about informal policies and practices that may promote or conflict with
compliance with written policies and procedures. This information will inform the next,
more comprehensive information gathering process.
Subsequent to the initial discussions, the PF Team will assess the practices and internal
culture of MPD staff through a two-step research design. First, the PF Team will carry out
interviews of staff members focusing on crucial themes drawn from existing research—such
as perceptions about loyalty among police officers and within the department, orientation
towards a ‘crime fighting image’, and perceptions about the punitiveness of supervisors15.
14
Fyfe, J.J. (1980) Geographic correlates of police shooting: A microanalysis. Journal of Research in Crime and
Delinquency 17: 101-13 and Klinger, David, Richard Rosenfeld, Daniel Isom, and Michael Deckard. (2016) Race,
crime, and the micro-ecology of deadly force. Criminology & Public Policy, 15: 193–222.
15
Cockcroft, T. (2012) Police Culture: Themes and Concepts New York: Routledge and Paoline, E. (2003) “Taking stock:
Toward a richer understanding of police culture”. Journal of Criminal Justice 31 199 – 214.
POLICE FOUNDATION 19 These interviews will inform the development of a survey on MPD culture and work
experiences that will be administered to all staff in the department. Survey findings will
supplement the information gathered as described in the tasks in Section 2.5.2, informing
findings and recommendations associated with the objectives and review criteria addressed
in Section 2.5.1.
Where possible, police officers’ responses will be joined with data on use of force, citizen
complaints, and arrests to allow for assessment of how organizational culture relates to job
performance outcomes.
2.5.3.1.(G) In addition to the tasks and activities described in Section 1A of this proposal, the
PF Team will conduct data analyses utilizing existing MPD data, as is applicable to informing
project findings.
Without additional details regarding MPD data available for analysis, we cannot provide
detailed qualitative methodologies.
2.5.3.2. Data will be collected and analyzed from Madison residents and nonresidents who
regularly visit, work, or attend school in Madison, particularly from populations that have the
most police contact and are the most vulnerable and marginalized.
A major component of this project is concerned with understanding community experiences
with the MPD. As described in Sections 1A and 1B, this component of the project involves
four types of data collection: 1) a study of police activity in Madison communities; 2) direct
observations of police in times and places when they are most active; 3) focus groups and
interviews with community stakeholders who frequently work with the police; 4) a random
sample survey of community members who live in areas that experience high levels of
police activity. This broad based approach to evaluating community perceptions of the
police will provide a comprehensive view of police-community relations in Madison.
Police Activity in Madison Communities (2.5.2.5. and 2.5.2.6.): The assessment of police
activity in Madison communities will use two key methods in order to understand how
officers behave in different locations throughout the city. Our approach to this question is
informed by research in criminology that shows that police activity can be shaped by
community racial composition, socio-demographics, and crime, as well as citizens’
perceptions of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the police16. We will analyze police
activity at the Census tract level by creating regression models that use community
characteristics to predict police activities such as use of force (including the use of less
lethal weapons), arrest, and officer-involved shooting, as well as community policing and
problem-oriented policing activities. We will also use longitudinal data and panel regression
models to assess changes in police activity within communities over time.
Following an initial analysis of peak times and locations for police activity in Madison, the
research team will carry out direct observations of patrol officers. Trained observers will
accompany police officers during sixty (60) one- to two-hour observation periods during
16
Klinger, David. (2004). “Environment and Organization: Reviving a Perspective on the Police”, The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science 593(1) 119-136 and Kirk, D.S., & Matsuda, M. (2011). “Legal Cynicism,
Collective Efficacy, and the Ecology of Arrest.” Criminology, 49(2), 443-472.
POLICE FOUNDATION 20 high-activity times and locations. The observers will ask police officers general questions
about the nature of the areas where they patrol, and also code officers’ activities during
patrol, including responses to calls for service, interrogations, and problem solving
activities.
Satisfaction with MPD Among Community Stakeholders (2.5.2.4., 2.5.2.6., and 2.5.2.10.):
The PF Team will take a two-stage approach to assessing the relationship between MPD and
the community. The research team will identify community groups that represent
populations that are of particular interested under this RFP - racial and ethnic minority group
communities, the LGBTQ community, persons with mental illness, immigrants, the
homeless, drug involved persons, persons under Department of Corrections (DOC)
supervision, and key personnel in public schools who regularly work with the police. We
will then carry out focus groups and interviews with these personnel to understand the
common concerns and issues that are addressed in these partnerships. During these focus
groups, we will also assess community members’ perceptions about MPD initiatives such as
the Trust Based Policing Initiative, the Racial Disparity Workgroup, and the Diversity
Inclusion Team. These activities are described in Section 1A.
While these qualitative research efforts will provide crucial information about the
perceptions of stakeholders who routinely interact with the police, we also intend to contact
members of communities that experience high levels of police activity who may not be
present at community meetings or working directly with the police. Therefore, we will carry
out community surveys in highly policed areas. The sample of respondents will be identified
using parcel data files on residential areas in the City of Madison. We will identify a block
randomized sample of residents of communities within Madison, wherein 40 households are
selected for participation from within fifteen Census tracts that experience high levels of
police activity. We will then attempt to contact these households through email, in-person,
and by mail to complete brief surveys about residents’ perceptions of the police. This data
will be combined with other information about community crime, demographics, and police
use of force to determine how these factors influence local perceptions about community
policing, fairness, effectiveness, and use of just procedures, following work by Schaefer and
colleagues17 and Kirk and Matsuda18.
2.5.3.3. Quantitative data analysis will be performed to identify causal factors most heavily
influencing outcomes of interest, in order to develop appropriate recommendations for
improvement. Findings will inform recommendations and suggested implementation steps.
The Police Foundation Team will analyze the survey data using descriptive and regression
models, and our interpretation of the findings will also be informed by the policy reviews
described in Section 1A of this study. Our goals in these surveys are to understand whether
informal MPD culture tends to support or undermine the stated priorities of the organization,
to assess police officers’ perceptions and community members perceptions about a wide
range of issues addressed in the Tasks in Section 1A, including, but not limited to:
17
Schaefer, J., Huebner, B., and Bynum, T. (2003). “Citizen Perceptions of Police Services: Race, Neighborhood Context,
and Community Policing”. Police Quarterly 6(4), 440-468.
18
Kirk, D.S., & Matsuda, M. (2011). “Legal Cynicism, Collective Efficacy, and the Ecology of Arrest.” Criminology, 49(2),
443-472.
POLICE FOUNDATION 21 •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Community policing and problem-oriented policing (2.5.2.6.)
Promotion and retention (2.5.2.3.)
Department support for officer welfare, including physical and mental health
Adequacy of training received by officers (2.5.2.2.)
Officer supervision and discipline (2.5.2.7.)
Field practices (2.5.2.5.)
Adequacy of equipment and technologies provided to officers (2.5.2.9.)
Mechanisms for responding effectively to calls that involve persons with mental
illness, drug involved persons, and physical or cognitive difficulties and adequacy of
resources available to officers experiencing mental health issues or who are drug
and/or alcohol dependent (Section 2.5.2.10.3.)
MPD special initiatives and programs (Section 2.5.2.10.)
2.5.3.4. As discussed in this Section, and in Section 1A, the Police Foundation will utilize a
mixed methods approach to data collection, assessment, and analysis.
Qualitative and quantitative data will be collected and analyzed using a variety of tools and
analysis methodologies.
2.5.3.5 As discussed in Section 1A and 1B, evidence-based approaches, best practices, and
promising practices will be utilized, referenced, and recommended whenever possible, with a
focus on community engagement, police legitimacy and procedural justice.
1D) Describe Plan for Deliverables in Section 2.5.4.
The PF Team will develop a comprehensive report on the current status of the Madison Police
Department.
2.5.4.1. Based on the findings from the steps above, the PF Team will compile the information,
organize data, and develop recommendations to address each of the components listed in the
tasks described in Section 2.5.2, and the outcomes described in Section 2.5.1, to build on work
already underway, as well as address any identified gaps or areas for improvement, in efforts
to develop and implement all policies and practices necessary to serve as a model 21st century
police department.
This information will culminate in a draft report that will provide an overview of the
findings, and a detailed outline of recommendations for both the city of Madison and the
Madison Police Department. The report will also include implementation steps and
processes, proposed timelines, and the tools and supports that will be required to
institutionalize open, transparent and inclusive policing in Madison. The draft final report
will be submitted for review and input by key Madison stakeholders, including Madison city
government officials and Madison Police Department leadership.
The PF Team’s final report will include an overview of the project methodology; the
information and data collected and reviewed; observations; analysis findings; and discussion
and actionable recommendations. The report will include discussion and recommendations
for each of the areas reviewed, as described above, and will identify areas of high
performance, as well as recommendations for areas of prioritization and urgency.
POLICE FOUNDATION 22 The Project Director will take the lead on developing the template for the report, including
developing the draft outline and identifying and organizing the sections to be included. The
report will be drafted by PF Team staff working in specific areas of focus. The Project
Director will then pull these sections together, to ensure the report is complete and
cohesively written. Upon completion of the draft report, but prior to submission to the client,
the report will be reviewed internally by the Police Foundation Chief Operating Officer and
a Police Foundation Executive Fellow not directly involved in the project. This objective
review ensures that the report is comprehensive and responsive to the client’s expectations.
Following completion of the draft report and submission to Madison stakeholders, key PF
Team members will meet with identified Madison city and MPD leadership to discuss the
findings, recommendations, and full report. The report will then be quickly finalized,
addressing all feedback. Internally the document will be professionally formatted and copyedited.
A sample of a recent Police Foundation report produced as a result of a local police
department assessment is: The Collaborative Reform Initiative: An Assessment of the St.
Louis County Police Department.
(http://www.policefoundation.org/publication/collaborative-reform-initiative-an-assessmentof-the-st-louis-county-police-department/ )
The final report will be provided to the City according to the agreed upon schedule,
electronically and in hard copy, and will be the property of the City of Madison.
2.5.4.2. The PF Team will draft a final report that will include recommended steps and
strategies for the Madison Police Department, as well as stakeholder groups, as applicable.
Recommendations may include diverse actions, including changes to programs, new
strategies, resource allocation changes, policy modifications, innovative approaches, etc.
Recommendations will be based on best practices and Madison’s needs. Recommendations
will include progressive and preventative measures, including education, awareness, and
outreach; policy and process changes and updates; training; systems; and tools for
measuring success (outcomes). The report will include how MPD performance compares
and relates to the City of Madison, Dane County, State of Wisconsin, and policing
profession as a whole, both in the U.S. and internationally. The report will also include
suggested strategies to measure the results from implementation of recommendations,
including checklists and proposed timelines.
The PF Team will periodically attend, present, and report out to the Madison Police
Department, the MPD Policy and Procedure Review Ad Hoc Committee, the Mayor, City
Council, and other stakeholder groups as requested. (2.5.4.3 and 2.5.4.4)
2) PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE
A preliminary timeline is proposed below. The Police Foundation understands that the
proposed timeline will be discussed, modified as necessary, incorporated into the Work Plan,
and agreed upon with leadership prior to project implementation.
POLICE FOUNDATION 23 Madison%Police%Department%Policy%and%Procedure%Review%%
Tasks%and%Activities
*Deliverables%and%Milestones
+
1
2
Dec
Jan
Project%Period%(beginning%December%1,%2016)
Month
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Feb
March
April
May
June
July
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Aug
Sept
11
12
Oct
Nov
Task%1.%Research%and%Data%Gathering
Initial'Meeting'and'Draft'Project'Work'Plan*
Finalization'of'Project'Work'Plan*
2.5.2.1%Assess%MPD%Standard%Operating%Procedures%and%Code%of%Conduct
2.5.2.2%Assess%MPD%Training%Curricula%and%Procedures%
2.5.2.3%Assess%MPD's%Recruiting,%Hiring,%Promotion,%and%Retention%Processes
2.5.2.4%Assess%MPD%Internal%Culture
2.5.2.5%Examine%MPD%Field%Practices%through%observation
2.5.2.6%Analyze%MPD's%efforts%toward%community%policing%&%problemPoriented%
policing
2.5.2.7%Evaluate%MPD%accountability%mechanisms
2.5.2.8%Assess%MPD%data%collection,%data%usage,%data%records,%automation,%and%
communication%systems.%
2.5.2.9%Assess%equipment%and%technology%used%in%the%department
2.5.2.10%Evaluate%MPD%Special%Initiatives%and%Programs%
2.5.2.10.1%Assess%MPD's%efforts%toward%community%engagement%with%minority,%
diverse,%and%vulnerable%populations
2.5.2.10.2%Review%past%and%present%MPD%Trust%Based%Policing%Initiatives,%Racial%
Disparity%Workgroup,%and%the%Diversity%Inclusion%Team
2.5.2.10.3%Review%MPD%programming%that%serves%people%with%mental%health%and/or%
substance%abuse%issues
x
x
x
x
x
x
Task%2.%Interviews/%Meetings/%Forums/%Focus%Groups/%and%Observations%with%
Madison%Police%Department%Employees
2.5.3(F)'Initial'Interviews'with'MPD'leaders'and'groups'to'supplement'
information'gathered'in'2.5.2*
2.5.3.1(F)%Collect%Information%from%MPD%staff%through%Focus%Groups
2.5.3.1(F)%Collect%Information%from%MPD%staff%through%staff%interviews
2.5.3.1(F)%Collect%Information%from%MPD%staff%through%observation
2.5.3.1(F)'Develop'and'Implement'MPD'staff'survey*
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Task%3.%Interviews/%Meetings/%Forums/%Focus%Groups%with%City%employees%
other%than%police,%and%City%officials
Initial'Interviews'with'City'leaders,'public'officials,'and'local'governmen'partners'
to'supplement'information'gathered'in'2.5.2*
City%Council%meetings
2.5.2.10.1%Interviews%with%local%government%programs%serving%diverse%and%
vulnerable%communities%(as%listed%in%proposal)
2.5.2.10.3%Interviews%with%local%government%programs%providing%services%to%
individuals%with%mental%illness%and/or%substance%abuse%issues
Focus%groups%with%identitified%groups%as%determined%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Task%4.%Interviews/%Engagement%with%the%Public
2.5.3.2'Initial'Interviews'with'community'leaders'and'stakeholders'to'supplement'
information'gathered'in'2.5.2*
2.5.2.10.1%Interviews%with%local%nonprofit%organizations%serving%diverse%and%
vulnerable%communities%(as%listed%in%proposal)
2.5.2.10.3%Interviews%with%community%programs%providing%services%to%individuals%
with%mental%illness%and/or%substance%abuse%issues
2.5.3.2%Focus%groups%with%identitified%groups%as%determined%
2.5.3.2%Community%Engagement%Meetings
2.5.3.2'Develop'and'Implement'Community'Survey*
x
x
x
x
x
Task%5.%Analysis%and%Report%Writing
2.5.3.1(A)%Analysis%of%existing%police%data%and%data%collected%during%Tasks%1,%2,%3,%4
2.5.3.1(B)%Analysis%of%officer%initated%activities%and%contacts,%and%civilian%calls%for%
service
2.5.3.1(C)%Analyze%MPD%data%regarding%training,%complaints%and%disciplinary%actions
2.5.3.1(D)%Analyze%MPD%officer%involved%shooting%data
2.5.3.1(E)%Examine%existing%MPD%data%to%identify%the%existence%of%disparities%in%
police%contacts,%etc.%
2.5.3.1(F)%Analyze%information%gathered%in%Tasks%2,3,4
2.5.3.1(G)%Additional%data%analysis%as%determined
Quantitative%data%analysis%and%qualitative%data%analysis%(2.5.3.3%and%2.5.3.4)
2.5.3.5%Analyze%all%information%gathered%utilizing%evidencePbased%approaches,%best%
practices,%and%promising%practices,%focusing%on%objectives%in%2.5.1.
2.5.4.1%Compile%information,%organize%data,%&%develop%recommendations%to%
address%components%in%Section%2.5.2%of%RFP,%&%outcomes%in%Section%2.5.1.
Monthly'Progress'Reports*
Draft%Final%Report
2.5.4.2'Final'Report*
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Task%6.%Presentations
2.5.4.3'Attend'Ad'Hoc'Committee'meetings'and'report'on'project'status*
2.5.4.4'Present'on'project'progress,'findings,'and'recommendations'to'Ad'Hoc'
Committee,'Mayor,'Police'Chief,'City'Council,'and'others*
POLICE FOUNDATION x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
24 3) PROJECT MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGY
The Police Foundation utilizes established project management principals to ensure that all
project tasks and activities are completed on time, within budget.
Initial Meeting and Project Work Plan - The PF Team will meet with MPD and Madison
City points of contact to discuss the project, tentative timelines, and the project Work Plan. At
that initial meeting, the PF Team will introduce key personnel, present an overview of project
activities, and propose a Project Work Plan, to include tasks, activities, milestones,
deliverables, and a timeline. As a result of this initial meeting and follow-up planning
discussions, the PF Team will provide Madison with a detailed draft Project Work Plan that
includes all tasks, activities, timelines, and responsible staff. Upon client review, the PF Team
will finalize the Work Plan, which will be used to guide all project activities. The PF Team
will work closely with Madison points of contact to develop a client-approved Project Work
Plan within 30 days of contract award.
Ongoing Project Management – The Program Director will work closely with the Senior Law
Enforcement Project Manager and Director of Strategic Studies, who will be the primary
onsite points of contact for this project. This management team of three will ensure tasks and
activities are completed in accordance with the agreed upon Work Plan. The full Madison PF
Team will meet weekly via telephone to discuss project activities and findings. Written
monthly status reports outlining tasks accomplished, progress made and any challenges
encountered that could impact time and cost goals, will be provided to the client,
supplemented by telephone conversations and meetings onsite as necessary.
We intend for the Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager, Director of Strategic Studies,
Project Manager, Policy Analyst, Senior Research Associate, Executive Fellow, and Research
Fellow to work on and offsite during the project period; the Program Director, Senior Policy
Analyst, and Project Assistant will work exclusively off-site.
The team structure and position roles and responsibilities are provided in Section 5.
Quality Assurance - In addition to the proposed highly qualified Madison PF Team, the
Police Foundation has established a robust system of quality assurance and internal controls to
ensure that each project is executed efficiently and effectively, and results in high-quality
deliverables that exceed our clients’ expectations. All projects are discussed at weekly staff
meetings. During these meetings the Program Director reports out regarding recent project
activities, upcoming tasks, and project challenges, as applicable. Any follow-up required is
coordinated with the Madison PF Team and Police Foundation leadership. In addition, the
Vice President / Chief Operating Officer (COO) oversees all management consulting projects,
which will include the Madison project.
The COO will monitor this project’s activities and budget expenditures on a bi-weekly basis.
Standardized internal financial management controls are utilized to ensure projects are
completed on-budget. These processes will ensure that the proposed and agreed upon timeline
for completion of the project will be met.
POLICE FOUNDATION 25 Institutional Review Board - As an independent research organization, †he Police Foundation
adheres to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) requirements for human
subjects’ protections. We will use an Institutional Review Board (IRB) to review and approve
the research methodology associated with gathering information from individuals through
focus groups and surveys, ensuring that human subjects protections are in place.
4) T EAM E XPERIENCE
4A) Police Foundation Organizational Experience and Qualifications
Incorporated in 1970, the Police Foundation is the oldest nationally known, independent,
nonprofit, non-partisan, and non-membership driven organization dedicated to improving
policing in America. The Police Foundation has been on the cutting edge of police innovation
since its establishment 45 years ago. The Police Foundation’s mission is to advance policing
through innovation and science.
Over the Police Foundation’s history, its leadership has insisted that the organization’s work
have practical impact on policing, and that the knowledge gained through empirical
investigation be applicable outside the “laboratory,” directly informing improvement in the
way police work. In addition to designing, conducting, and evaluating controlled experiments,
the Foundation offers a range of professional services, including training and technical
assistance and management analyses and planning. Professional services are custom-designed
to meet the needs of each individual law enforcement agency. Our organization’s ability to
connect clients with subject matter expertise, supported by sound data analysis, makes us
uniquely positioned to assist police and public safety departments of all sizes across the
United States.
Organizational Competencies
The Police Foundation is credited with much of the research, initiated in the 1970s that moved
the nation toward a more progressive policing approach emphasizing a community orientation.
The Police Foundation prides itself in four core competencies, described below.
1.
A Strong Understanding of Community Policing: Since inception, the Foundation has
understood that to flourish, police innovation requires an atmosphere of trust; a
willingness to experiment; an exchange of ideas both within and outside the police
structure; and a recognition of the common stake of the entire community in improving
police services. Police Foundation work is grounded in the principles of community
policing.
2. The Police Foundation Executive Fellows Program: Executive Fellows at the Police
Foundation are current or recently retired executive-level members of criminal justice
organizations whose knowledge, experience, and skills help advance the Foundation’s
mission. They are experts in an array of law enforcement and public safety areas,
including community policing, conflict resolution, use of force, etc. They serve as
members of our Practitioner Advisory Board to help ensure we remain grounded in an
understanding of practical needs of law enforcement organizations.
POLICE FOUNDATION 26 3. History of Quality Research and Data Analysis19: The Police Foundation is constantly
engaged in a variety of research endeavors. Past projects have included research on
diverse policing issues, including community policing; shift length; CompStat; effective
police response to stalking protocol; crime mapping; immigration enforcement; use of
force, and abuse of police authority.
4. Organizational Assessment & Technical Assistance Experience: The Police Foundation is
committed to assisting departments with evaluation and continual improvement, providing
analysis, training and technical assistance, and critical incident reviews and support. These
services are often funded at the local level, as well as through the Collaborative Reform
Initiative and other federally funded projects.20
Organizational Assessments and Management Consulting
The Police Foundation works with federal partners, state governments, cities, counties, public
and private colleges and universities, and private sector organizations to conduct studies,
assessments, training, and technical assistance related to crime and policing. This work
includes organizational, operational, technological, and administrative analyses and
assessments, assessments of responses to crime and disorder, and analyses as to the extent to
which evidence-based approaches are or could be leveraged.
The proposed PF Team has extensive experience providing management consulting, analysis,
technical assistance, and training to police and public safety departments of all sizes across the
country. These projects involve not only working with public safety leadership and officers,
but college, university, and local government leaders and managers. Jurisdictions, colleges,
and universities that members of our team have worked with in the past include: Minneapolis
(MN); Kalamazoo (MI); Case Western Reserve University (OH); San Bernardino (CA);
University of Illinois – Chicago; Detroit (MI); Arlington (TX); Houston (TX); Newark (NJ);
Sacramento (CA); Omaha (NE); Cleveland (OH); Philadelphia (PA); Bethel Park (PA);
Redding (CT); and St. Louis (MO). Projects address diverse areas of focus, including hiring
and recruitment, operational reviews, strategic planning, training, technology implementation,
and research, as well as community engagement, police legitimacy, collaborative leadership,
and collaborative reform.
Our assessments are comprehensive and data-driven, resulting in action-oriented
recommendations. Aligning agency programs, strategies, and tactics with evidence and
research is a key focus. The Police Foundation specializes in conducting studies of this
alignment and making recommendations for improvement, as well as identifying best
practices to be replicated.
4B) Past Reports
Brief summaries of relevant past reports and publications are provided below. Given the
length of these reports and the costs of reproduction for the purposes of this proposal, the St.
19
A more extensive list of Police Foundation research can be found at http://www.policefoundation.org/content/our-research.
An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department can be viewed at
http://www.policefoundation.org/publication/collaborative-reform-initiative-an-assessment-of-the-st-louis-county-policedepartment/
20
POLICE FOUNDATION 27 Louis County Collaborative Reform Report is the only report attached. All listed reports are
available on the Police Foundation website through the identified urls.
St Louis County, Missouri: Collaborative Reform Initiative. In 2015, the Police Foundation
was awarded a grant to provide Collaborative Reform Technical Assistance (CRI-TA) in
selected jurisdictions around the country. This effort aims to independently and objectively
analyze and assess individual law enforcement department policies, procedures, and tactics,
with the goal of issuing recommendations that will 1) help change the ways that law
enforcement agencies build community partnerships and enhance transparency; 2) transform
organizational structure, policies, practices and culture through administrative rule-­‐making;
and 3) institutionalize reforms with integrated accountability measures. Under this agreement,
the Police Foundation completed an Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department,
and has moved into conducting follow up technical assistance to help the department utilize
recommendations to improve policies and practices that will institutionalize community
policing in St. Louis County. This comprehensive project identified over 100 findings and
recommendations, focusing most specifically on officer recruiting hiring, and training; traffic
stops; the department’s citizen complaint process; community engagement and community
policing activities; and issues related to civil disobedience. The Executive Summary of this
report is attached; the full report is over 100 pages and is prohibitively long to attach to this
proposal. It is published online on our website, and at http://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/copsp316-pub.pdf.
Christopher Dorner Incident in Southern California: The Police Foundation conducted an
in-depth review and analysis of the police response to attacks by former LAPD officer
Christopher Dorner, who killed four people and substantially raised the threat level for
Southern California law enforcement for 10 days in February 2013. Hundreds of officers from
all over Southern California streamed to the final shootout with the suspect, distracting
incident commanders and creating a potentially dangerous situation. The PF Review Team
interviewed dozens of officials in jurisdictions covering five of the nation’s most populous
counties to analyze the regional response to a highly mobile attacker who ambushed police
officers in multiple locations. The PF Team identified a number of challenges that needed to
be addressed for similar future incidents. A detailed report can be found at:
https://www.policefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Police-Under-Attack.pdf
Wilmington, Delaware: The Police Foundation was engaged by the State of Delaware to
support the Wilmington Public Safety Strategies Commission, a newly formed commission
tasked with examining crime in Wilmington, Delaware, and developing recommendations on
what strategies could be used to reduce crime in Wilmington, the state’s largest city. The
commission was created by the state Legislature at the urging of Gov. Jack Markell after
national news reports identified Wilmington as having one of the highest rates of violent
crime for a city its size. The legislation required that the report be completed within 60 days.
The report can be found at: https://www.policefoundation.org/publication/wilmington-publicsafety-strategies-commission-final-report/.
Stockton, California: The Police Foundation was engaged by the Stockton Police Department
to complete an independent review of the Bank of the West robbery and hostage taking in
POLICE FOUNDATION 28 2014. The Police Foundation completed a critical incident review to identify lessons learned
that can then be applied in the field, increasing the safety of both law enforcement personnel
and civilians. The report can be found at: https://www.policefoundation.org/publication/aheist-gone-bad/.
Colorado’s Legalization of Marijuana and the Impact on Public Safety: In partnership with
the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, the Police Foundation conducted a study of the
impact of the legalization of marijuana on public safety in Colorado. Both nationally and in
Colorado, there is almost no significant research or data collection to determine the impact of
legalized marijuana on public safety. The Police Foundation believes that Colorado’s
experience and subsequent knowledge as they implement legalized marijuana will be
beneficial to share with law enforcement officials and policy makers across the nation.
Understanding that there are lessons to be learned and shared with the larger law enforcement
community, the Police Foundation partnered with the Colorado Association of Chiefs of
Police to research and publish Colorado’s Legalization of Marijuana and the Impact on
Public Safety: A Practical Guide for Law Enforcement. The full report can be found at:
https://www.policefoundation.org/publication/colorados-legalization-of-marijuana-and-theimpact-on-public-safety-a-practical-guide-for-law-enforcement2/
5) I NDIVIDUAL S TAFF Q UALIFICATIONS
Team Structure: In order to provide a high-quality independent review of the Madison Police
Department’s Policies and Procedures as described in the Request for Proposals (RFP), the
Police Foundation proposes an efficient team of eight highly qualified staff, supplemented by
two Subject Matter Experts (SME), to perform this work. This Team has significant
experience as law enforcement practitioners and leaders, law enforcement management
analysts, and researchers, with expertise in public safety management, operations, and culture;
community policing; police recruiting and training; race relations, cultural diversity, and
community relations as they apply to law enforcement agencies; and law enforcement
program evaluation. The Project Team will be supported by Police Foundation administrative,
financial, and research staff, as necessary.
Police Foundation (PF) Team positions are:
• Program Director
• Director of Strategic Studies
• Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager
• Senior Research Associate
• Project Manager
• Senior Policy Analyst
• Policy Analyst
• Project Assistant
• Police Foundation Executive Fellow
• Police Foundation Research Fellow
Proposed project roles and staff qualifications are listed below. Staff bios include summaries
of skills and qualifications. Resumes are attached in the last section of this proposal.
POLICE FOUNDATION 29 Program Director: The Program Director will have prime responsibility and final authority
for this project’s work. The Program Director has extensive technical and managerial
experience in the field of law enforcement operations and community policing. This position
will work off-site, in close collaboration with the onsite Director of Strategic Studies and
Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager, to plan, organize, and oversee all activities of the
project. The Program Director will regularly consult with the client to maximize efficiency in
achieving project objectives. This position will ensure that all deliverables are developed and
submitted according to the agreed upon Work Plan and that the quality of all work products
meets client expectations.
Jennifer Zeunik will serve as Program Director for this project. Ms. Zeunik will provide
oversight for all work completed and will ensure that the organizational assessment and
associated deliverables are completed on time and within budget. Ms. Zeunik has over
fifteen years of public sector and nonprofit project management experience, working
closely with all levels of government, currently playing a pivotal role in the Police
Foundation’s Collaborative Reform project and Critical Incident Technical Assistance
project. In her previous role as a law enforcement consultant, Ms. Zeunik provided
strategic management expertise to international, federal, state, and local criminal justice
clients. Her work focused on justice policy research, business development activities,
program management, strategic planning, training and technical assistance management,
and development of strategic communications. She served as a lead writer on numerous
published reports, including the COPS funded Police Foundation Collaborative Reform
Initiative: An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department and the International
Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) National Policy Summit Report on Community
Police Relations: Advancing a Culture of Cohesion and Community Trust.
Ms. Zeunik holds a Bachelors Degree in Psychology and Criminology from Florida State
University, and a Masters of Public Administration from the University of Georgia,
School of Public and International Affairs.
Director of Strategic Studies: The Director of Strategic Studies will provide subject matter
expertise and guidance specific to 21st century policing matters, including community
policing; problem oriented policing; training; use of force policy and training; citizen
complaints; specialized police response to people with mental health or substance abuse
issues; body cameras; transparency and accountability; officer safety; and data-driven
policing. This individual will be responsible for all onsite activities, in partnership with the
Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager, will work onsite during the project, and will serve
as a primary point-of-contact with the client for day-to-day project activities. This position
will work with the client to develop onsite agendas, set up meetings, gather information, and
implement the Work Plan. The Director of Strategic Studies will coordinate closely with the
Project Director to ensure the project proceeds on-time and on-budget, and that all
deliverables meet client expectations.
Frank Straub, PhD, PF Director of Strategic Studies, is an experienced law enforcement
leader with expertise in the provision of Critical Incident and Collaborative Reform
technical assistance to local police departments. Straub last served as the Chief of the
POLICE FOUNDATION 30 Spokane (WA) Police Department, where he received national recognition for the major
reforms and community policing programs he implemented, as well as the significant
crime reductions achieved during his tenure. Prior to leading the Spokane Department,
Straub served as Director of Public Safety for the City of Indianapolis (IN). During his
tenure, the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department reduced homicides to the lowest
level in 20 years. Straub has also served as the Public Safety Commissioner for the City of
White Plains (NY), where his department reduced serious crime by 40%. Straub also
previously served as the Deputy Commissioner of Training for the New York City Police
Department, and as a federal agent.
Dr. Straub holds a PhD in Criminal Justice from the City University of New York’s
Graduate Center, an M.A. in Forensic Psychology from John Jay College of Criminal
Justice, and a B.A. in Psychology from St. John’s University. He co-authored a book on
performance-based police management and published several articles regarding
community policing, police reform, and jail management.
Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager: The Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager
has extensive technical and managerial experience in public sector management and law
enforcement operations, with expertise in police technology; recruiting and hiring; community
engagement; police legitimacy; engaging with diverse and vulnerable populations; implicit
bias; reducing racially disparate impacts in police outcomes; restorative justice. This
individual, in partnership with the Director for Strategic Studies, will be responsible for all
onsite activities, will work onsite during the project, and will serve as a primary point-ofcontact with the client for day-to-day project activities.
Alfred Lewers, Jr. will serve as Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager on this
project. Assistant Chief Lewers (Ret.) recently retired from the Miami Gardens Police
Department (MGPD) and holds the unique honor of being the first person hired at the
agency, in October 2006. He was instrumental in forming the 300-member force from the
ground up. During his tenure at the MGPD, he focused on ensuring that the department
was situated to take full advantage of technological advances in policing, ensuring that the
appropriate policies, training, and technical solutions were in place. He co-authored the
City of Miami Gardens’ public safety technology project and self-initiated the deployment
of several innovative tech solutions. Lewers was a thought leader in multiple areas of
organizational improvement and revamped the Operations Patrol Division to focus on
problem-oriented policing and trust building, as opposed to their past traditional policing
model. While at the MGPD, he held the ranks of Captain and Major, being assigned to all
divisions within the department. He is skilled in grants acquisition, as well as gun violence
reduction through technology, and multifaceted social services and non-traditional
approaches.
Prior to his service with the MGPD, he was a Lieutenant at the Fort Lauderdale Police
Department, overseeing the Recruiting, Background Investigations, Training, and the
Alarm Units. In that capacity, he focused on process improvements and enhanced training
benchmarks for the entire agency. He also held positions as the Recruiting Unit
Supervisor, where he perfected his skills in diversity recruitment and retention.
POLICE FOUNDATION 31 Mr. Lewers is pursuing his Master’s Degree in Public Administration at Florida
International University’s Steven J. Green School of International & Public Affairs and
holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Public Administration from Union Institute & University. He
also holds a Graduate Certificate from the University of Virginia in Criminal Justice
Education and is a graduate of the 259th Session of the FBI National Academy.
Senior Research Associate: The Senior Research Associate will be responsible for all of this
project’s data assessment and data analysis activities, as well as the design, development, and
implementation of the MPD personnel survey and community survey. In addition, she will
examine current MPD data collection and analysis activities to provide recommendations for
additional data collection and/or analysis methodologies, as applicable. This individual has
experience and expertise with racial equity impact analysis; general qualitative and
quantitative research methods, including data analysis, statistical modeling, and systems
analysis. This position also has extensive experience with survey methods, first-hand
observations, ethnographic interviewing, and community-based participatory research.
Dr. Breanne Cave is a Senior Research Associate at the Police Foundation with over five
years of experience working on research projects funded by the National Institute of
Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National Institutes of Health. Her
research focuses on police use of force, public safety, and health in crime hotspots. She
has published peer-reviewed research on crime and place, policing, and security. She has a
strong interest in quantitative spatial analysis, and has pursued coursework in geography
and geoinformation science. While on active duty as a combat engineer officer in the
Marine Corps, she worked in intelligence and security roles in support of Operation Iraqi
Freedom; as a reservist, she carried out oral history research with History Division, Marine
Corps University. Her research interests include policing, evidence-based policy, research
translation, place-based research, terrorism and homeland security. Her research can be
found in the Journal of Experimental Criminology, Policing: An International Journal of
Police Strategies and Management, and Police Policy and Research: An International
Journal, as well as in edited volumes on crime and place and counter-terrorism.
Dr. Cave has extensive experience in the development and fielding of survey methods and
instruments to measure how police technologies and use of force practices impact citizens’
perceptions of police legitimacy and procedural justice. In addition, she has planned,
coordinated, and managed place-based data collection (including resident surveys,
physical and social observations) in communities in Baltimore City, Maryland, carrying
out data collection before and after the mass protests there concerning police practices in
predominantly African-American communities. She has significant expertise in police use
of force issues and police arrest practices.
Dr. Cave earned her Ph.D. in Criminology, Law & Society from George Mason University
in May 2016. She received her B.A. in Criminal Justice and M.A. in Justice
Administration from Norwich University.
Project Manager, Management Studies: The Management Studies Project Manager has
extensive technical and managerial experience in public sector management and law
POLICE FOUNDATION 32 enforcement operations, including staffing and resource allocation. This individual will be
responsible for examining MPD operations and management structures, policies and
procedures, and resource allocation. The Project Manager has extensive experience in cultural
assessments of institutions, cultural dynamics, and first-hand observations.
Craig Fraser, PhD, will serve as the Operations Analyst for this project. He has over
twenty years of experience conducting law enforcement management studies in his role as
the Director of Management Services for the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF),
from 1994 to July 2015. Dr. Fraser has managed studies of over 250 law enforcement
agencies in the U.S. and abroad, including public safety studies at the University of Illinois
- Chicago, University of California - Davis, North Carolina State University, University of
California - San Francisco, Northeastern University and University of Vermont. He is
currently completing a policing study for Case Western Reserve University. In addition,
he has completed management studies for police agencies in Texas, California, North
Carolina, Colorado, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, New York, Minnesota, Florida,
Oklahoma, Nevada, and Utah. He has specific substantive expertise in police technology,
training, and resource allocation. In addition to his management studies experience, Dr.
Fraser has held appointments at the University of Kansas, Washburn University, Florida
State University, and Boston University, and he created and chaired the Department of
Criminology and Criminal Justice at Virginia Union University. His has an undergraduate
degree from Duke University and an M.A. and Ph.D. from Purdue University.
Senior Policy Analyst: The Senior Policy Analyst will provide policy analysis support for this
engagement, working offsite. This position will have significant responsibility for policy
review and analysis, gap analyses, and deliverable development. This individual has
significant experience in policy review and gap analysis.
Rebecca Benson will serve as the Senior Policy Analyst for this project. Ms. Benson has
over 10 years of experience as an analyst with the Police Foundation and with police
departments on each coast. She has significant experience and expertise regarding law
enforcement best practices, community policing, and the use of crime data by police
departments. Prior to joining the Police Foundation she served as a Crime and Intelligence
Analyst with the Los Angeles Police Department, Olympic Division. The Olympic
Division is a newer division within the LAPD that is responsible for preparing and
providing analytical support to assist in the creation of new area boundaries; mapping and
documenting community resources, activities, and special locations; as well as analyzing
personnel resources and shift schedules. Ms. Benson was pivotal in the development of the
division, and was ultimately responsible for daily crime analysis and mapping. Rebecca
also led weekly crime control meetings with Command staff and organized strategies
around prevention and deterrence with Command, Detective, and Senior Lead Officers.
She was also engaged in preparation of CompStat reports. Prior to her work with LAPD,
Ms. Benson spent many years with the Boston Police Department. Within the Office of the
Police Commissioner, she served as a Program Manager on several community and youth
projects that involved significant partnering with local community organizations, schools
and businesses.
POLICE FOUNDATION 33 Ms. Benson holds a Masters of Science degree in Criminal Justice from Northeastern
University.
Policy Analyst: The Policy Analyst will provide policy analysis support for this engagement,
working on and offsite. This position will support the onsite work of all senior staff, engage in
data collection and analysis, including relevant media and social media coverage, and will
support policy review and analysis, gap analyses, and deliverable development.
Ben Gorban is a Policy Analyst at the Police Foundation where he works on law
enforcement technical assistance projects, including Collaborative Reform and Critical
Incident Reviews. His areas of interest are community oriented policing in the 21st
Century, law enforcement policy, and operationalizing evidence-based promising practices
and policies. Before his work with the Police Foundation, Gorban served as a Project
Coordinator for the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), overseeing the
Division of State Associations of Chiefs of Police, providing training and technical
assistance, developing resources for law enforcement executives, and publishing articles in
Police Chief Magazine. He has worked on national-scope projects on topics that include
social media, countering violent extremism, cyber crime, and traffic safety, funded by
federal agencies including Department of Justice, Department of Transportation, and
Department of Homeland Security.
Gorban received his M.S. in Justice, Law and Society from American University in 2011,
and his Bachelors Degree in both Philosophy, and Justice, Law, and Society from
American University in 2009.
Project Assistant: The Project Assistant will provide project support for this engagement,
working offsite. This position will assist with information gathering, categorization, data
management, and logistics coordination.
Joyce Iwashita will serve as Project Assistant. Iwashita joined the Police Foundation in
March 2016 and supports the day-to-day project management of selected projects across
various research projects and programs. Iwashita provides general administrative support
and project coordination of both on site and off site work as directed by Senior Staff.
Executive Fellow: The Executive Fellow will provide significant subject matter expertise in
the areas of 21st century policing issues; law and policing; community engagement and
policing; use of force; and citizen complaints and internal investigations; police accountability
systems; de-escalation training; and diversion. The Executive Fellow will work both on and
off-site.
Rick Braziel will serve as the Police Executive Fellow on this engagement. After serving
for 33 years with the Sacramento Police Department, the last five as Chief, Braziel is now
conducting after action reviews, organizational assessments, and leadership development
for law enforcement agencies. He is a nationally recognized expert in policing practices
including recruitment, hiring, training, and retention. His most recent effort includes
working with St. Louis County Police in their U.S. Department of Justice Collaborative
POLICE FOUNDATION 34 Reform Review. A portion of the review is dedicated to the recruitment, selection, hiring,
and promotion processes. Braziel used his innovative overhaul of the Sacramento Police
Department’s recruitment, hiring, and training process as a framework for evaluating and
recommending changes to St. Louis County Police.
Research Fellow: The Research Fellow will focus on MPD programming that serves people
with mental health and/or drug abuse issues, including how MPD programming is connected
to services provided by local agencies serving these populations, and the adequacy of local
resources from a police perspective. This individual has extensive expertise in specialized
police responses to people in crisis, as well as psychiatry/mental health and alcohol and
substance abuse.
Melissa Reuland will serve as the Research Fellow on this project. Reuland has extensive
research experience in the areas of mental health and law enforcement, focused on
Specialized Police Responses (SPR). She is currently a Senior Research Program Manager
at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in the Department of Psychiatry, managing
health care services research. Reuland worked with the Council of State Governments
(CSG) Justice Center and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) on the BJAfunded Law Enforcement/Mental Health Partnership Project. For this project, Ms. Reuland
developed products designed to support expansion of specialized responses to people with
mental illnesses, including: Improving Responses to People with Mental Illnesses:
Tailoring Law Enforcement Initiatives to Individual Jurisdictions The Essential Elements
of a Specialized Law Enforcement Program, and Statewide Law Enforcement / Mental
Health Efforts: Strategies to Support and Sustain Local Efforts. In addition, she has
published several community policing curricula, edited books on crime analysis and
problem solving, and written articles for peer-reviewed journals. Ms. Reuland holds an
M.S. in criminal justice from the University of Baltimore
6) P RIOR W ORK WITH M ODERATELY -S IZED U RBAN P OLICE D EPARTMENT
S IMILAR TO THE C ITY OF M ADISON – P OTENTIAL C HALLENGES , U NIQUE
C HARACTERISTICS AND C ULTURE
Members of the proposed PF Team have worked with police departments of all sizes across
the country in a variety of capacities. Similar sized departments include Spokane (WA); San
Bernardino (CA); Berkley (CA); and Raleigh (NC). Our team’s roles in these departments and
projects have ranged from Chiefs to critical incident reviewers to independent consultants
conducting policy and management reviews. Similar projects in the comparable cities of
Berkeley (CA) and Raleigh (NC) involved moderately-sized departments in cities with large
universities. They have unique civic cultures, as does Madison, that are influenced by
members of the university community (students, staff and faculty). The presence of a large
student body also means that the city police department has to develop good working
relationships with the campus law enforcement agencies to help promote the safety and
security of all city residents.
This project, as described in the RFP and based on the preliminary research completed by PF
staff, may be challenging as result of the current contentious relationship between the MPD
Chief and elected City Council members, which impacts MPD personnel, local government
POLICE FOUNDATION 35 employees, and the Madison community, as well as state government personnel and police
departments across Wisconsin, to some degree. While the details and specific dynamics of this
challenge are specific to Madison, the Police Foundation has experience working in
contentious environments, and adjusting to dynamic and fluid situations, to complete
assessments and reviews. We will approach this project with a focus on open and consistent
communication with stakeholders, as well as an evidence-based approached that provides a
balanced and professional assessment.
Additional potential challenges and proposed solutions that we anticipate include:
Potential Challenge
Obtaining buy-in from MPD personnel
Proposed Solution
Open and comprehensive communication
that describes our goals and processes.
Interviews that ensure confidentiality and
explore the experience from the perspective
of the individual.
Identify and assess existing data; gather
additional data as necessary, through
surveys, interviews, focus groups,
observation, and effective sampling.
Engaging individuals with recent MPD
contacts
Uncertainty regarding availability and
quality of existing MPD data
7) P REVIOUS E XPERIENCE A NALYZING P OLICE D EPARTMENT C ULTURE
A key component in both Critical Incident Reviews and the Collaborative Reform process is
assessing police department culture. The culture of a department is critical to understanding its
priority activities; resource allocation decisions; approach to community engagement; and
assessment of practices and implementation of departmental policy.
The Police Foundation uses a mixed method approach to analyzing a department’s culture,
which involves policy and procedure reviews; interviews with department staff and
stakeholders, including sworn, civilian and union leaders, as well as community members; an
internal department survey; a community survey; field observation data collection; focus
groups; information gathering and assessment as related to recruiting, hiring, training, and
internal investigations; data analyses. The PF team will also spend time at MPD headquarters,
in the districts and on ride-alongs to better understand the culture of the department. These
processes are thoroughly described in our Proposed Plan of Work.
We have used this methodology in the Stockton Police Critical Incident Review; St. Louis
County Collaborative Reform Initiative; San Bernardino Critical Incident Review; and the
Minneapolis Critical Incident Review. We are currently in the process of using this
methodology in the Kalamazoo Critical Incident Review and the North Charleston
Collaborative Reform Initiative. While the process sets a blueprint for information gathering,
it also is fluid enough to allow the PF team to adjust to the needs of individual client sites.
POLICE FOUNDATION 36 8) P REVIOUS P ROJECTS U SING S TATISTICAL M ODELING AND S YSTEMS
A NALYSIS TO D ETERMINE C AUSAL R ELATIONSHIPS B ETWEEN D EPARTMENT
F ACTORS AND S PECIFIC O UTCOMES
With a mission to advance policing through innovation and science, Police Foundation staff
have extensive experience using statistical modeling and systems analysis to determine causal
relationships between police initiatives and activities, and identified outcomes. Dr. Breanne
Cave, the Senior Research Associate proposed on this project, has specific experience with
such research. Dr. Cave has:
• Participated in the development and fielding of survey methods and instruments to
measure how police technologies and use of force practices impact citizens’
perceptions of police legitimacy and procedural justice in Fairfax, Virginia and
Baltimore City, Maryland. Her work related to these issues has been published in
policing journals and presented at national criminology conferences. ·
• Participated in experimental, quasi-experimental, and evidence assessments to evaluate
law enforcement and security practices for Dallas Police Department, Fairfax County
Sheriff’s Office, the Transportation Security Agency (TSA), and the Federal Protective
Service (FPS). ·
• Planned, coordinated, and managed place-based data collection (including resident
surveys, physical and social observations) in communities in Baltimore City, Maryland
over three years. Carried out data collection before and after mass protests concerning
police practices in predominantly African-American communities. ·
Dr. Cave’s current research is focused on police use of force issues, including a nationwide
study of officer-involved shootings and academic publications on police arrest practices in
Baltimore City, Maryland.
9) E XAMPLES OF R ECOMMENDATIONS I NVOLVING I NNOVATIVE R EFORMS
The Police Foundation has a long history of using research to identify innovative solutions to
policing problems. Most recently, following the completion of the Collaborative Reform
process in St. Louis County, Missouri, the Police Foundation identified over 100 findings and
recommendations, focusing most specifically on officer recruiting, hiring, and training;
unbiased policing and citizen contacts; the department’s citizen complaint process;
community engagement and community policing activities; and issues related to civil
disobedience. The recommendations made by the PF Team were based on the needs of the St.
Louis community and included reforms such as improving ways for the police department to
gain input from the community and improved recruitment and hiring of individuals who
represent the demographics of the community. In the San Bernardino Critical Incident
Review, the team found approximately 80 lessons learned focusing on leadership, training,
command and control, community engagement and officer and community wellness.
10) P REVIOUS E XPERIENCE W ORKING WITH D IVERSE AND V ULNERABLE
P OPULATIONS
The PF Team has extensive experience working with diverse populations in a variety of
settings and roles. As former law enforcement department leaders, many of our PF Team
members worked closely with stakeholders from diverse communities in New York City
POLICE FOUNDATION 37 (NY); Spokane (WA); Miami Gardens (FL); Indianapolis (IN); White Plains (NY); Fort
Lauderdale (FL); Sacramento (CA). Their efforts focused on engaging communities of color
in these cities, as well as immigrant communities and LGTBQ communities. In addition, these
PF Team members worked closely with local and state Department of Corrections staff to
support community supervision and re-entry efforts, as well as local service providers working
with people struggling with mental health issues and substance abuse issues. Youth were also
an important area of focus for our former law enforcement leaders, who partnered with local
nonprofit organizations, as well as local schools and child welfare departments, to address the
needs of disadvantaged youth.
In addition to the former law enforcement leaders on our team, other proposed PF Team
members have been engaged in research and department reviews and assessments to better
understand and/or address the relationships between police and disadvantaged communities.
Police Foundation work in St. Louis County occurred immediately following the unrest in
neighboring Ferguson, and required our team to engage effectively with similarly
disenfranchised African American communities. In addition, our work in San Bernardino
required us to engage significantly with the Muslim community there, which we did so
successfully, gathering important information and input through local mosques and
community groups. Similarly, our work in Minneapolis focused on an incident that occurred
in a diverse neighborhood where most residents are African American, Hmong, Somali, or
Native American. Again, our PF Team effectively gathered information is this neighborhood
that allowed us to accurately assess the Minneapolis Police Department in their management
of the identified critical incident.
Our proposed subject matter experts and former law enforcement leaders also have extensive
experience in working with individuals with mental health issues and the mental health
community. They have worked with law enforcement to train and prepare them better respond
to crisis situations with these unique populations.
These efforts are only a handful of examples of the experience the PF Team has working with
diverse populations.
11) I SSUES R EGARDING P RESENTATIONS OR A NSWERING Q UESTIONS ,
I NCLUDING T HOSE FROM THE M EDIA
The Police Foundation does not have any issues or concerns regarding the requirement to
make numerous presentations to different City of Madison personnel, agencies, and the public.
We also do not have any issues responding to questions regarding our work, including
questions that may be posed by the media.
Assumptions
The following represent assumptions used to develop this proposal and the associated budget.
a) The Madison Police Department and Madison City Government will provide adequate
staff with decision-making authority to support project efforts.
b) The Police Foundation will have access to necessary information and Madison Police
Department personnel to complete this project within the required timeframe.
POLICE FOUNDATION 38 c) The proposed project will last approximately one year in duration, beginning on or
about December 1, 2016 and ending on November 30, 2017.
Designated POC
For the purposes of this proposal and contract negotiations with the Police Foundation the
designated point of contact is:
Blake Norton, Chief Operating Officer
Police Foundation
1201 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-833-1460
bnorton@policefoundation.org
R ESUM ES
Jennifer Zeunik, Program Director
Frank Straub, Director of Strategic Studies
Al Lewers, Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager
Breanne Cave, Senior Research Associate
Craig Fraser, Ph.D., Project Manager
Rebecca Benson, Senior Policy Analyst
Ben Gorban, Policy Analyst
Joyce Iwashita, Project Assistant
Rick Braziel, Executive Fellow
Melissa Reuland, Research Fellow
POLICE FOUNDATION 39 JENNIFER HICKS ZEUNIK
Director of Programs
Police Foundation
(703) 362-4073; jzeunik@policefoundation.org
CAREER BRIEF
Jennifer Zeunik is the Director of Programs for the Police Foundation, where she provides
oversight, as well as project and staff management for projects such as Collaborative Reform
and Critical Incident Reviews. Throughout her career, Ms. Zeunik has worked closely with all
levels of government in law enforcement program and policy. In her previous role as a law
enforcement consultant, Ms. Zeunik provided strategic management expertise to international,
federal, state and local criminal justice clients. Her work focused on justice policy research,
business development activities, program management, strategic planning, training and
technical assistance management, and development of strategic communications.
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
2015 – present
Director of Programs
Police Foundation; Washington, DC
Provide overall management and strategic guidance to Police Foundation programs.
Manage work performed by program staff, fellows, consultants, and contractors. Manage
relationships with clients and partner organizations. Develop qualitative and quantitative
programmatic evaluation metrics. Cultivate business development opportunities. Oversee
the effective and efficient execution of programmatic budgets.
2008-2015
Principal/ Independent Consultant
Jennifer Zeunik Consulting LLC; Bronxville, NY
Provided strategic management and policy consulting to criminal justice government and
non-profit clients. Services included justice policy research; program design,
implementation and management; development of written reports/products (such as
literature reviews); business development activities (including grant writing); strategic
planning; training and technical assistance management.
2006-2008
Vice President, Programs
Atlanta Police Foundation; Atlanta, Georgia
Responsible for the entire APF program portfolio (Recruitment Program, Reestablishment
of the Atlanta Police Department’s (APD) Mounted Patrol Unit, Scholarship Program,
Training Program, Crime Stoppers Atlanta, Housing Program and Operation Shield)
designed to enhance safety in the city of Atlanta and expand services of the APD. Program
and policy outcomes include, assisted APD in increasing recruitment by 82%, decreasing
vacancy rate from an average of 25% to less than 3%; launched and managed Crime
Stoppers Atlanta that facilitated 34 arrests, 66 cases cleared and the inclusion of 20 metro
law enforcement agencies during its first year in existence; dispersed over $200,000 in
scholarships to approximately 100 officers working to achieve a college degree; and
POLICE FOUNDATION 40 designed Operation Shield policy and management, enabling improved sharing of crime
prevention and response information between APD and the Atlanta business community.
Oversaw the effective and efficient execution of a $3.3 million programmatic budget.
Managed program staff, collaborative relationships with law enforcement command staff,
and contractual relationships with business partners, improving program efficiency and
responsiveness. Developed qualitative and quantitative programmatic evaluation metrics.
Responsible for all programmatic communication to stakeholders including city and police
officials, board members, and donors. Provided ongoing input and support to all
Foundation fundraising activities and events.
2001-2005
Project Manager, Law Enforcement Information Technology Standards Council
International Association of Chiefs of Police; Alexandria, VA
Directed all activity of U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ) grant funded, multiassociation law enforcement projects. Managed budgets up to approximately $2.1million.
Led development of standardized functional specifications for computer aided dispatch
(CAD) and records management systems (RMS) designed to assist local law enforcement
agencies nationwide in procurement of CAD and RMS. Developed continuation funding
strategies, including annual proposals to USDOJ. Negotiated and managed subcontracts
worth approximately $1.1 million, and directed activities of all contract staff. Represented
IACP policy positions in national forums (on national advisory boards, as well as at
meetings and conferences) shaping national law enforcement information technology
policy. Repeatedly served as guest editor and contributor for Police Chief Magazine.
Served in leadership and staff positions for the planning, execution and oversight of a
diverse array of IACP projects and events. Provided training and technical assistance to
hundreds of local law enforcement agencies across the United States. Earned IACP
Special Incentive Award on four occasions for exceptional performance. Left position to
pursue full time education, working toward Master of Public Administration (MPA)
degree.
1999-2001
NIBIN/DRUGFIRE Program Support Manager
Computer Sciences Corporation/ Nichols Research Corporation; Washington, DC
Managed team of employees tasked with NIBIN/DRUGFIRE Configuration Management, Documentation Management, Inventory Control and Internal Training, as well as oversaw daily operations of approximately 180 networked Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) sponsored ballistic imaging and correlation systems (DRUGFIRE) across the U.S. Delivered Program Support and Site Support project status presentations to Program Manager and/or FBI (client) representatives. Provided training to the NIBIN/DRUGFIRE users -­‐ approximately 500 local, state and federal law enforcement personnel. Revised Action Request Management process, reducing length of time necessary to resolve users’ technical problems by 40%. 1996-1999
Crime Laboratory Technician Team Lead
Florida Department of Law Enforcement; Tampa, FL
POLICE FOUNDATION 41 Directed activity of CLT Team serving as liaison to federal, state and local law enforcement agencies across a 16 county region in the submission of criminal evidence to the crime laboratory for over 10,000 investigations. Responded to assigned crime scenes to collect, secure and submit physical evidence to the laboratory for analysis. Ensured section compliance with standards set by American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors (ASCLD), securing Laboratory re-­‐accreditation each year. Testified to the chain-­‐of-­‐custody of evidence in various judicial proceedings including trial and depositions. Transitioned all chain-­‐of-­‐custody legacy data from antiquated computer system to new Evidence Management System. EDUCATION
2007
1995
Master of Public Administration, focus in Public & Non-Profit Management,
The University of Georgia, School of Public and International Affairs
Bachelor of Science in Psychology, minor in Criminology
Florida State University
PUBLICATIONS
Blake Norton, Edwin E. Hamilton, Rick Braziel, Daniel Linskey & Jennifer Zeunik. 2015.
Collaborative Reform Initiative: An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police
Department. Collaborative Reform Initiative. Washington, DC: Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services.
International Association of Chiefs of Police. January 2015. IACP National Policy Summit on
Community-Police Relations: Advancing a Culture of Cohesion and Community
Trust. International Association of Chiefs of Police.
Jennifer Zeunik. 2005. “Technology Talk: Purchasing a New CAD or RMS Soon? National
Standard Functional Requirements Are on the Way,” The Police Chief, vol. 72, no. 7,
July 2005. Copyright held by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, 515
North Washington Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 USA.
International Association of Chiefs of Police. 2009. “Missing Persons: Volunteers Supporting
Law Enforcement” Volunteers in Police Service, International Association of Chiefs of
Police and the Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice.
Law Enforcement Information Technology Standards Council. 2005. “Standard Functional
Specifications for Law Enforcement Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) Systems V.1.”
Law Enforcement Information Technology Standards Council. 2006. “Standard Functional
Specifications for Law Enforcement Records Management Systems, V.2.”
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
• Peer Reviewer for U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 2015 to present
• Member, American Society of Public Administrators (ASPA), 2005 to present
• Member, The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), 2002 to present
• Member, Pi Alpha Alpha, Public Administration Honor Society, 2007
• Secret Security Clearance granted by DISCO in July 2000.
POLICE FOUNDATION 42 Frank G. Straub, Ph.D.
Director of Strategic Studies
The Police Foundation
(914) 582-5898; fstraub@policefoundation.org
CAREER BRIEF
Law enforcement executive who has developed and implemented nationally recognized
community policing programs and led the reform of police departments. My accomplishments
in community policing, juvenile justice, crisis intervention, and agency reform have been
acknowledged by the White House, Congress, requests to speak at national conferences, and
described in numerous publications.
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
2016 - Present
Director of Strategic Studies
Police Foundation, Washington DC
Provide oversight and leadership to strategic studies, projects and research; develop
funding strategies; provide direction and oversight to Foundation staff; supervise and/or
write research papers and grant proposals.
Current projects include: Critical Incident Review of the San Bernardino Terrorist Attack,
Minneapolis Police Department After Action Review, Critical Incident Review of the
Kalamazoo Shooting.
2012-2015
Chief of Police
City of Spokane, WA
Reengineered the Spokane Police Department in response to the community’s demand for
police reform following a deadly use of force incident and the police officer’s conviction
on civil rights and obstruction of justice violations in federal court.
•
Implemented all Spokane Use of Force Commission reform recommendations in 18months and initiated a collaborative reform process with the U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Community Oriented Police Services.
•
•
Reduced serious crime by over 8% in 2014, reversing six years of double-digit crime
increases through data-driven enforcement and community engagement. In 2015,
reduced serious crime by an additional 12%.
Established a Chronic Offender Unit to focus on the most active adult and juvenile
property crime offenders. The Unit assists offenders connect to services and follows
their cases through the court process. In 2014, residential burglaries were reduced by
more than 20%, in part because of the Unit’s efforts.
•
Led the creation of the City’s first community court in collaboration with municipal
court judges, public defenders, city prosecutors and service providers.
POLICE FOUNDATION 43 •
Created a summer youth athletic league, implemented the Youth & Police Initiative,
and the Restore Our Kids program to improve police-youth relations; reduce youth
violence and gang involvement; and provide alternatives to out of school suspension.
•
Led the creation of the Family Justice Center in collaboration with YWCA, City and
County Prosecutors’ Offices, and the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office to address
domestic violence.
•
Required all officers to complete 40-hours of crisis intervention training (CIT).
•
Implemented a body worn camera program.
•
Reduced police officer use of force incidents by 22% in 2014.
2010 – 2012
Director of Public Safety
City of Indianapolis/Marion County
Led the department’s six divisions that employed 3,500 police officers, fire fighters,
emergency medical, homeland security, communications, and animal care and control
professionals serving the 11th largest city in the United States. Administered a $425
million budget.
•
Created a unified and fully integrated department that provided seamless coordination
and collaboration between multiple public safety disciplines to manage daily
operations, major events, and respond to critical incidents.
•
Introduced evidence-based policing practices, data-driven enforcement strategies,
expanded community partnerships, prevention and intervention programs. Under my
direction, the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department reduced homicides to the
lowest number in 20 years.
•
Established the Office of Police Accountability (OPA) creating civilian oversight of
internal affairs investigations, audits and inspections.
•
Led the creation of the City’s first prisoner reentry program through collaboration with
the Mayor’s Office, corrections officials, and various service providers to create.
•
Assigned a team of police officers to Eskenazi Medical Center’s Prescription for Hope
program to reduce violence-related injury and repeated criminal activity through
hospital-based intervention and education programs.
•
Established the Youth & Police Initiative, partnered with the 10 Point Coalition, and
other community-based programs to reduce youth violence and gang involvement.
POLICE FOUNDATION 44 2002 – 2010
Public Safety Commissioner
City of White Plains, NY
Led the department’s 400 police officers, fire fighters, and contract EMS personnel in the
delivery of integrated public safety services. Administered $50M budget.
•
Reduced serious crimes by 40%, initiating data-driven enforcement and community
policing strategies. These strategies were recognized in my testimony before the U.S.
House of Representatives Judiciary Committee in June 2008.
•
Created the Youth-Police Initiative in collaboration with the North American Family
Institute to reduce youth violence and improve community-police relations.
•
Created the first police/mental health practitioner response team and the first Prisoner
Reentry Program in Westchester County.
2001 – 2002
Deputy Commissioner of Training
New York City Police Department
• Led police recruit, in-service, promotional and executive training for all sworn and
civilian members of the department.
•
Developed and implemented NYPD-wide counter-terrorism training following the
9/11terrorist attacks.
1999 – 2001
Executive Deputy Inspector General
Office of the New York State Inspector General
Directed all public corruption investigations conducted by a staff of 90 attorneys, auditors,
and investigators. Jurisdiction included 50 agencies and public authorities.
1990 – 1999
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of the Inspector General
- Special Agent in Charge, Research & Analysis Unit
- Assistant Special Agent in Charge, New York Field Office
- Special Agent, New York Field Office
1987 – 1990
Special Agent, New York Field Office
U.S. Naval Investigative Service
1984 – 1987
Special Agent, New York Field Office
U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security
POLICE FOUNDATION 45 EDUCATION
1997
Ph.D. in Criminal Justice
The Graduate Center, City University of New York
Dissertation: The Evolution of Corruption Control Strategies in the New York
State Department of Correctional Services 1971-1990
1990
M.A. in Forensic Psychology
John Jay College of Criminal Justice
1980
B.A. in Psychology
St. John’s University
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS
Straub, Frank and Robert Haas (May 2016). “Learning from Near Misses: The Law
Enforcement Officer (LEO) Near Miss System.” Police Chief.
James, Lois; Fridell, Lorie; and Straub, Frank. (February 2016). “Psychological factors
impacting on officers decisions to use deadly force: The Implicit Bias v. Ferguson
Effects.” Police Chief.
Straub, Frank (October 2015). “Collaborative Reform in Spokane, WA: A case study
and its implications for reform.” Police Chief.
Advisor to the Center for Court Innovation’s Police-Teen Dialogue Toolkit. Released
by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services
(October 2015).
Straub, Frank (November 2008). “Policing Cities: Reducing violence and building
communities.” Police Chief.
O’Connell, Paul E. and Frank Straub (Spring 1999). “Why the Jails Didn’t Explode.”
City Journal.
BOOK & BOOK CHAPTERS
O’Connell, Paul E. and Frank Straub (2007). Performance-Based Management for
Police Organizations. Long Grove, Ill., Waveland Press.
“Why the Jails Didn’t Explode” in The Millennial City: A New Urban Paradigm for 21stCentury America. Magnet, Myron(ed) (2000). New York: Ivan R. Dee.
POLICE FOUNDATION 46 SELECTED PRESENTATIONS
“Perspectives on American Policing & 21st Century Police Reform.” Keynote at the InterAmerican Development Bank’s Workshop on Communicating Crime & Prevention.
Washington DC (November 16, 2015).
“Reports from the Field.” White House Community Policing Forum (July 23,2015).
“Say What? Police-Youth Dialogue as a Means to Build Community Trust.” International
Association of Chiefs of Police Conference (October 24-27, 2015).
“Reducing Force and Building Community Trust by Adopting Crisis Intervention & Social
Interaction Training.” International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference (October 2427, 2015).
“From the Lab to the Street: Body Cameras to Data Analysis & Wide-Area Video.”
International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference (October 24-27, 2015).
“A Safe Neighborhood to Call Home.” National Summit on Your City’s Families, National
League of Cities (November 13, 2014).
“Innovations from Mid-Size Agencies: Benchmarking, Fiscal Accountability for Officers &
Leadership Development through Inter-Agency Exchange.” International Association of
Chiefs of Police Conference (October 25-28, 2014).
“Partners in Pretrial Reform: How to Effectively Engage Law Enforcement and Elected
Officials.” National Conference of the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies
(September 7-10, 2014).
TEACHING EXPERIENCE
Indiana University/Perdue University
School of Public & Environmental Affairs (Graduate Program)
John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 1997 - 2010
Graduate Program, Department of Public Management
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
International Association of Chiefs of Police
Former Co-Chair -Research Advisory Committee
Member Juvenile Justice and Child Protection Committee
Faculty Member - Juvenile Justice Institute
Police Executive Research Forum
Member
POLICE FOUNDATION 47 ALFRED LEWERS JR.
Senior Law Enforcement Program Manager
Police Foundation
(202)-833-1460 Ext.100; alewers@policefoundation.org
CAREER BRIEF
Alfred Lewers Jr. is a Senior Law Enforcement Project Manager with the Police Foundation, joining
the Foundation after a 30-year law enforcement career. He recently retired from the Miami Gardens
Police Department (MGPD) as the Assistant Chief of Police and holds the unique honor of being the
first person hired at the agency in October 2006. He was instrumental in forming the 300-member
force from the ground up. Alfred Lewers is a proud veteran of the United States Army, where he
served as a military policeman. Throughout his career, he has been the recipient of over 60 department,
citizen, and military awards and commendations.
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
June 2016 – present
Senior Law Enforcement Program Manager
Police Foundation, Washington DC
May 2014 – Feb 2016
Assistant Chief of Police
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
Assisted the Chief of Police with the administration, development and direction of police
personnel; including budgeting, policy and procedures, matters of discipline, administrative duties,
equal employment opportunity policies, and the overall operation of the organization.
November 2012 – May 2014
Operations Division Commander- Police Major
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
September 2011 – November 2012
Special Operations - Police Captain
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
April 2011 – September 2011
Support Services Division – Police Division
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
October 2010 – April 2011
Office of the Chief – Police Captain
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
July 2009 – October 2010
Support Services Division
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
April 2008- July 2009
Operations Division – Police Captain
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
POLICE FOUNDATION 48 January 2007 – April 2008
Support Services Division Commander – Police Major
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
October 2006 – January 2007
Special Projects Administrator
City of Miami Gardens Police Department, Miami Gardens, FL
1988 – 2006
Police Officer, Lieutenant
City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department, For Lauderdale, FL
1986-1988
City of Coral Springs Police Department, Coral Springs, FL
1986-1986
Community Service Aide (Patrol Division)
1982 – 1985
United States Army Military Policeman
United States Army
EDUCATION
2002
Center for Advanced Criminal Justice Studies Executive Leadership Program
Florida Atlantic University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
2006
Bachelor of Arts, Public Administration
Union Institute & University, Cincinnati, OH
2015
Graduate Certificate, Criminal Justice Education
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
2015
FBI Academy National, 259th Session
CURRENT AND PAST PROJECTS
•
Contributing author of the City of Miami Gardens’ blueprint for a $6-­‐10 million public safety technology project. •
Created and presented a dynamic presentation for members of South Florida’s local, county, state and federal law enforcement community, as a way of gathering support and participation in the Miami Gardens based, cooperative public safety technology project. •
Envisioned and planned the proposal for the departments Public Safety Technology Project. HONORS, AWARDS, AND ACHIEVEMENTS
Chief’s Medal, City of Miami Gardens
Officer of the Month, City of Miami Gardens
Outstanding Law Enforcement Officer of the Year, United States Attorney’s Office Southern District
of Florida - 2013
POLICE FOUNDATION 49 ShotSpotter Outstanding Best Practices Awardee - 2014
More than 50 additional public and department commendations
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
5000 Role Models of Excellence Project, Agency Coordinator and Mentor Broward County Council of PTAs, Executive Board Member
Community Hope Center, Former Chairman of the Board of Directors
Eastern Region Police Recruiter’s Association, Former member
FBI National Academy Associates, Member
First Baptist Church of Fort Lauderdale, Member
Florida City and County Management Association, Student Member
Florida PTA, Member
International Association of Chiefs of Police, Member
International City/County Management Association
Kiwanis Club of Miami Gardens, Immediate Past President and Charter Member
Miami-Dade County Association of Chiefs of Police, Member
Miami-Dade County City and County Management Association, Affiliate Member
Monarch High School Band Parent Organization, Member
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Member
National Association of Black Law Enforcement Executives, Executive Board/Sergeant-At-Arms
POLICE FOUNDATION 50 BREANNE CAVE, PHD
Senior Research Associate
Police Foundation
(202) 833-1460; bcave@policefoundation.org
CAREER BRIEF
Dr. Breanne Cave is a Senior Research Associate at the Police Foundation with over five years of
experience working on research projects funded by the National Institute of Justice, the Department of
Homeland Security, and the National Institutes of Health. Her research focuses on police use of force,
public safety, and health in crime hotspots. She has published peer-reviewed research on crime and
place, policing, and security. She has a strong interest in quantitative spatial analysis, and has pursued
coursework in geography and geoinformation science. While on active duty as a combat engineer
officer in the Marine Corps, she worked in intelligence and security roles in support of Operation Iraqi
Freedom; as a reservist, she carried out oral history research with History Division, Marine Corps
University. Her research interests include policing, evidence-based policy, research translation, placebased research, terrorism and homeland security.
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
2016 – Present
Senior Research Associate
Police Foundation; Washington, DC 2009 –2015 Graduate Research Assistant Center for Evidence-­‐Based Crime Policy; Fairfax, VA
2012 – 2015
Field Historian
Oral History Division, Marine Corps University; Quantico, VA 2007 – 2008
Executive Officer Marine Wing Support Squadron 274, US Marine Corps; Arlington, VA 2006 – 2007
Intelligence Officer Marine Wing Support Squadron 271, US Marine Corps; Arlington, VA 2005 – 2006 Project Officer College of Continuing Education, United States Marine Corps; Arlington, VA POLICE FOUNDATION 51 EDUCATION
2016
PhD, Criminology, Law, and Society
George Mason University
Dissertation: Policing places: The influence of street segment
context on police behavior. Degree conferral date May 2016.
2014
Graduate certificate, Geography and GeoInformation Science
George Mason University
2009
Master’s in Justice Administration
Cum laude
Norwich University
2005
Bachelor’s in Criminal Justice
Summa cum laude
Norwich University
PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS
Lum, C., Cave, B., and Nicols, J. (Under review). Are security efforts evidence-­‐based? Security Journal. Weisburd, D., Groff, E., Jones, G., Cave, B., Amendola, K., and Emison, R. (In Press). The Dallas patrol management experiment: Can AVL technologies be used to harness unallocated patrol time for crime prevention? Journal of Experimental Criminology. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-­‐015-­‐9234-­‐y Cave, B., Telep, C., and Grieco, J. (2015). Rigorous evaluation research among U.S. police departments: Special cases or a representative sample? Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, 16(3): 254-­‐268. DOI:10.1080/15614263.2014.888348 Merola, L., Lum, C., Cave, B. and Hibdon, J. (2014). Community support for license plate recognition. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 37(1): 30-­‐51. DOI: 10.1108/PIJPSM-­‐07-­‐2012-­‐0064 Lum, C., Hibdon, J., Cave, B., Koper, C. S., & Merola, L. (2011). License Plate Reader (LPR) Police patrols in crime hot spots: An experimental evaluation in two adjacent jurisdictions. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7(4): 321-­‐345. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-­‐011-­‐9133-­‐9 BOOK CHAPTERS AND PRACTITIONER ARTICLES
Weisburd, D., Cave, B., and Piquero, A. (In Press). How do criminologists interpret statistical explanation of crime?: A review of quantitative modeling in published studies. In A. Piquero and C. Wellford (Eds.). Handbook of criminological theory. Weisburd, D., Eck, J., Braga, A., Telep, C., Cave, B., Bowers, K., Bruinsma, G., Gill, C, Groff, E., Hinkle, J., Hibdon, J., Johnson, S., Lawton, B., Lum, C., Ratcliffe, J. Rengert, G., Taniguchi, T., and Yang, S-­‐M. (In Press). Place matters: criminology for the 21st century. New York: Cambridge University Press POLICE FOUNDATION 52 Boruch, R., Weisburd, D.L., Berk, R.A., and Cave, B. (2014). Place-­‐based randomized trials. In D. Weisburd and G. Bruinsma (Eds.). Encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice. New York: Springer Verlaag. Cave, B. (2013). Implications of crime and place research for probation and parole. Perspectives: The Journal of American Probation and Parole Association, 37(4), 48-­‐53 Cave, B. (2011). Counterinsurgency and criminology: Applying routine activities theory to military approaches to counterterrorism. In C. Lum & L. Kennedy, (Eds.). Evidence-­‐based counterterrorism. Springer-­‐Verlag. Lum, C., Gill, C., Cave, B., Hibdon, J., and Weisburd, D. (2011). Translational criminology: The evidence-­‐-­‐-­‐base for evaluating TSA’s Comprehensive Security Strategy at U.S. airports. In C. Lum and L. Kennedy (Eds.), Evidence-­‐based counterterrorism. Springer-­‐Verlag. RESEARCH REPORTS
Lum, C., Cave, B., and Nichols, J. (2013). An evidence assessment of the Federal Protective Service’s security criteria and countermeasures at federal facilities. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Weisburd, D., Groff, E., Jones, G., Amendola, K.L., and Cave, B. (2012). The Dallas AVL experiment: Evaluating the use of automated vehicle locator technologies in policing. Washington, DC: Police Foundation. Gill, C., with Lum, C., Cave, B., Dario, L., Telep, C., Vitter, Z. and Weisburd, D. (2012). Evidence-­‐
based assessment of the City of Seattle’s crime prevention programs. Seattle, WA: City of Seattle Office of City Auditor. http://www.seattle.gov/audit/2012.htm#crimeprevention Hibdon, J., Lum, C., Gill, C., Cave, B., Chahal, J., and Vovak, H. (2012). TSA’s Comprehensive Strategy to Security at U.S. airports: An analysis of security related incidents at airports. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security. NOT FOR PUBLIC DISSEMINATION. Lum, C., Gill, C., Cave, B., Hibdon, J., and Weisburd, D. (2011). TSA's Comprehensive Strategy to Security at U.S. Airports: Assessing the evidence-­‐base of the "Playbook". Phase I Final Report. Department of Homeland Security. NOT FOR PUBLIC DISSEMINATION (see Lum et al. above for publicly available chapter). Lum, C., Merola, L., Hibdon, J., and Cave, B. (October, 2010). License plate recognition technologies for law enforcement: An outcome and legitimacy evaluation. SPAWAR, National Institute of Justice: Washington, DC. Cave, B (2010). Police perceptions of crime places and beat space. Research report for Fairfax County Police Department. PRESENTATIONS
Cave, B., Weisburd, D.L., Haviland, A., Lawton, B., and Ready, J. (2015). Mean streets and mental illness. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: Washington, DC. POLICE FOUNDATION 53 Cave, B. (2014). The ecology of policing places: The influence of street segment context on police behavior. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: San Francisco, CA Weisburd, D., Ready, J., Lawton, B., Cave, B., Nelson, M., and Haviland, A. (2014). Is living in a hot spot for crime or drugs related to collective efficacy, legitimacy, victimization, deviance, and health problems?: Findings from a survey of street segments in Baltimore, MD. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: San Francisco, CA Ready, J., Weisburd, D., Lawton, B., Haviland, A., Cave, B., and Nelson, M. (2014). Systematic social and physical observations at crime hot spots in Baltimore, MD: Methodology and baseline findings. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: San Francisco, CA Lawton, B., Weisburd, D., Ready, J., Cave, B., Nelson, M., and Haviland, A. (2014). Response and nonresponse: Contrasting survey response rates across different types of crime hot spots. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: San Francisco, CA. Nelson, M., Weisburd, D., Ready, J., Lawton, B., Cave, B., and Haviland, A. (2014). Trials and tribulations of using official data for sampling at micro-­‐geographic units of analysis. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: San Francisco, CA. Cave, B. (2014). Preliminary findings on police legitimacy from Baltimore Health and Safety Study. Presented at the SIPR – GMU Research Symposium: Tulliallan, Scotland. Cave, B (2013) The spatial distribution of high crime and disorder places in Seattle, Washington. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: Atlanta, GA Cave, B. Telep, C., and Grieco, J. (2012). Rigorous evaluation research among U.S. police departments: Special cases or a representative sample? Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: Chicago, IL Cave, B. (2011). Counterinsurgency and Criminology. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: Washington, DC. Cave, B. (2010). The effect of jurisdictional boundaries on police behavior and perceptions of crime in places. Presented at the American Society of Criminology Conference: San Francisco, CA. Cave, B. (2010). The effect of jurisdictional boundaries on police behavior and perceptions of crime in places. Presented at the 2010 Stockholm Criminology Conference: Stockholm, Sweden. CURRENT PROJECTS
Co-­‐Principal Investigator with Charlotte Gill (PI, George Mason University). Risk awareness, De-­‐
escalation, and Referral (RADAR): A subject-­‐specific information sharing approach to increase public safety in first responder crisis management. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Research partner. The Major Cities Chiefs Association/ Police Foundation Officer-­‐Involved Shooting Database. The Police Foundation. POLICE FOUNDATION 54 Research partner. The Hayward Attendance Project. City of Hayward Principal Investigator. The effect of a public ridesharing service on crime: A micro-­‐geographic perspective. Lyft Inc./ The Police Foundation PRACTITIONER TOOLS DEVELOPED
License Plate Recognition Technology Web Portal With Cynthia Lum, Linda Merola, and Julie Hibdon See: http://cebcp.org/lpr/ STATISTICAL
AND CODING SKILLS
Software programs and coding languages: ArcGIS, Python, SAS, SPSS, Stata, SQL Training: Meta-­‐analysis workshop. Michael Borenstein/ Biostat, completed April 2016. Longtiduinal data analysis using SAS. Statistical Horizons Course, completed April 2016. Introduction to geoprocessing scripts using Python. ESRI instructor led training course, completed August 21, 2014. HONORS, AWARDS, AND ACHIEVEMENTS
George Mason University
Presidential Fellowship
Dean’s Challenge Award
Criminology, Law, and Society student training award
George Mason University Team Excellence Award (for the Center for Evidence- Based Crime
Policy)
Norwich University (graduate)
Distinguished Norwich University Scholar
Alumni Scholarship
Norwich University (Undergraduate)
Norwich University Academic Scholarship
General I.D. White Scholarship, David & Dixie Hollis Scholarship
Community Service Scholarship
W.E. Sweester Scholarship
Navy/ Marine Corps ROTC Scholarship
Colby Military Writer’s Symposium Scholarship
Professional:
Global War on Terrorism Service Medal
Iraq Campaign Medal (2)
Sea Service Deployment Ribbon (2)
National Defense Service Medal
Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal
POLICE FOUNDATION 55 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
2014 – Present Member, Division of Policing, American Society of Criminology 2009 – Present Member, American Society of Criminology POLICE FOUNDATION 56 CRAIG B. FRASER, PHD
Project Manager - Management Services
Police Foundation
(443) 562-6266; cbfraswe@juno.com
CAREER BRIEF
Dr. Craig Fraser has over twenty years of experience conducting law enforcement
management studies in his role as the Director of Management Services for the Police
Executive Research Forum (PERF), from 1994 to July 2015. Dr. Fraser has managed studies
of over 250 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad, including a patrol allocation
study in Austin, Texas in 2012. In addition, he has completed management studies for police
agencies in Fort Worth, Texas, California, North Carolina, Colorado, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Louisiana, New York, Minnesota, Florida, Oklahoma, Nevada, and Utah. He has specific
substantive expertise in police technology, training, and resource allocation. Dr. Fraser has
authored training guides on police resource allocation, staffing and deployment, taught
extensively on the topic, and conducted 50 specialized staffing and deployment studies. In
addition to his management studies experience, Dr. Fraser held a joint position of Director of
Training, Richmond Police Department and Director of the Criminology/Criminal Justice
Program, Virginia Union University.
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
2015 – present
Project Manager – Management Services
Police Foundation; Washington, DC
Directs and manages the completion of law enforcement management studies and
operational analyses. Leads management consulting teams of Police Foundation staff,
Executive Fellows, and subject matter experts.
2005 –2015
Director, Management Services
Police Executive Research Forum; Washington, DC
Directed and managed the completion of management studies and technical assistance
projects. Assembled study teams from full time PERF staff, visiting fellows, as well as
subject matter experts and practitioners from throughout the law enforcement profession.
2003-2005
Director, Public Safety Practice
MAXIMUS Inc.; Reston, VA
1994 – 2003
Director, Management Services
Police Executive Research Forum; Washington, DC
1992 – 1994
Joint position as Director of Training, Richmond Police Department and
POLICE FOUNDATION 57 Chairperson, Department of Criminology/Criminal Justice, Virginia Union University
Richmond Police Department and Virginia Union University; Richmond, VA
1989 – 1992
Police Planning and Budget Manager
Santa Ana Police Department; Santa Ana, CA
1987 – 1989
Director of Training, Education, and Accreditation Division
Metropolitan District Police Department; Boston, MA
1987 – 1989
Adjunct Professor
Boston University Department of Urban Affairs and Criminal Justice; Boston, MA
1986 – 1987
Senior Associate
URSA Institute / Polaris Research & Development; Bethesda, MD
1982 – 1986
Director, Management Information Division
Winston-Salem Police Department; Winston-Salem, NC
1978 – 1982
Associate Director and Associate in Research
Florida State University School of Criminology, Southeastern Criminal Justice Training
Center; Tallahassee, FL
1976 – 1978
Assistant Director, Criminal Justice Training Center, and
Director, Technical Assistance Resource Center
Washburn University Department of Corrections and Criminal Justice; Topeka, KS
1975 – 1976
Research Associate
University of Kansas Institute of Public Affairs and Community Development; Lawrence, KS
1973 – 1975
Project Director and Analyst, Kansas City Evaluation Office
The Police Foundation; Washington, DC
EDUCATION
Ph.D., Political Science Purdue University POLICE FOUNDATION 58 M.A., Political Science Purdue University A.B., Political Science Duke University TEACHING EXPERIENCE
Departmental Chair and Associate Professor,
Virginia Union University; Richmond, Virginia
§ Introduction to Criminal Justice
§ Criminal Law
§ Analyzing Community Crime Problems
Adjunct Professor
Boston University, Department of Urban Affairs and Criminal Justice
§ Urban Analytical Methods
§ Microcomputer Applications
§ Workshop in Urban Affairs and Planning
§ Special Topics: Organized Crime
Adjunct Professor
Washburn University (Topeka, Kansas), Department of Corrections and Criminal Justice
§ Police-Community Relations
TRAINING COURSES TAUGHT
§ Vision and Values § The Framework for Community Policing § Community Policing Management Seminar § Statistics for Police Planning and Research § Implementing Community Policing § Community Policing § Crime Analysis § Resource Allocation § Community-­‐Based Evaluation Research in Law Enforcement § American Police Organization § Police Records Management § Computer Applications for Police Research § Police Planning and Research Methods HIGHLIGHTS OF POLICE STUDY EXPERIENCE:
§ Shared services study for four suburban Wisconsin police agencies
§ Consolidation, merger options for police agencies in three different Pennsylvania
counties
§ Management of studies examining citizen complaints, internal investigations and use
of force for jurisdictions including Minneapolis, Philadelphia, San Antonio, New
Haven, Fort Worth and Fairfax County.
POLICE FOUNDATION 59 §
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Eight jurisdiction study of applying process mapping to police investigations
Creation of a statewide community policing recruit curriculum
Creation of a problem based learning recruit curriculum for a large urban police
department
Comprehensive police agency management studies and performance audits
Police personnel and resource allocation studies
Police information system needs assessment and functional specification development
Assisting with strategic planning for community policing implementation
Staffing needs for California police agency contracting with sheriff’s department
Cost sharing and best management practice of two adjacent Illinois police departments
Staffing needs for suburban Maryland police agency
Information technology needs analysis of large urban Arizona police department
Executive search assistance for Superintendent of the Chicago, Illinois Police
Department
Information strategy and staffing study for suburban Illinois police department
Best practice analysis for Virginia county for public safety agencies, including Sheriff,
Fire, EMS, Animal Control, and Clerk of Courts departments
Review of Georgia county sheriff’s department and EMS agency
Policy and procedures revisions for North Carolina police department
Development of Investigator Training Course for a state Attorney General’s office
Communications operations for multiple jurisdictions.
Study lead for assessments of over 250 police and law enforcement
agencies
POLICE FOUNDATION 60 REBECCA LOTT BENSON
Senior Policy Analyst
Police Foundation
(202)463-7748; rbenson@policefoundation.org
CAREER BRIEF
Rebecca Lott Benson is a Senior Policy Analyst with the Police Foundation with experience in
analysis of local-­‐level law enforcement policies, procedures, and practices both internal to local police departments, and as a consultant. As a Crime and Intelligence Analyst with the Los Angeles
Police Department, Olympic Division, she provided analytical support to the development of the new
division by creating new area boundaries, mapped and documented community resources, activities
and special locations, and analyzed personnel resources and shift schedules. Rebecca was responsible
for daily crime analysis including mapping and statistical reports, led weekly crime control meetings
with Command staff, and developed strategies for crime prevention and deterrence with Command,
Detective, and Senior Lead Officers. She often coordinated unified responses to crime problems with
neighboring divisions and bureaus as well as other local law enforcement agencies. She was also
greatly engaged in preparation of monthly CompStat reports and presentations and participated in
research, development and testing of systems and processes with the CompStat Division. She received
numerous commendations and was awarded Civilian of the Year in 2009.
Prior to her work in Los Angeles and following her graduate work at Northeastern University, Rebecca
served the Boston Police Department in a few capacities. As Program Manager in Community and
Youth projects in the Office of the Police Commissioner, she managed a successful youth partnership
between law enforcement and the business sector. Concurrently, she was detailed to the Youth
Violence Strike Force to assist in the development of the Boston Reentry Initiative (BRI). She was
heavily involved in the creation of a critical database that facilitated intelligence sharing among project
law enforcement partners. She consulted on policy and organizational development with state and
federal LE partners to replicate the program across and beyond the state. These initiatives also
involved partnering with local community organizations, schools and businesses.
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
Senior Policy Analyst
January 2015 to Present Police Foundation; Washington, DC Act as liaison between police practitioners and researchers. Coordinate and lead teams of expert consultants conducting technical assistance, research and data collection in state and local jurisdictions. Provide in-­‐depth analysis of relevant law enforcement policy, procedures, and practices. Develop proposals and fundraising efforts for foundation related projects and initiatives. Crime and Intelligence Analyst
10/2008 – 07/2011
Los Angeles Police Department, Olympic Division; Los Angeles, CA
Researched, compiled, and analyzed crime trends. Prepared maps, statistics, and reports demonstrating trends and patterns on a daily, weekly, monthly and annual basis for meetings/presentations with and for Command and Detective staff. Disseminated appropriate information to patrol, detective, and administrative staff as well as conducted Crime Control meetings and Roll Call presentations to assist with deployment of resources. Developed and maintained databases for special projects (Parole/PACT). Partnered with POLICE FOUNDATION 61 neighboring law enforcement partners to share best practices by cross training and assisting in development of intelligence units. Program Manager
01/2002 – 06/2005
Office of the Police Commissioner, Boston Police Department; Boston, MA
Intelligence Unit, Boston Police Department; Boston, MA
Performed intelligence reviews and reports for several interagency programs-­‐ Boston Reentry Initiative (BRI), Street Violence Suppression Project, Parole Initiative, Gang Assessment, Department of Youth Services (DYS) Reentry Project, Grove Hall Initiative, Federal Reentry Project. Participated in critical database creation, development and maintenance. Acted as intelligence liaison between BPD and other local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies and partners. Produced critical intelligence bulletins and disseminated approved reports to appropriate internal and external law enforcement teams. Collected and analyzed data for grant proposals and reports. Provided intelligence support for the multi-­‐agency law enforcement team for the 2004 Democratic National Convention Program Coordinator
08/2005 – 12/2005
Savannah Impact Program (SIP), Savannah Chatham Police Department; Savannah, GA
Supervised programming staff. Prepared grant proposals and developed new programs. Tracked SIP client progress and produced monthly production reports. Consulted with incoming Chief on policy changes to SIP programs, processes, and systems. Program Coordinator
07/2001 – 06/2005
Summer of Opportunity, Boston Police Department; Boston, MA
John Hancock Corporation; Boston, MA
Managed program payroll/budget. Coordinated SOO intern placements and prepared review. Research Assistant 09/2000 – 07/2001 Criminal Justice Center for Policy Research Northeastern University; Boston, MA Collected and analyzed data. Prepared statistics and reports for projects. EDUCATION
2002
1998
Master of Science, Criminal Justice
Northeastern University
Bachelor of Science
Brigham Young University
HONORS, AWARDS, AND ACHIEVEMENTS
Awarded LAPD divisional Civilian of the Year for 2009.
Received numerous LAPD Bureau and Area Commendations.
Experienced with diverse corporate, governmental and academic settings.
POLICE FOUNDATION 62 BEN GORBAN
Policy Analyst
Police Foundation
(202) 833-1460; bgorban@policefoundation.org
CAREER BRIEF
Ben Gorban is a Policy Analyst with over eight years of experience supporting law-enforcement
related projects, including the provision of technical assistance and policy analysis support on projects
related to community policing and the role of social media in law enforcement. His areas of expertise
include research, resource development, ad information dissemination.
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
April 2016 – Present
Policy Analyst
Police Foundation; Washington, DC
Provide research, policy analysis, and data collection support to Police Foundation research,
training and technical assistance, and operational assessment projects. Support proposal
development and fundraising efforts.
July 2010 – April 2016
Acting Manager
International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP); Washington, DC State Associations of Chiefs of Police: Served as the dedicated point of contact for the Division of State Associations of Chiefs of Police (SACOP). Facilitated communication between SACOP and IACP, planned the annual conference and midyear meeting, and managed the budget for the division. IACP Center for Social Media: Oversaw IACP’s training, technical assistance, and resources related to law enforcement use of various social media platforms; researched issues and emerging trends related to law enforcement; maintained the IACP Center for Social Media website and blog. Also served as subject matter experts for news media on law enforcement use of social media. The Role of Community Policing in Countering Violent Extremism: Developed key principles, awareness briefs, roll-­‐call training videos, and social media posts to raise awareness of law enforcement regarding the role of community policing in homeland security. Also began the development of online training for all levels of law enforcement regarding indicators of violent extremism, different extremist groups and individuals, and key principles of community policing and countering violent extremism. Grant Writing and Sponsorships: Wrote and directly contributed to IACP grants awarded by the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Department of Transportation (responsible for $2.9 million). Fostered new partnerships with sponsors resulting in additional funding (responsible for $10,000). August 2009 – April 2010
Full Time Technical Assistant Specialist
American University; Washington, DC
Worked at the Justice Programs Office assisting in development and delivery of a curriculum on caseflow management improvement programs including Differentiated Case Management (DCM) and Case Management Conferences (CMCs) for state and local courts across the nation. Coordinated and attended site visits for technical assistance in association with the POLICE FOUNDATION 63 caseflow management curriculum. Provided assistance to court systems on continuity of operations (COOP) and pandemic planning. December 2006 – July 2008
Office Automation Clerk
US Department of Justice Washington, DC
Worked in the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) researching, writing, and assisting in meeting planning and coordination. Developed PowerPoint presentations, speeches, talking points, and research papers on the following topics: prisoner reentry, rising crime rate, effects of the economy on various justice issues and agencies, pandemic influenza, and tribal justice issues. January 2008 – May 2008
Research Assistant
Centre for Crime and Justice Studies; London, England
Researched different aspects of human trafficking and human trafficking policies internationally, with a specific focus on the United States and United Kingdom. Compared and contrasted the differing government and non-­‐governmental organization responses, the role of the media in raising awareness, and the policy responses. June 2007 – December 2007
Clerk
US Department of Justice; Washington, DC
Worked with the Civil Division, Consumer Litigation, and National Courts Branch, assisting in preparation of depositions, briefs, and other documents for federal courts. Coordinated videotaping of moot court proceedings for attorneys preparing for oral arguments. Organized and filed documents related to litigation. EDUCATION
2011
2009
2009
Master of Science in Justice, Law and Society
Specialization in Justice and Public Policy
American University
Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, College of Arts and Sciences
American University
Bachelor of Arts in Justice, School of Public Affairs
American University
PUBLICATIONS
“Car Hacking – The Risks and Implications for Law Enforcement” Ben Gorban and Michael Wagers,
PhD, The Police Chief 81 (February 2014): 60–61.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&article_id=3259&issue
_id=22014
“Why Cybersecurity Should Be a Top Priority for Your Agency,” Technology Talk, The Police Chief
80 (December 2013): 88–89.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&article_id=3217&issue
_id=122013
POLICE FOUNDATION 64 JOYCE IWASHITA
Project Assistant
The Police Foundation
202-721-9790; jiwashita@gmail.com
CAREER BRIEF
Joyce Iwashita is a Project Assistant at the Police Foundation where she supports a variety of Police
Foundation projects, including Collaborative Reform and Critical Incident Reviews. A Harry S.
Truman Scholar, Ms. Iwashita has interned at the U.S. Senate, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs,
and National Criminal Justice Association, and has done work for the Herbert Scoville Jr. Peace
Fellowship. Ms. Iwashita received her Bachelor of Arts in Economics from Lewis & Clark College in
Portland, Oregon, where she did research on U.S. sentencing laws.
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
4/4/2016 – present
Project Assistant
Police Foundation; Washington, DC
Responsible for supporting day to day project management of selected projects across various
research and programs within the Police Foundation. Provides general administrative support and
project coordination of both on site and off site work as directed by Senior Staff. Participates in
project related meetings, initiating the meetings and site visits with Police Foundation staff,
funders, and law enforcement experts across the country.
9/21/2015 – 3/25/2016
Processing Associate
Herbert Scoville Jr. Peace Fellowship; Washington, DC
Processed, organized, and tracked hundreds of spring and fall applications for the U.S. peace and
security fellowship. Updated content on the Fellowship’s website.
6/3/2015 – 7/24/2015
Intern
National Criminal Justice Association; Washington, DC
Produced state and topic area reports on federally funded state, local, and tribal criminal justice
programs for future publication and use by federal policymakers. Compiled and analyzed data on
the collateral consequences of criminal convictions for a report aimed at state-level policymakers.
Researched, wrote, and edited articles on criminal justice funding and programs for NCJA
newsletters. Supported preparations for NCJA’s annual conference.
6/10/2013 – 8/9/2013
Legislative Team Intern
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs; Washington,
DC
Supported the preparation of VA witnesses for Congressional hearings by proofreading
testimonies, providing input on practice questions, and preparing briefing materials. Tracked
veterans- and defense-related appropriation and authorization bills.
5/28/2012 – 8/17/2012
Intern
Office of US Senator Daniel K. Akaka; Washington, DC
POLICE FOUNDATION 65 Assisted office staff by researching and analyzing legislation, writing policy memos, and drafting
response letters in a variety of policy areas including appropriations, justice, education,
environment, and health.
EDUCATION
2015
Bachelor of Arts in Economics
Lewis & Clark College
HONORS, AWARDS, AND ACHIEVEMENTS
Phi Beta Kappa, 2015
Departmental Honors in Economics, Lewis & Clark College, 2015
Harry S. Truman Scholar, 2014
POLICE FOUNDATION 66 RICK BRAZIEL
Police Foundation Executive Fellow
EDUCATION
M. A., Security Studies, U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. 2006
M. A., Communication Studies, California State University, Sacramento. 1993
B. A., Communication Studies, California State University, Sacramento. 1986
EXPERIENCE & ACCOMPLISHMENTS
CONSULTANT
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO – INSPECTOR GENERAL, 2015-PRESENT
Independently monitor and evaluate high profile or serious complaints, serve as community liaison,
and prepare reports of findings to the Board of Supervisors.
CRITICAL INCIDENT ASSESSMENT
Currently assisting in the assessment of the San Bernardino Terrorist Shootings.
After-Action Assessment of the Police Response to Ferguson, Missouri - September 2015. http://riczai-inc.com/ric.php?page=detail&id=COPS-P317
Assessment of Stockton Police Response to the Bank of the West Robbery and Hostage Taking
September 2015. http://www.policefoundation.org/publication/a-heist-gone-bad/
Assessment of the police response to attacks on police by former police officer Christopher Dorner,
“Police Under Attack.” 2014
http://www.policefoundation.org/content/police-foundation-regional-review-police-response-attackschristopher-dorner
ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT
Collaborative Reform Initiative – An Assessment of the St Louis County Police Department –
September 2015. Assessment areas include use of force, internal affairs, fair and impartial policing,
racial profiling, recruitment, retention, diversity hiring, and community engagement.
Washington State Patrol Trooper Recruitment and Retention Study – Workforce analysis,
recruitment, and retention review and analysis.
INSTRUCTOR/FACILITATOR
POLICE FOUNDATION 67 Subject areas include leadership, community engagement and trust building, communication skills,
media relations, critical incident leadership, teambuilding, and organizational development.
POLICE FOUNDATION - EXECUTIVE FELLOW
Serve as a member of the President’s Practitioner Advisory Board. Represent the Foundation at
regional, national, and international events.
SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT, 1979-2012
Police Chief, January 2008 – December 2012
Leader of an organization, with over 1,200 employees (65% sworn – 35% civilian) and a $132
million budget, responsible for working in partnership with the community to identify priorities in
the delivery of police services. Sacramento, the capital city of California, was identified by TIME
Magazine as the most integrated city in America. Sacramento has approximately 500,000 residents
and a daytime population in excess of 600,000.
Using evidence-based practices, academic research, and private sector results driven strategies
refocused SPD mission including redesign of crime reduction strategies, staff deployment, and
resource allocation resulting in the reduction of Part I Crime by over 21% while reducing
department staffing by 28%. Strategies included collaborating with unique partners to develop
creative concepts, expanding research and analysis capacity, and improving regional efforts.
Increased transparency and community involvement through the creation of a Police Advisory
Committee, Youth Advisory Committee, and redesigned wed site including interactive features.
Conducted 14 Town Hall meetings as well as an on-line survey to identify community expectations
designed to realign staffing to improve service delivery.
Deputy Chief, August 2002 - January 2008
Office of Operation and Office of Investigations –Chief responsible for Patrol, Problem Oriented
Policing (POP), Neighborhood Crime Prevention, SWAT, Parole Intervention Team, Air
Operations, Traffic, K-9, Bikes, Regional Transit Police Services, Marine, Mounted, EOD-Bomb
Squad, Reserves, Court Liaison, Major Crimes, Property Crimes, Narcotics, Vice, School Resource
Officers, Magnet Schools, Forensic Identification and CSI.
Office of Technical Services – Chief responsible for Personnel, Training, Communications, Records,
Property, Fleet, Technology and Information Divisions. Directed the overhaul of the recruiting,
hiring, retention, and training process for police officers and dispatchers. The “Train to Success”
and “Grow Your Own” models have received national attention.
Office of Emergency Services and Homeland Security – Created the Sacramento Regional Office of
Homeland Security with federal, regional and local law enforcement, regional fire services,
emergency services and public health partners. Office Chief of a multidiscipline, multi-agency team
responsible for regional planning, training, and logistics related to Homeland Security.
POLICE FOUNDATION 68 Development of the Sacramento Community Racial Profiling Commission through the drafting of
City ordinance and serving as Vice Chair.
Captain, April 1994 - August 2002
Lieutenant, August 1990 - April 1994
Sergeant, December 1987 - August 1990
Police Officer, May 1981 - December 1987
Community Service Officer, October 1979 - May 1981
AUTHOR AND INSTRUCTOR
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department. Collaborative Reform Initiative. Washington,
DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. 2015.
After-Action Assessment of the Police Response to the August 2014 Demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri.
COPS Office Critical Response Initiative. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services. 2015
A Heist Gone Bad, a Police Foundation Critical Incident Review of the Stockton Police Response to the Bank
Of The West Robbery And Hostage-Taking. Washington, DC: The Police Foundation. 2015
Virtual Reality Training in Law Enforcement. California Peace Officer. Fall 2011.
Impact of Homeland Security Communities of Learning: Developing a Strategy for Training and
Collaboration. Monterey, CA: US Naval Post Graduate School, 2006.
COP TALK: Essential Communication Skills for Community Policing. San Francisco: Acada
Books, 1999.
Humboldt State University 2002- present- Developed curriculum and instructs in the College of
Professional Studies, Leadership Studies program. Also instructs in the California Peace Officer
Standards and Training (POST) Management Course in the following topics: leadership,
communication skills, leader’s role in community policing, media relations, and marketing.
Trainer – Critical incident leadership, community engagement, organizational development, and
communication.
Center for Homeland Defense and Security. Presenter to executive level participants from multiple
disciplines from across the country regarding organizational development and change.
HONORS & AWARDS
•
•
•
•
Sacramento Police Department Unit Citation, March 2002
Sacramento Police Department Distinguished Service Award, May 2001
California State University Sacramento, Alumni of the Year, 1994
Sacramento Police Department Silver Medal of Valor, November 1988
POLICE FOUNDATION 69 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, BOARDS & PERSONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, Commissioner, 2015-present
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, Command College, Class 33
California Peace Officers’ Association, President 2012-2013
California Peace Officers’ Association, Board of Directors, 2008-2014
California Peace Officers’ Memorial Foundation, Board of Directors, 2012-2016
California Police Chiefs Association Board of Directors 2010-2012
CSUS Alumni Association
Central California Intelligence Center, Governance Board, Chair 2009-2012
International Association of Chiefs of Police
MLK365 Board of Directors 2012
National Executive Institute Associates
Naval Postgraduate School, CHDS, Alumni Association Treasurer, 2007-2009
Police Executive Research Forum, Board of Directors-Treasurer, 2011-2012
Police Foundation, Executive Fellow 2012-present
Sacramento Philharmonic Orchestra Community Engagement 2010-2012
Senior Management Institute for Police – Boston 2004
The Salvation Army Advisory Board, 2011-2014
POLICE FOUNDATION 70 MELISSA REULAND
Police Foundation Research Fellow
EDUCATION
May 1994
Master of Science, Criminal Justice, University of Baltimore,
Baltimore MD.
May 1987
Bachelor of Arts, Psychology, Cum Laude, The University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor MI. High Honors in Psychology.
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry
Baltimore, MD
Senior Research Program Manager
December 2012 – present
Manage and coordinate two new health care initiatives funded through the Center for
Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI). Current project is implementing and
evaluating a home-based dementia care coordination program for 600 dually-eligible
people with dementia and their caregivers in Maryland. Past project integrated
behavioral health care in primary care settings as part of the Johns Hopkins
Community Health Partnership (JCHIP) project. Responsibilities include: program
implementation and evaluation; qualitative and quantitative data collection and
analysis; project milestones tracking; CMMI reporting; community collaboration
facilitation; and health care provider education.
Police Research Consulting, Baltimore MD
Senior Research Consultant
September 2004 – present
Direct, coordinate and manage national research and technical assistance projects
involving police and mental health collaboration. Responsibilities include: proposal
writing; research project design; qualitative and quantitative data collection and
analysis; community collaboration facilitation; and report writing.
POLICE FOUNDATION 71 Contract work (selected):
q
Council of State Governments Justice Center, Bethesda MD. Work funded by the
Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice.
•
Improving Law Enforcement Data Collection: Conducting research to
develop practices and tools for valid and reliable data collection in law
enforcement agencies engaged in improving their responses to people with
mental illnesses.
•
Statewide Implementation of Specialized Policing Responses (SPR) to
People with Mental Illnesses: Explored and documented the structure of eight
states’ implementation of SPRs throughout local and county law enforcement
agencies statewide.
•
Law Enforcement/Mental Health Partnership Project. Conducted
multidisciplinary research and developed suite of materials designed to support
expansion of Specialized Policing Responses to people with mental illnesses.
Provided on-site technical assistance to more than ten communities funded by
BJA to plan and implement SPRs.
q
Detroit-Wayne County Community Mental Health Agency, Detroit MI
Facilitated Mental Health and Law Enforcement Task Force convened to develop a
Mental Health/Police collaboration program with the Detroit Police Department.
Presented information on national training and practice models, facilitated focus group
discussion on model strengths and weaknesses, and identified ways to adapt those
models to Detroit-Wayne County.
q
Department of Mental Health, Washington DC
Facilitated Task Force convened to develop a Mental Health/Police collaboration
program. Attended task force meetings and advised participants on national training
and practice models, their strengths and weaknesses, and on adapting those models to
Washington DC.
Police Executive Research Forum, Washington DC
Senior Research Associate
June 1995 – August 2004
Direct, coordinate and manage national research and technical assistance projects for
police. Responsibilities include: proposal writing; research design; curriculum
development; qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis; budget analysis
and monitoring; and report writing.
Project Work (selected):
POLICE FOUNDATION 72 q
Police Response to People with Mental Illnesses, funded by Disabilities Rights
Section, U.S. Department of Justice. Developed model policy and training curriculum
to promote law enforcement’s voluntary compliance with the ADA in providing
service to people with mental illnesses. Conceptualized, scripted and co-produced a
training video.
q
Community Policing Partnerships for Domestic Violence: Documentation and
Assessment, funded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S.
Department of Justice. Collected and analyzed qualitative and quantitative data from
several communities across the U.S. to identify effective police-community
partnerships for responding to domestic violence.
q
Explaining the Prevalence, Context, and Consequences of Dual Arrest in Intimate
Partner Cases. Collected national incident-level data and data from individual
departments in four states on intimate partner abuse cases. Analyzed these data to
determine factors related to dual arrest and strategies for reducing unwarranted arrests.
q
Kansas City Together – a Community-Police Partnership, funded by the Hall
Family Foundation and the Marion Ewing Kauffman Foundation. Facilitated Kansas
City Police Department discussions regarding ways to improve minority relations.
Identified best practices and implemented recommendations.
q
Community Policing Consortium, funded by the Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. Developed two community-oriented
policing curricula (Collaborative Problem Solving and Supervising Problem Solving).
Scripted and co-produced a six-volume series of training videotapes and study guides.
University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore MD
Division of Gerontology
Research Project Coordinator
December 1989 - May 1995
Coordinated a series of large prospective epidemiological studies of recovery from hip
fracture and hip replacement in the elderly. In addition, collaborated with law school
faculty to explore the relationship between domestic violence and partner notification
of HIV.
The University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor MI
Department of Postgraduate Medicine
Research Associate
September 1987 - August 1989
Maintained survey fieldwork for the Health Risk Factor Study and coordinated
implementation of Alcohol Misuse Prevention Curriculum in 350 tenth-grade classrooms.
POLICE FOUNDATION 73 CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS
International Academy of Law and Mental Health Congress in Germany: panel
presentation in 2011.
Policing and Mental Health Symposium in Australia: keynote and plenary speaker in 2010.
International Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Conference: panel presentations in 2005,
2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.
Justice Mental Health Collaboration Project, Technical Assistance Grantees Conference:
plenary and panel speaker in 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance Regional Meetings: panel
presentations in 2007 and 2008.
Psychiatrists in Blue: Canadian Conference on Police/Mental Health Systems: keynote
speaker, 2006
PUBLICATIONS
- Monographs/White Papers (selected)
Reuland, M., Draper, L. and Norton, B. Statewide Law Enforcement/ Mental Health
Efforts: Strategies to Support and Sustain Local Initiatives New York, NY: Council of
State Governments Justice Center, 2012.
Reuland, M., Draper, L. and Norton, B. Improving Responses to People with Mental
Illnesses: Tailoring Law Enforcement Initiatives to Individual Jurisdictions. New
York, NY: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2010.
Reuland, M., Schwarzfeld, M and Draper, L. Law Enforcement Responses to People
with Mental Illnesses: A Guide to Research-informed Policy and Practice.
New York, NY: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2009.
Reuland, M. and Schwarzfeld, M. Improving Responses to People with Mental
Illnesses: Strategies for Effective Law Enforcement Training. New York, NY: Council
of State Governments Justice Center, 2008.
Schwarzfeld, M, Reuland, M and Plotkin, M. Improving Responses to People with
Mental Illnesses: The Essential elements of a Specialized Law Enforcement-Based
Program. New York, NY: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2008.
POLICE FOUNDATION 74 Reuland, M., Schaefer Morabito, M.S., Preston, C. and Cheney, J. Police-Community
partnerships to Address Domestic Violence, Washington, DC: Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services, 2006.
Reuland, M. and Cheney, J. Enhancing Success of Police-Based Diversion Programs
for People with Mental Illness. Delmar, NY: Technical Assistance and Policy Analysis
Center for Jail Diversion, 2005.
Reuland, M. A Guide to Implementing Police-Based Diversion Programs for People
with Mental Illness. Delmar, NY: Technical Assistance and Policy Analysis Center for
Jail Diversion, 2004.
Reuland, M. Policies and Practices to Address Diversity in the Nation’s Largest
Police Departments. New York, NY: John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2002.
- Journal Articles (selected)
Reuland, M. “Tailoring the Police Response to People with Mental Illness to
Community Characteristics in the USA.” Police Practice and Research, Vol. 11(4), p.
315-329, 2010.
Reuland, M. and Margolis, G.J. “Police Approaches That Improve the Response to
People with Mental Illnesses: A Focus on Victims.” Police Chief, Vol. 70(11), p. 3539, 2003.
Thompson, M. D., Reuland, M., and Souweine, D. “Criminal Justice/Mental Health
Consensus: Improving Responses to People with Mental Illnesses.” Crime and
Delinquency, Vol.49 (1), p. 30 – 51, 2003.
Kenney, D. J. and Reuland, M. “Public Order Policing: A National Survey of
Abortion-related Conflict.” J. Crim. Just., Vol. 30 (5), p. 355-368, 2002.
Fox, K.M., Reuland, M.M., Hawkes, W.G., Hebel, J.R., Hudson, J, Zimmerman, S.I.,
Kenzora, J. and Magaziner, J. Accuracy of Medical Records in Hip Fracture. J. Am.
Geriatr. Soc., Vol. 46, p. 745-750, 1998.
Rothenberg, K.H., Paskey, S.J., Reuland, M., Zimmerman, S., North, R.L.
"Domestic Violence and Partner Notification: Implications for Treatment and
Counseling of HIV-Infected Women." J. Am. Medical Women's Assoc., Vol. 50
(3&4), p. 87-93, 1995.
Fishbein, D., Reuland, M.M. "Psychological Correlates of Frequency and
Type of Drug Abuse Among Jail Inmates." Addictive Behaviors, Vol 19 (6), p.
583-598, 1994.
POLICE FOUNDATION 75 - Book Chapters
Reuland, M. “Law Enforcement’s Improved Response to People with Mental
Illnesses.” In Dlugacz, H.A. (Ed.) Reentry Planning for Offenders with Mental
Disorders, Volume 11, Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, 2015.
Reuland, M. and Yasuhara, K. “Law Enforcement and Emergency Services.” In
Griffin, P.A., Heilbrun, K., Mulvey, E.P., DeMatteo, D. and Schubert, C.A. (Eds.) The
Sequential Intercept Model and Criminal Justice, New York, NY: Oxford University
Press, 2015.
Reuland, M., Draper, L. and Norton, B. “Developing a Statewide Approach to
Specialised Policing Response (SPR) Programme Implementation.” In Chappell, D.
(Ed.) Policing and the Mentally Ill: International Perspectives, Boca Raton, FL: CRC
Press, Taylor and Francis Group, 2013.
Reuland, M., “Police Response to People with Mental Illnesses.” In Greene, J. (Ed.)
The Encyclopedia of Police Science, Third Edition, Volume II, New York, NY:
Routledge, 2007.
Reuland, M. “Police Use of Force and People with Mental Illness.” In Ederheimer, J.
(Ed.) Strategies for Resolving Conflict and Minimizing Use of Force, Washington, DC:
Police Executive Research Forum, 2007
Reuland, M. “Law Enforcement Policy Recommendations.” In Jurkanin, T.J., Hoover,
L.T. and Sergevnin, V.A. (Eds.) Improving the Police Response to Persons with
Mental Illness: A Progressive Approach, Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 2007.
Reuland, M., Plotkin, M., and Schaefer, M. “Contact with Law Enforcement.” In
report on Criminal Justice/Mental Health Consensus Project, New York, NY: Council
of State Governments, 2002.
- Published Report
Hirschel, D, Buzawa, E, Pattavina, A, Faggiani, D and Reuland, M. Explaining the
Prevalence, Context and Consequences of Dual Arrest in Intimate Partner Cases,
Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, 2007.
- Curricula
Collaborative Problem Solving. Washington, DC: Community Policing
Consortium, for the Office on Community-Oriented Policing Services, U.S.
Department of Justice, 1997.
Supervising the Problem Solving Process. Washington, DC: Community
Policing Consortium, for the Office on Community-Oriented Policing Services,
U.S. Department of Justice, 1997.
POLICE FOUNDATION 76 COLLABORATIVE
REFORM INITIATIVE
An Assessment of the St. Louis
County Police Department
Blake Norton, Edwin E. Hamilton, Rick Braziel,
Daniel Linskey & Jennifer Zeunik
COLLABORATIVE
REFORM INITIATIVE
An Assessment of the St. Louis
County Police Department
Blake Norton, Edwin E. Hamilton, Rick Braziel,
Daniel Linskey & Jennifer Zeunik
This project was supported by cooperative agreement number 2014-CR-WX-K002 awarded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s)
and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to
specific agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement by the author(s) or
the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues.
This document contains preliminary analysis that is subject to further review and modification. It may not be quoted
or cited and should not be disseminated further without the express permission of the Police Foundation or the U.S.
Department of Justice. Any copyright in this work is subject to the Government’s Unlimited Rights license as defined
in FAR 52-227.14. The reproduction of this work for commercial purposes is strictly prohibited. Nongovernmental users may copy and distribute this document in any medium, either commercial or noncommercial, provided that this
copyright notice is reproduced in all copies. Nongovernmental users may not use technical measures to obstruct or
control the reading or further copying of the copies they make or distribute. Nongovernmental users may not accept
compensation of any manner in exchange for copies. All other rights reserved.
The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of the date of this publication. Given that URLs and
websites are in constant flux, neither the author(s) nor the COPS Office can vouch for their current validity.
Recommended citation:
Norton, Blake, Edwin E. Hamilton, Rick Braziel, Daniel Linskey, and Jennifer Zeunik. 2015. An Assessment of the
St. Louis County Police Department. Collaborative Reform Initiative. Washington, DC: Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services.
Published 2015
Contents
Letter from the Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vii
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Key findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Chapter 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
COPS Office Collaborative Reform Initiative for Technical Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Collaborative reform in the St. Louis County (Missouri) Police Department . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Organization of this report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Chapter 2. St. Louis County Police Department Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Community and officer demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
CALEA certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Impact of St. Louis region police agencies on SLCPD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Chapter 3. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
Chapter 4. Recruitment and Hiring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Management and administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
SLCPD police officer hiring process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Chapter 5. Basic Recruit Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Management and administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Academy training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Field training program overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Field training instructor requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
Chapter 6. Promotions and Postpromotional Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
Criteria for promotions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
– iii –
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department
Chapter 7. In-service Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
Missouri POST Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Instructor requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Mandatory in-service training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
Chapter 8. Responses for Handling Protests and Mass Demonstrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
Snapshot of civil disturbance response teams and training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Overview of police response in Ferguson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Response to the grand jury announcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52
Chapter 9. Five-year Analysis of Vehicle Traffic Stops, 2010–2014. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Limitations on SLCPD traffic stop data and analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Analysis of vehicle stop data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63
Additional analysis: Comparison of precinct level stop data to county-wide stop data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Summary of conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71
Chapter 10. Five-year Analysis of Use of Force Incidents, 2009–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78
Management and administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83
Key conclusions and supporting data on analysis of use of force data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Chapter 11. Complaint Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Management and administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .102
– iv –
Contents
Chapter 12. Community Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106
Department culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107
Community engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .108
Problem solving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109
Communication strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110
Stakeholder feedback: Community attitudes toward police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110
Stakeholder feedback: Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114
Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .115
Chapter 13. Conclusion and Next Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Appendix A. Reference materials consulted by the Police Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126
Appendix B. Detailed review and analysis of traffic stops by precinct data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .127
Appendix C. Traffic stops chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135
Appendix D. Deadly use of force chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .136
Appendix E. Nondeadly use of force chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .137
Appendix F. Findings and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138
Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
About the Police Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
About the COPS Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
–v–
Letter from the Director
Dear colleagues,
In August of 2014, Chief John Belmar of the St. Louis County Police Department (SLCPD) requested participation in the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) Collaborative Reform Initiative
for Technical Assistance (CRT-TA) process.
CRI-TA is a nonadversarial, voluntary process that can assist law enforcement agencies in strengthening
and building mutual trust with the communities they serve. It helps agencies develop long-term strategies
for sustainable, positive change through community policing principles. It is a rigorous process that requires a comprehensive assessment of key operational areas within a police department to identify issues
that affect public trust, agency effectiveness, and officer safety. In collaboration with a designated technical
assistance provider, the COPS Office works with agencies to analyze policies, practices, training, and tactics
around specific issues.
This report summarizes the findings of the CRI-TA technical assistance team and their recommendations to
help improve their department’s policies and procedures in specific areas.
I applaud Chief Belmar’s courage in making the decision to pursue collaborative reform. Though the benefits are great, a critical examination such as this takes a lot of time and effort. It also takes a commitment to
being open and transparent, and in working with us hand in hand throughout this process, the SLCPD has
demonstrated their dedication to doing just that. Based upon a thorough assessment of their policies, the
COPS Office and SLCPD established goals in the areas of recruitment practices, leadership training, handling mass demonstrations, enforcement stops, use of force, and communication. Each of these goals aims
to eliminate racial bias in policing, promote public safety, and support positive community relations. It is
now incumbent on the leadership of the police department to embrace the findings and recommendations in this report and lead the department to make the changes necessary to advance the SLCPD and
serve as a national model.
In doing so, it is our hope that this report will serve not only as a roadmap of reform for the SLCPD but also
as a guide to the 61 police agencies in St. Louis County and a model for police departments facing similar
challenges across the country.
In closing, I would like to thank the SLCPD for their efforts in this program and acknowledge their commitment to reform. I also want to thank all of those who gave a great deal of time, effort, and thought to our
work in St. Louis County—especially members of the community who volunteered to assist in this process.
By working together, we can implement the best practices of community policing and set an example of
the collaboration, partnership, and communication that we hope to see going forward.
Sincerely,
Ronald L. Davis, Director
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services
– vii –
Acknowledgments
The authors of this report wish to thank Director Ronald L. Davis, Robert E. Chapman, Tawana Elliott,
Matthew C. Scheider, Deborah L. Spence, and Melissa Fox of the Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services (COPS Office), without whom this report would not have been possible.
We would also like to thank the following individuals for their continuous support and assistance: James
Bueermann, James Burch, Rebecca Benson, Daniel Woods, Michelle Boykins, Chief Jon Belmar, William
Howe, and Sergeant John Wall, along with all of the St. Louis County Police Department personnel and the
staff at the U.S. Department of Justice COPS Office who supported this work. Last, we would like to thank
those residents, faith leaders, community members, nonprofit partners, and business owners from St. Louis
County who participated in focus group meetings and conference calls with our team to help the Police
Foundation team learn about the unique characteristics of St. Louis County.
Members of the Police Foundation team conducting the CRI-TA assessment with the St. Louis County Police Department include the following:
t Blake Norton, Vice President/Chief Operating Officer, Police Foundation
t Edwin E. Hamilton, Research Manager, Police Foundation
t Rick Braziel, Retired Chief, Sacramento Police Department and Executive Fellow, Police Foundation
t Ronnell Higgins, Chief, Yale University Police Department and Executive Fellow, Police Foundation
t Daniel Linskey, Retired Superintendent-in-Chief, Boston Police Department
t Hassan Aden, Retired Chief, Greenville (North Carolina) Police Department; Executive Fellow, Police
Foundation; and Director of Research, International Association Chiefs of Police
t Jiles Ship, Past President, National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Officers (NOBLE)
– ix –
Executive Summary
The nation was jarred by events that occurred in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri; Staten Island, New York; Cleveland, Ohio; and in 2015 in Baltimore, Maryland. These events—which followed officer-involved incidents in
these American cities and around the nation—exposed deep divides between communities and their police departments. As the discord reached a fever pitch, law enforcement agencies nationwide began the
process of self-evaluation, reflecting on policies and practices and implementing innovative strategies to
better engender community policing principles, build trust, and allay fear.
The St. Louis County Police Department (SLCPD), with 8551 authorized sworn commissioned officer positions, is responsible for providing police services to an estimated population of approximately 407,000
county residents.2 The population served increases to approximately 1 million when accounting for the
fact that the department also provides contracted law enforcement services to 66 municipalities, 12
school districts, and five other organizations within the county.3 The department provides both full
service contracts—in which the SLCPD is the sole police agency for a municipality and provides all police
services—and dedicated patrol contracts that require the SLCPD to provide requested police services.4
Approximately 60 departments in the St. Louis region serve 90 municipalities. These 60 departments possess “widely differing resources, and they provide protection across significantly diverse geographic and
demographic communities.”5 This amalgam of departments also creates a web of overlapping jurisdictions,
policies, and practices. In addition, the SLCPD operates the St. Louis County and Municipal Police Academy
(CMPA), a regional police training facility that provides training to many law enforcement agencies in the
area. Finally, mutual aid agreements in the region allow Missouri officers to respond to emergencies outside of their jurisdictions. This interdependent yet fragmented approach to policing in the area creates
challenges for the SLCPD in building trusting relationships with the community. The relationship each
independent municipal police department has with its community directly affects the relationship the
SLCPD has with the community at large.
In its civil rights investigation of the Ferguson Police Department (FPD),6 the U.S. Department of Justice
found heavy police enforcement existed to generate revenue through fines and fees. This culture of heavy,
sometimes “aggressive,” enforcement has led to strained community relations because of abusive policing
1. St. Louis County Police Department Annual Report (St. Louis, MO: St. Louis County Police Department, 2014), 5, http://www.stlouisco.com/Portals/8/docs/
document%20library/police/reports/14Annual.pdf.
2. There are 1.3 million people in St. Louis City and County. St. Louis County has a little more than 1 million people. The SLCPD is the primary law enforcement
agency (including contracts) to approximately 407,000 county residents. That leaves the remaining county residents living in municipalities and receiving police services
from their respective municipal police departments. However, the SLCPD also provides specialty police services at municipal police departments (by their request).
3.
In addition to 66 municipalities and 12 school districts, the SLCPD provides contract law enforcement services to the Missouri Department of Housing and Urban
Development; St. Louis Metrolink; Missouri Department of Conservation; Regional Computer Crime Education and Enforcement Group; and Spirit of St. Louis Airport. St.
Louis County Police Department Annual Report, 31 –32 (see note 1).
4. The SLCPD has dedicated full service patrol contracts with 16 municipalities in addition to two municipalities that hold contracts for requested patrol. It provides
dispatch services for 47 municipalities (18 to which it provides patrol services and an additional 29). It also provides computer aided report entry (CARE) services for 59
(18 patrol and 41 other) municipalities. St. Louis County Police Department Annual Report, 31 –33 (see note 1).
5.
Police Report #3: Equipment, Dispatch, and Mutual Aid (St. Louis, MO: Better Together, April 2015), http://www.bettertogetherstl.com/wp-content/
uploads/2015/04/BT-Police-Report-3-Full-Report.pdf.
6.
Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department, (Washington, DC: Civil Rights Division, March 4, 2015), http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/pressreleases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf.
–1–
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department
and municipal court practices beyond just the FPD.7 The consequence for the SLCPD is a lack of trust
by the community that exacerbated tensions during demonstrations following the shooting death of
Michael Brown.
For this reason, Chief Jon Belmar of the SLCPD requested the assistance of the U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) in identifying ways that the SLCPD could
improve its relationship with the St. Louis community. The COPS Office and the SLCPD established the following goals to assess and reform the policies, practices, and related processes in the SLCPD, taking into
account national standards, best practices, current and emerging research, and community expectations:
t Improve the recruitment, selection, and hiring processes to address minority underrepresentation in
the department (chapter 4).
t Enhance basic academy and supervisor in-service training with a specific focus on fair and impartial
policing, community engagement, and partnership development (chapters 5–7).
t Strengthen the policies, practices, training, and response for handling protests and mass demonstrations, including de-escalation training (chapter 8).
t Improve the process quality for traffic stops and searches to prohibit racial profiling (chapter 9).
t Reduce use of force and injuries to both officers and citizens (chapters 10–11).
t Develop a comprehensive communication strategy for SLCPD personnel and community partners
that will serve to increase transparency about SLCPD police practices (chapter 12).
This report is organized into chapters by goal (listed above); each analysis chapter ends with findings and
recommendations made during the assessment of the SLCPD.
Methodology
The Police Foundation (PF) Collaborative Reform Initiative for Technical Assistance (CRI-TA) assessment
team used a number of qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze policies, procedures, and practices
in the SLCPD.
Our assessment approach involved four modes of inquiry: (1) document review, (2) interviews and focus
groups, (3) direct observation, and (4) data analysis.
t The team reviewed departmental policies, manuals, training lesson plans, and strategic plans.
t Throughout the assessment process, we conducted semistructured interviews, focus groups, and
meetings with SLCPD command staff and officers and with community members. In total, we interviewed more than 200 individuals for this assessment.
t We directly observed SLCPD operations throughout the assessment, including preparations for
the St. Louis County grand jury decision in the case of the shooting death of Michael Brown and the
civil disturbances after the announcement. In addition, we conducted ride-alongs with officers and
observed recruit and in-service training sessions at the regional police academy.
7.
Ibid.
–2–
Executive Summary
t We collected, coded, and analyzed data from the SLCPD, including the use of force database and investigative reports, officer involved shooting (OIS) data and narrative reports, citizen complaint database and investigative reports, and traffic stop information.
Our team of subject matter experts used their knowledge and experience, findings from our data analysis,
reviews of policies and procedures, interviews, and observations of SLCPD practices to address gaps and
weaknesses identified. We relied primarily on national standards, evidence-based practices, and research to
inform our findings and recommendations.
Key findings and recommendations
The PF assessment team found the SLCPD to be a competent, professional police department, well trained
and disciplined in the technical skills necessary to perform police operations. While particularly proficient
in the area of tactical operations, the department lacks the training, leadership, and culture necessary to
truly engender community policing and to build and sustain trusting relationships with the community.
The assessment team made 50 findings and 109 recommendations for adjustment to SLCPD policy and
procedures to improve operations and relationships between the department and the community it
serves. Below are some of the key findings and recommendations. Please note that this is an abbreviated
list and that each finding and recommendation has been truncated in an effort to highlight key points.
Goal: Improve the recruitment, selection, and hiring processes to address
minority underrepresentation in the department.
Finding: The SLCPD does not represent the diversity of the population it serves. Compared to the
population of St. Louis County, Blacks are significantly underrepresented in the commissioned ranks of police officer and police sergeant, and while the SLCPD has made efforts to increase minority representation
in the command ranks the department remains moderately under representative of the community in the
ranks of lieutenant and captain.
Women are also underrepresented in all ranks of the department. Currently, of the 13 SLCPD captains, only
one is female. In addition, the department has only three female, in comparison to 26 male, lieutenants.
The assessment team also noted the lack of inclusion of female leadership in all executive-level meetings
between the assessment team and the SLCPD. (4.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should develop a strategic plan for officer recruitment, focused on race and gender
diversity, to include attention to recruiting, promotion, and retention of minorities and women. They should
conduct a scan of organizations that have successfully overcome recruiting barriers and develop a plan
with goals, objectives, and outcome measures. This plan should be articulated to the rank-and-file officers
and reviewed annually to respond to any changing demographics in the metropolitan area. (4.1.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should create a community recruiter program that identifies and trains community leaders to serve as SLCPD recruiters. (4.1.2)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should track and publicly report, at least annually, demographic information of
current employees, employees who have left the organization, and applicants who have applied to the department. (4.1.3)
–3–
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department
Recommendation: The SLCPD should consider creating a diversity council representing gender, ethnic, racial,
LGBT, and linguistic minorities to serve as advisors and champions for the chief and SLCPD command staff to
support recruitment efforts focused on youth, newcomer populations, and gender diversity. (4.1.4)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should create a youth advisory council representing youth from schools throughout the county who will serve as advisors to the chief and command staff on ways to engage the community’s
youth and on potential barriers to recruiting St. Louis youth into policing. (4.1.5)
Goal: Enhance basic academy and supervisor in-service training with a
specific focus on fair and impartial policing, community engagement, and
partnership development.
Finding: The St. Louis CMPA provides insufficient training hours devoted to community engagement, diversity, and community policing elements during SLCPD basic recruit training. Of the
916 hours of basic recruit training, only 14 hours are devoted to these topics. (5.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should include fair and impartial policing, community engagement, and partnership development in basic academy curriculum. The foundation of recruit training should be
modified to include courses on policing history and professionalism, community policing, and community
engagement strategies. (5.1.1)
Finding: The CMPA does not sufficiently use experts in the area of cultural diversity. Most CMPA
trainers do not have the expertise necessary to teach officers about cultural diversity, youth issues, and
newcomer populations; nor does the SLCPD regularly engage youth or diverse populations as part of the
standard recruit training program (or in-service or postpromotional training). (5.2)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should invite university instructors and members of community-based organizations and other subject matter experts in cultural diversity, youth issues, and newcomer populations to serve
as guest lecturers. Instructors who are identified as subject matter experts on cultural diversity should have a
curriculum vitae (CV) that reflects the necessary expertise. (5.2.1)
Finding: Based on interviews with instructional staff, instructors at the CMPA are not subject matter experts in areas such as fair and impartial policing, community engagement, and partnership
development. The majority of academy instructors are assigned full time and are experts in their assigned
areas. However, impartial policing, community engagement, and partnership development are key principles that should be woven into nearly every course of instruction. All instructors should be knowledgeable
in these principles and their application. (5.4)
Recommendation: All instructors authorized to teach at the St. Louis CMPA should complete train-the-trainer or
similar courses in the areas of fair and impartial policing, community engagement, and partnership development.
(5.4.1)
Recommendation: St. Louis CMPA curricula should be modified to create themes relating to police legitimacy,
procedural justice, fair and impartial policing, community policing, and building community trust that can be
woven into all academy classes. All instructors should, where appropriate, attempt to weave these themes
through all instructional material. Appropriate evaluation instruments beyond written exams should be
used to measure application of the instruction. (5.4.2)
–4–
Executive Summary
Finding: SLCPD personnel with TAC/SWAT8 experience are selected for promotion at significantly higher rates than those without. (6.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should review informal and formal reward systems to recognize and promote
an increased emphasis on community engagement, problem-solving experience, and trust building with the
community. Successes in these areas should be given prominent consideration for assignments and promotion.
(6.1.2)
Finding: The SLCPD does not require sufficient mandated in-service training that addresses
community engagement or community policing. The in-service training program currently provides
the state-required racial profiling information, legal updates, and programs that address current issues such
as use (and misuse) of social media. If an officer is interested in any community policing training, they must
take a related course provided by the CMPA through continuing education, or seek an outside provider.
(7.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should modify its in-service training to adequately address community policing,
problem-oriented policing, and the historical impact on police-community relations. (7.1.1)
Goal: Strengthen the policies, practices, training, and response for
handling protests and mass demonstrations.
Finding. While SLCPD officers understand NIMS terms and most concepts, they lack
organization-wide understanding, experience, and proper application of NIMS. The SLCPD has
not fully implemented key concepts of NIMS command and management, including ICS, multiagency coordination systems, and public information. Department General Order (GO) 11-49 identifies the purpose,
policy, and procedure for implementation of ICS and also includes training requirements as prescribed in
NIMS, yet many employees do not understand NIMS.9 (8.1)
Recommendation: While requirements mandate law enforcement training in NIMS10 and ICS,11 the SLCPD should
require that supervisors and incident commanders with actual experience be available to respond to requests for
assistance during incidents of civil disorder. (8.1.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should require that ICS, including standardized ICS forms, be used during planned
special events such as parades, presidential visits, large-scale gatherings, and sporting events. This will provide
opportunities to implement and practice protocols so that they are better deployed during response to
events that develop rapidly. In addition, by policy, training, and practice, NIMS should be a day-to-day operational norm for the SLCPD. For example, search warrants should use command and management including an ICS structure and, when appropriate, multiagency coordination and public information. (8.1.2)
8. The SLCPD uses the term “TAC” to identify what most agencies call “SWAT.”This report uses “TAC/SWAT” in place of “TAC” for the reader’s ease of understanding.
9.
Office of the Chief of Police, Departmental General Order 11-49 (St. Louis, MO: St. Louis County Police Department, 2011).
10. “The National Incident Management System (NIMS) is a systematic, proactive approach to guide departments and agencies at all levels of government,
nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector to work together seamlessly and manage incidents involving all threats and hazards—regardless of cause,
size, location, or complexity—in order to reduce loss of life, property and harm to the environment.” “National Incident Management System,” Federal Emergency
Management Agency, last modified May 6, 2015, https://www.fema.gov/national-incident-management-system.
11. The Incident Command System (ICS) is a standardized management tool for meeting the demands of small or large emergency or nonemergency situations.
It represents best practices and has become the standard for emergency management across the country. ICS may be used for planned events, natural disasters, and
acts of terrorism and is a key feature of the National Incident Management System (NIMS). Incident Command System Training (Washington, DC: Federal Emergency
Management Agency, May 2008), http://training.fema.gov/emiweb/is/icsresource/assets/reviewmaterials.pdf.
–5–
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department
Recommendation: The SLCPD incident commander should be required to ensure that a comprehensive incident
action plan (IAP) is completed as described in NIMS and that any officer who responds to a mutual aid request is
well informed of the IAP, including rules of engagement and disengagement and use of force policies. Senior staff
should verify dissemination and understanding of this information by those on the front lines. (8.1.3)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should develop a policy that details the deployment of civil disturbance
response teams (CDRT). The policy should address the other recommendations and concerns noted in
this section. (8.1.4)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should continue to regularly train and exercise with all potential mutual aid responders.
(8.1.5)
Recommendation: Department GO 11-49 should be revised to include appropriate recommendations identified
in this report. (8.1.6)
Finding: In August of 2014, the SLCPD had difficulty anticipating the extent of concern from
communities it does not usually police and therefore did not properly plan for potential resulting protests. By not identifying the potential for large-scale violent protests, officers reacted to problems
instead of taking a proactive approach to preventing them. While this improved following the incidents in
August, additional attention is required. (8.2)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should include community leaders in the response planning process and inform
and educate the public about potential police response plans. (8.2.1)
Recommendation: As authorized by law, the SLCPD should use social media monitoring programs along with community source(s) development to encourage and enhance real-time actionable intelligence on issues emerging in
the community. (8.2.2)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should use social media to engage the community and protesters before, during,
and after events to disseminate accurate information and correct erroneous information. (8.2.3)
Finding: The SLCPD does not have policies that ensure that they always exhaust other deescalation options before using tactical responses to disorder and protests. (8.5)
Recommendation: SLCPD policy should require that officers familiar with the area and the community deploy
before tactical teams. As they did in November 2014, the SLCPD should continue to assign officers who are
skilled at community engagement to the front lines as situations develop. This recommendation in conjunction with the tiered approach in finding 8.4 reduces the overreliance on a tactical response by SLCPD.
(8.5.1)
Finding: The SLCPD lacks documented comprehensive training in the psychology of crowds and
de-escalation. (8.8)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should provide training based on best practices for crowd management issues, including the psychology of crowds, to improve frontline supervisors’ and officers’ decision making. Trainers from outside the department should be considered to assist with delivery of a diverse curriculum. (8.8.1)
–6–
Executive Summary
Recommendation: The SLCPD should provide training that stresses the safe withdrawal of officers from the scene
as soon as the situation allows it as a means to decrease tensions during protests. (8.8.2)
Goal: Improve the process quality for vehicle stops, searches, and arrests
to prohibit racial profiling.
Finding: While consistent with Missouri data collection law, the traffic stop analysis procedures
employed by the SLCPD are inconsistent across the agency and lack the sophistication necessary for appropriate analysis of stop data. This results in a missed opportunity to fully understand if bias-based profiling is occurring. The SLCPD has established a threshold requiring the review
of an officer’s stop activity if 20 percent or more of the officer’s stops during a three-month period are
stops of minority drivers. The assessment team’s review of the SLCPD’s efforts described in GO 07-81 revealed a process that lacks appropriate documentation, is inconsistent among divisions, and lacks a review
process that demonstrates an understanding of analysis methods necessary for a comprehensive review of
traffic stop data. (9.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should conduct a comprehensive and rigorous study of traffic stop practices. (9.1.1)
Finding: The SLCPD does not collect and analyze information on pedestrian stops made by officers. (9.2)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should collect pedestrian stop data for additional analysis of its stop practices.
The SLCPD should also collect data on pedestrian stops to more thoroughly address the potential issue
of racially biased policing. Information from pedestrian stops should include, at a minimum, the race or
ethnicity and gender of the individual(s) stopped, reason for the stop, whether a search was conducted
and contraband found,12 whether an arrest occurred and reason for the arrest, and the location of the
stop. (9.2.1)
Finding: The SLCPD’s General Order (GO) 07-81, which establishes policies and procedures for
citizen contacts and traffic stop information, is outdated. The policy needs to be modified to reflect
current law enforcement practices that provide guidance for avoiding biased policing. The GO has not been
revised since 2007 and lacks sufficient guidance for officers on relevant issues of biased policing. (9.4)
Recommendation: SLCPD executive staff should review and modify the existing GO 07-81. The revised policy
should emphasize the specific purpose of the policy to include commitment to treating all citizens in a fair
and equitable manner. Definitions of biased policing and racial profiling should be provided in the policy
as well as procedures to be followed when initiating enforcement action (stopping, detaining, searching,
etc.) to avoid the perception of bias.
The purpose of the policy should state unequivocally that during any encounter with citizens, the officer is
responsible for treating the citizen in a fair, equitable, and objective manner, in accordance with the law
and without consideration of the citizen’s race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, or any other identifiable group.
12.
Contraband refers to items (e.g., drugs, weapons) illegally transported as defined by federal, state, or local laws.
–7–
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department
The modified policy should include a concise definition of what constitutes biased policing and how it relates to officers’ performance of enforcement duties as well as the delivery of police services. Separate definitions for probable cause and reasonable suspicion should also be more clearly defined in the policy. (9.4.1)
Recommendation: As the SLCPD revises GO 07-81, the SLCPD should ensure that the revised GO is followed by
training that mirrors the guidance for officer behavior during encounters, including but not limited to being
courteous and professional, providing a reason for the stop, providing the citizen his or her badge number when
requested, and offering an explanation if the officer determines that the reasonable suspicion for the stop was
unfounded (e.g., investigatory stop). Research on racially biased policing has consistently found13 that
minority citizens are more likely to suspect that police stops are racially motivated if officers treated them
discourteously or did not inform them of the reason for the stop. Focusing on direct and respectful communication between the officer and citizen during encounters will strengthen perceptions of county residents
that SLCPD officers exhibit a high degree of professionalism and accountability in conducting duties. (9.4.2)
Finding: The SLCPD currently does not include analyses of stop data in the annual reports provided for the public. (9.6)
Recommendation: Once improvements have been made to policy and practice governing data collection,
benchmarking, and analysis, the SLCPD should include vehicle and pedestrian stop data and analysis with appropriate benchmarking for interpretation in published annual reports. Care should be taken to ensure that
data cannot be misconstrued but are presented in their true and honest form. Providing this information in
an easily accessible location (in the annual report, on the department’s website, etc.) will increase transparency, accountability, and dialogue with the public. (9.6.1)
Goal: Reduce use of force and injuries to both officers and citizens.
Finding: The SLCPD does not thoroughly investigate the use of deadly force in all situations. In
particular, GO 10-29 does not require the Bureau of Crimes Against Persons to investigate the discharge of
a firearm by an officer if both (a) it causes no injury and (b) the officer is not the victim of a first-degree assault. (10.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should revise GO 10-29 to require the Bureau of Crimes Against Persons to investigate all uses of deadly force by an officer against another person irrespective of injury. (10.1.1)
Finding: The SLCPD has not yet made full use of the IAPro software that was first implemented
in 2012. (10.2)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should provide officers assigned to the BPS with Blue Team system training on the
proper way to document incidents in a more comprehensive and accurate report format. (10.2.1)
Finding: The SLCPD may be unintentionally limiting complaints by not publicizing the acceptance
of anonymous complaints and the locations where complaints may be made. The SLCPD accepts
and investigates all complaints, including those made anonymously. However, the presence of a signature
line on the Citizen Complaint Statement (F-332) may intimidate some citizens and discourage them from
making a complaint. (11.1)
13. Jacinta M. Gau, “Consent Search Requests as a Threat to Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy: An Analysis of Consent Requests During Traffic Stops,” Criminal
Justice Policy Review 24, no. 6 (November 2013), 759–777, http://cjp.sagepub.com/content/24/6/759.full.pdf.
–8–
Executive Summary
Recommendation: The SLCPD should review all printed material and its website to reinforce the openness of the
complaint process including a listing of all locations where a complaint is accepted and the ability of a citizen to
make an anonymous complaint.14 (11.1.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should remove the signature line on the Citizen Complaint Statement
(F-332). A signature, although not required, appears to be necessary to complete the form. The mere presence
of the signature line appears to conflict with the openness of accepting anonymous complaints. (11.1.2)
Finding: The SLCPD currently uses a traditional punitive form of punishment in response to a
sustained complaint. For serious allegations, this comes in the form of reprimands, suspensions, demotions, and termination. This usually results in an adversarial relationship between the employee and department, which may leave employees bitter and not address the cause of the misconduct. (11.2)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should consider moving to an education-based discipline (EBD) process.15 Many
agencies including the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, the Sacramento (California) Police Department, and the Lakewood (Colorado) Police Department have successfully implemented EBD and seen
reductions in citizen-generated complaints. (11.2.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should establish a St. Louis County Police-Community Mediation Program. The
program uses a trained independent party to mediate citizen complaints against police employees. The
mediation allows both the employee and the citizen to discuss their issues in a safe and impartial environment. The employee and community member are able to collaborate with each other rather than treat
each other as adversaries and to have their complaints dealt with in an efficient manner. The goal is to
build more understanding and better relations between the community and the SLCPD. (11.2.2)
Finding: During the review of Bureau of Professional Standards (BPS) files, the assessment team
discovered a pattern of light discipline in investigations involving ethical failings and untruthfulness. (11.4)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should establish a disciplinary matrix for officer misconduct to increase consistency.
Particular attention should be placed on allegations of ethical failings and dishonesty. (11.4.1)
Goal: Develop a comprehensive communication strategy for SLCPD
personnel and community partners that will increase transparency about
SLCPD police practices.
Finding: The SLCPD often places more value on technical and tactical proficiency than on investments in community policing such as community engagement and problem solving. (12.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should seek out and identify ways to embed the philosophies of community policing, procedural justice, and equity into the culture of the organization. (12.1.1)
14. President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing (Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services, 2015), http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/TaskForce_FinalReport.pdf.
15. Depending on the severity and type of the offense, an employee is offered alternatives to punitive discipline that may range from a research paper, courses in
subjects such as ethics, additional training, or any creative option the department believes will correct the underlying problem. The original proposed discipline remains
on the officer’s record as per department policy.
–9–
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
An Assessment of the St. Louis County Police Department
Recommendation: SLCPD command leadership and union representatives should identify ways to incentivize
and reward officer performance in community engagement, problem solving, and trust building beyond the
standard crime reduction metrics. (12.1.2)
Finding: The SLCPD does not have an explicit policy or documented philosophy to serve as a set
of guiding principles for community policing. The department makes reference to neighborhood policing in public and departmental policies and procedures and has this as one of the key pillars for officer
evaluation. (12.2)
Recommendation: SLCPD leadership should conduct a scan of community policing and stakeholder engagement best practices in preparation for defining their community policing strategies. (12.2.1)
Recommendation: SLCPD leadership should conduct outreach to other jurisdictions that have successfully integrated
problem solving, prevention, and intervention strategies as part of their overall response to crime and disorder. (12.2.2)
Recommendation: After the environmental scan, SLCPD leadership, line level officers, and community stakeholders should engage in a strategic planning process to develop a formal community policing strategy, policy, and
blueprint for implementation across the SLCPD. (12.2.3)
Recommendation: Using this blueprint, the SLCPD should develop a realistic timeline and strategic plan to implement the community policing strategy. This timeline should incorporate community oriented policing
throughout the department and enable every officer on patrol and in other units with public contact to
provide community policing services. (12.2.4)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should ensure that community policing includes respectful engagement and joint
problem solving with members of the community through neighborhood- and block-level partnerships involving
adults and youth in the community, through citizen advisory councils, or through expansion of the current neighborhood crime watch program. (12.2.5)
Finding: There is evidence that there are youth in the St. Louis community who fear and distrust
the police. The PF assessment team spoke with young people who said they often do not understand police actions and believe that the police do not understand them. The SLCPD has work to do to ensure that
the youth of the St. Louis community are regularly and meaningfully engaged. (12.5)
– 10 –
Executive Summary
Recommendation: The SLCPD should create and maintain a series of police-youth dialogues. This will
allow youth and police officers to potentially curb conflict and increase trust and cooperation in neighborhoods most affected by violence and crime. Bringing together youth and police of racially and ethnically
diverse groups to build dialogue guided by professional facilitators could help to break down stereotypes
and communication barriers to build mutual respect and understanding. (12.5.1)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should create a board of young adult police commissioners made up of
juniors and seniors from several city high schools. This commission would be a group of young people who
work with the SLCPD chief to bridge the gap between young adults and SLCPD officers. (12.5.2)
Recommendation: The St. Louis CMPA should consider having youth participate in the community engagement
training for academy recruits. This would entail having a panel discussion with youth focused on youth culture and perceptions of police. (12.5.3)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should consider partnering with county schools, faith- and community-based
organizations, and other community stakeholders to create youth programs (such as Junior Police Academies)
free of charge for children ages seven to 14 years. (12.5.4)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should work with the courts, schools, and other social service entities to
create a diversion program for youth offenders. (12.5.5)
Finding: Community trust in the SLCPD is negatively impacted by the enforcement practices
of several municipal police departments within St. Louis County. The reduced level of trust by
those subjected to heavy enforcement practices affects the SLCPD’s ability to develop relations with the
community. (12.6)
Recommendation: The SLCPD should take a leadership role in the development of fair and impartial
policing practices countywide. This could be accomplished in many ways including education, training, advising, and taking a public stand against agencies that have a perceived or proven unethical culture
of abusing the community. (12.6.1)
Finding: The overall structure of the SLCPD website is difficult to navigate as a user and does not
convey clear messages to users. (12.7)
Recommendation: The website should have a significant redesign to maximize its utility as a public resource.
(12.7.1)
– 11 –