Evidence-based policing

Before making investments in this strategy, city and county leaders should ensure this strategy addresses local needs.

The Urban Institute and Mathematica have developed indicator frameworks to help local leaders assess conditions related to upward mobility, identify barriers, and guide investments to address these challenges. These indicator frameworks can serve as a starting point for self-assessment, not as a comprehensive evaluation, and should be complemented by other forms of local knowledge.

The Urban Institute's Upward Mobility Framework identifies a set of key local conditions that shape communities’ ability to advance upward mobility and racial equity. Local leaders can use the Upward Mobility Framework to better understand the factors that improve upward mobility and prioritize areas of focus. Data reports for cities and counties can be created here.

Several indicators in the Upward Mobility Framework may be improved with investments in evidence-based policing. To measure these indicators and determine if investments in these interventions could help, examine the following:

• Safety from crime: Reported property crimes per 100,000 people and reported violent crimes per 100,000 people. These data are available from the Federal Bureau of Investigations’ Uniform Crime Reporting Program.

• Safety from trauma: Number of deaths due to injury per 100,000 people. These data are available from the National Center for Health Statistics’ Mortality File and the CDC’s WONDER database.

• Just policing: Number of juveniles arrested per 100,000. High rates of juvenile arrests provide a strong indicator of overall system involvement and over-policing. These data are available from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Crime Data Explorer.

Mathematica's Education-to-Workforce (E-W) Indicator Framework helps local leaders identify the data that matters most in helping students and young adults succeed. Local leaders can use the E-W framework to better understand education and workforce conditions in their communities and to identify strategies that can improve outcomes in these areas.

Several indicators in the E-W Framework may be improved with investments in this strategy. To measure these indicators and determine if investments in this strategy could help, examine the following:

• Exposure to neighborhood crime: Rate of violent felonies and property felonies by city or county (number of incidents per 100,000 residents).

• Neighborhood juvenile arrests: Rate of juvenile arrests by city or county (number of arrests per 100,000 residents).

• Defined data-sharing agreements and procedures: Establish communications and data-sharing channels between a wide range of stakeholders in government, law enforcement, and communities. These may include various law enforcement and criminal justice agencies, elected officials and legislators, social services, community groups, and independent evaluators such as universities. In addition, designate formal spaces and regular opportunities to share and discuss data, identify successes and challenges, and set priorities.

• Effective officer training and change management: Evidence-based policing often involves a significant shift from many traditional policing policies, especially concerning resident interactions and assessing risk, which may require a period of adaptation for officers. For effective change management, it is critical from the start to communicate goals and how to measure them, and to acknowledge concerns as a project is implemented. Champions must be found who can explain and advocate for new policies, including more officer accountability, to ensure they are fully understood and carried out with fidelity.

• Communicate effectively: A precinct or district commander must not only set priorities, motivate officers, and inspire confidence, but also communicate effectively. Integrating a daily briefing into routine procedures allows for the discussion of recent cases, mapping out responses, and assessing which tactics are producing positive outcomes. Equally important, these can be an opportunity to discuss both police and community areas of concern.

• Predict problems: It is critical to develop processes to identify officers who exhibit problematic behavior patterns or are deemed to be in the top tier of risk. This can be accomplished by collecting data and evaluating complaints and misconduct incidents such as the use of force and other factors. This can function as a data-driven early warning system that also includes a complementary suite of intervention and employee support services for officers.

• Risk of gun violence: Firearms are the leading cause of death for children and teens, and disproportionately affect Black youth and other people of color. Using data on reported arrests, victimizations, and similar information about a person’s peers can help police and community-based social service organizations assess people at high risk of gun violence and pair them with intensive social services and support.

• Relative crime harm: Understanding and evaluating the relative harm associated with criminal activity produces a more nuanced measure of public safety than simply counting the number of crimes and can be used to enhance evidence-based policing strategies. This should include measuring the severity of crimes (e.g., homicide compared to shoplifting) and the type of harm—physical, emotional, financial, or public safety—experienced by individuals, institutions, communities, and wider society.

• Drug possession and overdose: Moving away from traditional criminal sanctions for drug possession, new pre-arrest diversion programs seek to provide supportive services rather than incarceration for individuals struggling with substance use disorder. These have been shown to reduce the likelihood of re-arrest and overdose. Successful programs require data from law enforcement and first responders to identify community members in need, including those who have survived an overdose and/or had contacts with behavioral health agencies.

• Complaints about officers: Complaints arising about officers and results of behavioral tests can be used to predict—and prevent—both on-duty and off-duty police misconduct, and thereby reduce harmful impacts on residents. One study shows that officers in the top 2% of the predicted risk distribution are six times more likely to engage in serious misconduct than the average officer.

• Reactions to high-stress events: Officers who respond to high-stress calls must often make life-or-death decisions, which can result in excessive use of force, unnecessary arrests, violence, and more. Data on how officers react in such complex situations and make decisions can inform training practices, challenge assumptions about police activity, improve accountability, and eventually increase public safety.