Body-Worn Camera Training & Technical Assistance Regional Meeting: Omaha, NE October 5-6, 2017

Welcome & Introductions Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University Charlotte Evans, Chief, University of Nebraska-Omaha Dr. Gaylene Armstrong, Professor & Chair University of Nebraska-Omaha John Markovic, Senior Policy Advisor, Bureau of Justice Assistance

Director Tom Casady, City of Lincoln, NE Opening Keynote Director Tom Casady, City of Lincoln, NE

BWC will not stop global warming Technology is never flawless

Policy is Key When to record How long to retain video Whether officers can view video How supervisors can use video Whether to tell subjects Public input is crucial

Soft Costs are Important Storage Extraction Redaction Officer Time Integration Maintenance Replacement

Identify the full cost of ownership Manage expectations Avoid the bleeding edge Learn from the experience of others Anticipate unanticipated consequences

John Markovic, Senior Policy Advisor, Bureau of Justice Assistance Chief’s Panel John Markovic, Senior Policy Advisor, Bureau of Justice Assistance

Quick Recap of the BWC-Program Competitive grant solicitation program initiated in FY2015 Body Worn Camera – Policy and Implementation Program (BWC-PIP) – Purposeful title Repeated in FY2016 and 2017 Training and Technical Assistance Provision

Quick Visual Recap of the BWC-Program All Awards to Date Body-Worn Camera Grant Applications 630 Submitted, 263 Awarded

Quick Visual Recap of the BWC-Program All Awards to Date Estimated Body-Worn Cameras 104,895 Requested, 52,394 Awarded

Quick Visual Recap of the BWC-Program All Awards to Date

Voices From the Field Roundtable Discussion with Police Leaders Director Geoffrey Smith, Director of Public Safety, Sturgis, MI Michael Kearns, Manager of Technology, Syracuse University Doug Slagle, Deputy Chief, Marion, IA Police Department

1. Describe your agency and your role within the agency. 2. What policies and practices are in place with respect to the public release of video? 3. How does your agency approach training? 4. What is the biggest challenge your agency has faced so far with respect to implementing its BWC program? 5. What are the unique challenges that an agency your size has in implementing a BWC program?

BREAK

Panel session on Mass Demonstrations and BWCs Charlotte Evans, Chief, University of Nebraska-Omaha Tom Casady, Director of Public Safety, City of Lincoln, NE Brenda Buren, Assistant Chief, Tempe, AZ Police Department Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University

Lunch

Improving Outcomes with BWCs: Training to reduce violence, improve civility, and enhance civic engagement Natalie Todak, Assistant Professor, University of Alabama at Birmingham Rich Meyer, Sergeant, Spokane, WA Police Department

Peer Nominations Please write the first and last names of three of your colleagues other than yourself, who you consider the most highly skilled at de-escalating difficult, potentially violent citizen encounters. Spokane (WA) Police Department 89 nomination forms; 242 individual votes

Top De-Escalators

Research Questions What are highly skilled officers’ perceptions of de- escalation? How do these officers define de-escalation and its tactics?

Methods In-depth interviews with 8 nominated officers Definition; tactics; training; challenges; anecdotes Focus group with body camera review

Man with Weapon/Suicide by Cop Focus Group Videos Suicidal Person Suspicious Person Man with Weapon/Suicide by Cop DV Offender on Roof Suicidal Juvenile Man with Axe

Definitions of De-Escalation Brining a crisis situation to a calm state Outcome goal: Gain cooperation or compliance Process goal: Use least amount of force possible “Taking a subject who is…maybe angry, volatile, intense, and bringing them to a resolution where they get to have a say in it…to where they actually become in control. And really, they come back to the frontal part of their brain…so instead of that ‘fight or flight’ behavior, they come back to the logical part of their brain.”

Preventative De-Escalation “At any minute we know, we all know, that can go bad. And it’s the difference between wrestling with them when the ambulance pulls around the corner and not---it’s preventing that…setting the groundwork for when he does [become escalated]…” “…Setting the scene for when the ambulance shows up and then he starts potentially spiking like I ain’t #%@&ing going to the hospital!” Arrests Involuntary hospital admissions Removal of children from home

De-Escalation Tactics Humanity Listening Compromise Empower Honesty “For me, if you can kinda talk to them like you’d be talking to a normal person, to try and take away the law enforcement portion of it it seems to work. So many of these people, they’re very standoffish to police anyway. They don’t like the authority telling them what to do. So if you take that element out and just talk to them, sometimes that includes humor or a little empathy, I don’t know, it seems to work for me…It’s just talking to them as a person.”

De-Escalation Tactics Humanity Listening Compromise Empower Honesty “I think mainly for me it’s gaining control…and in order to do that I’m going to have to find what, what’s that one thing that they need…What do they need in order to become compliant?” (Prince) “Ask them questions that elicit an explanation or a reasoning why they’re doing it, because you might get to the root problem of something that’s not even why you’re called there, and then you can really bring resolution to the problem.”

De-Escalation Tactics Humanity Listening Compromise Empower Honesty “There was a little bit of wiggle room in the felony assault, because it wasn’t a domestic violence assault…But he had a couple domestic violence arrest warrants so we had to arrest him and book him. So we made a compromise with him that he would only be booked on his warrants…I thought that was a good balance because justice was still being served but, you know, we weren’t just summarily imposing our will on somebody.

De-Escalation Tactics Humanity Listening Compromise Empower Honesty “If you get them to buy in at least a little bit of ownership into it, you know it may not be where they wanted to go to begin with…you’re helping them buy into it at least a little bit. Some facet of it. Some part of it. So they’re kind of grasping on to the idea not that you’re convincing them to just do it, but you’re also making it beneficial to them on some level or making them see the benefit in it.”

De-Escalation Tactics Humanity Listening Compromise Empower Honesty “If I explain that…pictures are pictures. They don’t have an opinion. They don’t make things look worse or look better. They simply are what they are. You know, how big was the person who was taken to jail? Are they bigger than you? Yeah…it’s my husband and he’s way bigger than me. Could he kick the living shit out of you? Yeah he could. Did he? No he just hit me…Let’s show that to a judge.”

Challenging Scenarios Imminent threats Dynamic Situations Intoxicated Mentally Ill Committed “ I think the public forgets that people still have free will. That they’re still able to do what they wanna do. And we have a little bit of ability to try and manage that free will and get them to do what we want them to do, but at the end of the day, I don’t care how much talking, how much de-escalation training, negotiation training. If someone is committed to doing something, you know, they’re gonna do it because they still have that free will…I think the public feels that we can control every outcome, which we can’t.”

Training Communication training is better today but no comprehensive programs Most learned on the street Some officers do it better Rural/small departments do it better “One thing about working for a smaller department is, there were lots of times when I would work a shift and I would be the only officer on. We relied on the county for backup, but they can be 30 minutes away, they can be unavailable, and so I think at least speaking with people in a way to avoid physical confrontations became a habit…I think that most officers that are killed in the line of duty, I mean you see them, they’re on traffic stops all by themselves.”

Traits of Skilled De-Escalators “When I’m dealing with a person either in crisis or a criminal issue, I try to put myself in their shoes…and say if this were me, or if this was somebody that was close to me, would I want them to be getting a fair deal?” Demonstrated communication skills Empathetic Level headed in emergencies “I think that I’m fairly calm on calls, especially patrol calls, different situations where it may be dangerous or…quickly evolving and I’ve luckily been able to keep a calm demeanor and think through, whether it’s tactics or talking to people.”

Takeaways Veteran officers have accumulated career experiences with de-escalation Some officers are better than others What to do? Tap the resource of veteran and highly skilled officers for training development “Successful de-escalation” debrief sessions with body-worn camera video review (roll call)

BWC Training Workshop James Henning, Commander, Denver, CO Police Department Brenda Buren, Assistant Chief, Tempe, AZ Police Department Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University Dr. Michael White, Professor, Arizona State University & BWC TTA Co-Director

Denver Police Department Body Worn Cameras 1400 Cameras and Counting James Henning, Commander, Denver, CO Police Department

DPD Current Status All Uniformed Patrol Officers Equipped: Approximately 950 Systems Completed equipping all officers to wear BWCs while working off duty/Secondary Employment: Approx. 450 systems Provided Home Docks to all officers Invoicing employers 50 cents per hour to help offset costs SO: If you are cop in Denver wearing a uniform, you are probably wearing a camera.

Speaking of Training: What Works THE RIGHT TRAINER: Expert in the device, repairs, policy, and current issues Officers with strong credibility with peers Patience and a thick skin Be sure to include: Hands on practice with equipment Examples of Benefits to Officers (denied complaints) Discussion and Stories to illustrate policy and procedures Expect these issues: It takes time to learn how to teach a tough topic Rumors and Conspiracy theories Grumbling and Pushback

20/20 Hindsight is Best: Consistent Messaging is Critical Our Staged Roll Out resulted in: Evolving/ Different training across units Different Cultural Shifts across units The Officer ‘X’ Rule: The rumor mill is creating ‘urban legends’ resulting in inconsistent application of BWCs Downstream users offering inconsistent corrections Detectives giving good and bad advice to a few people

The New Trend: Video Overload Officer CYA: You can’t get in trouble for too much video Document everything to avoid complaints Turn it on too early/ turn it off too late Downstream Issues: Detectives have to review ALL Footage Looking for evidence, case documentation, and most importantly: stupid statements by officers. District Attorney’s face the same dilemma Storage issues

Commander James Henning James.henning@denvergov.org 720-913-6181 Questions? Commander James Henning James.henning@denvergov.org 720-913-6181

Training: Digital Evidence & Body-Worn Cameras Brenda Buren, Assistant Chief, Tempe, AZ Police Department

Education & Training Overview Phase I: Conceptual Phase II: Policy Phase III: Implementation Phase IV: Operational Phase V: Specialty Functions Phase VI: Ongoing

Phase I: Conceptual Education & Training Provided by Committee Members Organizational Approach Role of Digital Evidence/BWC Committee Research Partner Purpose of Digital Evidence System & BWC Significant improvement in system efficiency and effectiveness Promote greater transparency and accountability Document evidence Assist in resolving complaints Enhance training Benefits & Drawbacks of BWCs

Phase II: Policy Education & Training Provided by Committee Members Sharing Policy Development Process Leadership Communication Written Policy Training Video Training

Phase III: Implementation Training Provided by Technical Services Bureau IPhone Functionality Camera Functionality & Care Digital Evidence System Categorizing Video Reviewing & Accessing Video Preparation for Court Extensive Case Management Component - Investigations Report Writing

Phase IV: Operational Field Scenario Training Provided by Training Bureau Routine Policy Review Range Scenarios Multiple handgun drills/distances MILO/Simulator Scenarios Defensive Tactics Scenarios Vehicle Various Scenarios Responding to High Priority Calls

Phase V: Specialty Functions Training Provided by Committee & Technical Services Investigations Updated Policy Review Squad Level User Training Support Staff Communications Records Redaction City Court Fire Department

Phase VI: Ongoing Training Provided by Varied Sources Regular Committee Communications & Policy Updates Leadership Messaging Research Process Resulted in additional layer of training internally Enhanced Community Education on BWCs Annual Training Incident Based Training Academy & Field Training Focus

Brenda Buren Brenda_Buren@tempe.gov 480-350-8991

Body-Worn Camera Training Guide Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University Dr. Michael White, Professor, Arizona State University & BWC TTA Co-Director

Purpose These slides are intended as a resource for law enforcement agencies seeking to develop or modify their body-worn camera (BWC) training program. All materials are intended to be adapted to an agency’s local operations, consistent with local and state laws. Please reference the BWC Facilitator’s Guide as an additional resource. The Facilitator’s Guide provides important information about each of the training modules described in these slides. 11/8/2018

Table of Contents Module 1: Introduction and Background to BWCs in Policing Module 2: BWC Device Specifications and Operations Module 3: BWC Policy and Practice Module 4: Agency Accountability Additional Resources and Readings Sample Review Test Questions 11/8/2018

Module 1: Introduction and Background on BWCs Learning Objectives Understanding camera use prior to police BWCs Understanding the history of BWCs Common goals for deploying BWCs What is your goal? Common concerns about police BWCs Understanding the research on BWCs Terms to know 11/8/2018

Module 2: BWC Device Specifications and Operations Learning Objectives Identify key operating functions of the hardware Identify key functionality of software Demonstrate how to activate & deactivate the BWC Demonstrate how to dock BWC/transfer files Demonstrate how to charge the BWC 11/8/2018

Identify and review the following: Authorized users Module 3: BWC Policy and Practice (should be modified based on agency policy) Learning Objectives Identify and review the following: Authorized users Pre-/post-shift inspection Officer responsibilities Investigator responsibilities When to activate BWC When to deactivate BWC Discretionary activation/deactivation When BWC use is restricted or prohibited Officer review of BWC footage When citizens are to be notified about BWC activation Data transfer, download, and report writing Data storage and retention Release of captured video 11/8/2018

Module 4: Agency Accountability Learning Objectives Supervisor access to BWC data Use of BWC data for policy compliance and performance evaluations BWC data for critical incidents Supervisor responsibilities 11/8/2018

Resources BJA National Body-Worn Camera Toolkit Model Policies: IACP, ACLU National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Market Survey https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250381.pd f BJA Training and Technical Assistance (TTA) (http://www.bwctta.com/) 11/8/2018

Sample Review Test Questions 11/8/2018

BREAK

Panel Session on Implementation Issues Doug Slagle, Deputy Chief, Marion, IA Police Department Geoffrey Smith, Director of Public Safety, Sturgis, MI James Pauly, Lieutenant, Omaha, NE Police Department Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University

Sturgis Police Department Geoffrey Smith, Director of Public Safety, Sturgis, MI

What you do has far greater impact than what you say. –Stephen Covey

History In-car system since the early 90’s Test and evaluation of numerous BWC’s from 2011- 2014 First BWC’s purchased and implemented in 2015 Awarded supplementation grant for additional BWC’s in 2016 In-car system changing to the same company as BWC’s this fiscal year

Implementation of BWC’s Community Involvement- Service Clubs etc. City Commission briefings Staff input during selection and rollout Policy developed with multiple chiefs/lawyers/litigation attorneys prior to a National Model Policy tweaked following initial drafts Use of BWC’s during trainings, i.e. firearms, defensive tactics, active shooter

Negatives- Overall Differences in types and features of various BWC’s Equipment malfunctions during first few versions Cost (?) FOIA concerns/time Redaction

Positives Equipment upgrades more reliable, less issues Reduction in unsubstantiated citizen complaints made against department Reduction in overall citizen complaints Enhanced evidence due to more direct video/audio of complaints captured Redaction software is decent Quarterly audits help identify/locate conduct for future training or immediate considerations Staff like the BWC’s and find them valuable in their everyday tasks

Panel Session on Implementation Issues Doug Slagle, Deputy Chief, Marion, IA Police Department Geoffrey Smith, Director of Public Safety, Sturgis, MI James Pauly, Lieutenant, Omaha, NE Police Department Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University

Day 1 Wrap-Up Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University Dr. Michael White, Professor, Arizona State University & BWC TTA Co-Director

Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University Overview of Day 2 Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University

Dr. Justin Nix, Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska-Omaha Opening Keynote Dr. Justin Nix, Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska-Omaha

Perceptions of an Officer-Involved Shooting Captured on BWC: Findings from a Randomized Experiment Dr. Justin Nix, Assistant Professor, School of Criminology & Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska-Omaha

What We Know Agencies are increasingly adopting BWCs Conventional wisdom holds that BWCs increase transparency, and by extension, police legitimacy 1,2 Citizens’ attitudes toward police predict their interpretation of BWC footage 3 e.g., less likely to view the same use of force video as justified post- Ferguson 4 Police officers believe unfavorable media coverage affects citizens’ attitudes and behaviors “Hostile media perceptions” are associated with belief in police legitimacy crisis and fear of false accusations 5 1 White (2014); 2 Sousa et al. (2015); 3 Jones et al. (2107); 4 Culhane et al. (2017); 5Nix & Pickett (2017)

What We Need to Know More About How willing are police executives to be transparent following an officer-involved shooting captured on BWC? Does willingness to be transparent vary by the race of the suspect? Does willingness to be transparent vary by whether the suspect was armed or unarmed? Is willingness to be transparent complicated by beliefs about how the media will portray the incident?

Our Study Survey of command-level police officers attending a yearly continuing education course in the southeast In October 2016, we invited all 258 officers present to take the survey 227 surveys returned (88% response rate) Average age = 49 Average experience = 24 years 46% held at least a four-year college degree 98% male, 96% white Officers read a vignette about one of their officers fatally shooting a home invasion suspect Pilot tested the vignette in order to make it as realistic as possible Present sample reported the vignette was fairly realistic (avg = 85.5)

The Vignette While on patrol, your officers are dispatched to a home invasion in progress in a residential area. The caller describes the suspect as a white/black male. One of your officers arrives on-scene first and makes initial contact with a white/black male who fits this description in front of the house. The suspect has his hands in his pockets and does not comply with your officer’s commands to show his hands. The suspect then quickly removes his hands from his pocket holding an object. Your officer draws his weapon and fires at the suspect, killing him on the scene. Afterward, the officer finds that the object was a handgun/cellphone. The officer’s BWC captures full audio and video of the incident.

Results- Transparency

Results-Transparency

Results-Transparency

Results-Transparency

Results-Transparency

Results-Transparency

Results-Perceived Media Coverage

Results-Perceived Media Coverage

Results-Perceived Media Coverage

Results-Perceived Media Coverage

Some Conclusions Key Limitations: Small sample size Cross-sectional Officers from one state Hypothetical scenario Need to continue exploring factors associate with willingness to be transparent with BWC footage Questions/feedback welcome!

Contact Information Justin Nix Assistant Professor School of Criminology & Criminal Justice | 218 CPACS University of Nebraska at Omaha | unomaha.edu jnix@unomaha.edu

References White, M. D. (2014). Police Officer Body-Worn Cameras: Assessing the Evidence. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Sousa, W. H., Miethe, T. D., & Sakiyama, M. (2015). Body worn cameras on police: Results from a national survey of public attitudes. Research in Brief. UNLV Center for Crime and Justice Policy. Jones, K. A., Crozier, W. E., & Strange, D. (2017). Believing is seeing: Biased viewing of body-worn camera footage. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.007. Culhane, S. E., Boman IV, J. H., & Schweitzer, K. (2016). Public perceptions of the justifiability of police shootings: The role of body cameras in a pre- and post-Ferguson experiment. Police Quarterly, 19, 251-274. Nix, J. & Pickett, J. T. (2017). Third-person perceptions, hostile media effects, and policing: Developing a theoretical framework for assessing the Ferguson effect. (2017). Journal of Criminal Justice, 51, 24-33.

BWCs: Issues and Answers Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University Dr. Michael White, Professor, Arizona State University & BWC TTA Co-Director

Overview Backdrop for the BWC discussion Claims by advocates and critics Current study Results Breadth of diffusion Goals of BWC program Challenges to implementation Policy development Lessons learned and conclusions

The Backdrop

The Federal Push for BWCs December 2014 -President’s Task Force announced -$75 million pledged for 50,000 BWCs May 2015 – US DOJ releases the National Body-Worn Camera Toolkit President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing Final Report September 2015 – 73 agencies awarded funding through US DOJ BWC Program ($19.3 million) September 2016 – 106 agencies awarded funding through US DOJ BWC Program ($16.9 million)

Claims by Advocates and Critics

Possible BWC Benefits are Enormous Potential Benefits Possible BWC Benefits are Enormous Increased Transparency Enhanced Legitimacy and Public Satisfaction Improved Police Officer Behavior Improved Citizen Behavior Reduced Citizen Complaints and Police Use of Force Expedited Resolution of Complaints and Lawsuits Improved Evidence for Arrest and Prosecution Opportunities for Police Training (violence reduction)

Concerns and Consequences Possible Costs/Consequences are Enormous Citizens’ Privacy Officers’ Privacy Officers’ Safety Impact on Citizen Attitudes (Satisfaction/ Legitimacy) Training and Policy Requirements Impact on Officer Productivity/Morale State and Federal Law (Public Records, HIPAA) Logistical/Resource/Cost Requirements

What Does the Research Tell Us? Early research very positive Reductions in citizen complaints and use of force Rialto, Mesa, Phoenix, Orlando Enhanced court outcomes UK, Phoenix Officer support is high Orlando, Tempe, Spokane Citizen support is high general population; “consumers of police services” (Anaheim, Spokane, Tempe) Recent studies are mixed. Why?? Local context Agency-level variation

Agency Size Matters Agency size influences other law enforcement practices Use of force, technology, resources, community policing Does agency size make a difference for BWC planning and implementation?? Seems reasonable to assume Not much attention to Agency size No model BWC policy takes into account agency size IACP PERF ACLU Toolkit

Small Agencies are a Big Deal! Source: Reaves, 2015

Small Agencies are a Big Deal! FY2015 PIP Sites FY2016 PIP Sites

Current Study

Research Design & Methods Online survey (Qualtrics) Administered in 2016 Center for Public Safety Management (CPSM) assistance for survey distribution Key areas of interest Assess BWC interest Challenges encountered during various phases Planning, implementation, post-implementation Policy development

Sampling and Survey Distribution # of states 26 # of agencies All with 8,000 or fewer population Response rate N=210 N=149 interested/planning/already implemented a BWC program

Results

Categories of Results Breadth of Diffusion Goals of a BWC Program Technology issues Funding constraints Public records requests and redaction Challenges to Implementation Don't reinvent the wheel Working with the union Supervisory review Broadening the program goals Policy Development Lessons Learned

Breadth of Diffusion

Breadth of Diffusion Nearly half (48%) had a fully implemented BWC program 13% partially deployed 24% in planning phase 13% interested in BWCs but have not started planning 1% had BWCs but discontinued the program One-third deployed cameras all at once 16% used Randomized Controlled Trial design

Goals of the BWC Program

Goals of a BWC Program Nearly all indicated transparency/accountability Officer oversight (68%) Officer training (67%) Evidentiary value (48%)

Goals of a BWC Program Nearly all indicated transparency/accountability Officer oversight (68%) Officer training (67%) Evidentiary value (48%) In today's climate…I believe police need to utilize BWC technology. People seemed to believe police officers were telling the truth many years ago when I started in law enforcement. Today, it seems like very few people believe the police, and having BWC footage that shows what the officer was dealing with, at the time, from their perspective, is far too valuable to not use. Necessity in modern policing

Goals of a BWC Program Nearly all indicated transparency/accountability Officer oversight (68%) Officer training (67%) Evidentiary value (48%) We have also been able to use the video to better train our officers. For example, we review videos with officers to show an interaction and how the officer was perceived, and how the officer could improve their verbal skills. Training tools for “teachable moments”

Challenges to Implementation

Challenges to Implementation The most common challenge was technology issues Data storage and security (97%) Limited choices (27%) Since we do not have an existing BWC program, attempting to determine how much data storage will be necessary is nearly impossible. Estimates indicate 1-2TB, per officer, per year. That is a wide range to try to plan on; for our department, that is 37-74TB per year. This does not include major events, redaction methodology effects on data storage, and retention schedules. Choosing a storage solution

Challenges to Implementation Funding constraints were a big concern (24%) Long-term costs for retention and redaction (84%) [One challenge to BWCs is the] financial competition for other needs I as chief see as a priority. Crime rate is low, public trust is acceptable, and there isn't a critical need. However, the politicians would like to see the BWC program implemented.   We were very fortunate to have members of a neighborhood watch group that collected the funds necessary to fully deploy body worn cameras for all our sworn officers. Competing budgetary needs Creative funding solutions

Challenges to Implementation Public records requests and redaction not significant concern (12%). We are still in the process of implementing a program however, I believe the biggest hurdle is determining the manpower necessary to handle public information and court requests for video. Large agencies have full time staff that handles this, small agencies may be limited in their ability to fund such a position.   Could be a problem later

Policy Development

Policy Development Don’t reinvent the wheel Half consulted with nearby agencies Fewer consulted with Prosecutors (42%) and privacy groups (10%) [One recommendation is to] share information between agencies, locally, regionally and nationally. We all do the same job with similar equipment. Don't re-create the wheel. Seek out information and lessons learned from other agencies. We share with any agency that asks, as we were helped by other agencies to get to the decision we made. Be collaborative

Policy Development Work with the union(s) Include line officers in policy development (61%) Involve the union(s) (38%) Smaller agencies are somewhat more “tight knit” than larger ones. Working closely with line officers and supervisors as a part of a union was challenging in specific wording of certain areas of policy. Include all levels of the agency

Policy Development Supervisory review can be contentious Half of agencies perform audits or reviews (52%) The biggest challenge was officer/union buy-in. We developed a policy that showed our officers that we did not plan to use the BWC as a fishing tool to look for problems, but would only view the video in instances that were questionable. We also recognize officers more who go above and beyond during random reviews, or if records checks a videos. No “fishing expeditions” Positive feedback

Broadening Program Goals May need to emphasize multiple goals There is a reluctance on the part of command staff in the department to implement any sort of camera program, be they BWCs or more traditional dash cams. They are concerned that the court system will use the video to second guess every decision made by officers and are concerned that this could lead to negative consequences for the department and its officers. Great for evidence collection related to subject/suspect observed behaviors. Our council, community, and city manager support our officers – therefore they don't like any perception that cameras are being used to hold officers more accountable. Internal buy-in External buy-in

Lessons Learned and Conclusions

Lessons Learned Collaborative team approach Include relevant internal/external stakeholders early and often Project implementation must be coordinated by staff capable of managing complex issues related to procurement, labor relations, legal issues, etc. Also, designate a subject matter expert who can be point related to the technology – hardware and software, to include working with the vendor directly. Having support resources designated who can manage the video data and be responsible for disclosure and discovery requests [is important]. Take a team approach in implementation. Do community outreach. Get buy-in from strategic partners…[and] keep stakeholders apprised of progress.

Lessons Learned Cost and quality Important to balance cost and need Don't get the cheapest camera. You get what you pay for.   Vendor selection is critical. They must be able to work with you to work out hardware, software and storage issues. The [associated] costs…can be overwhelming. Look to see if there are BWC programs that are compatible with media management systems that you already own such as In-Car Camera systems. We were able to save a great deal of money by using cameras that were sold by the same vendor who provided ICC system and all the footage was compatible with our media management system.

Conclusions Many of the benefits and challenges are similar for large and small agencies The good and bad can present themselves differently PD may have to convince others they need BWCs Drops in force or complaints may be too small to justify the significant capital investment And the solutions to those challenges may be very different

Thanks! Michael D. White, Ph.D. Charles M. Katz, Ph.D. Professor, School of Criminology & Criminal Justice Associate Director, Center for Violence Prevention & Community Safety mdwhite1@asu.edu Charles M. Katz, Ph.D. Director, Center for Violence Prevention & Community Safety chuck.katz@asu.edu Special thanks to Dr. Janne Gaub and Kathleen Padilla for their assistance.

BREAK

BWC Research 101 Dr. Michael White, Professor, Arizona State University & BWC TTA Co-Director Brenda Buren, Assistant Chief, Tempe, AZ Police Department

Overview Research 101 Examples of Results Dr. Brenda Buren What is an experiment? Why randomize? What are your outcomes? Examples of Results Officer Perceptions Citizen Perceptions Big Ticket items: force, complaints, officer injuries Dr. Brenda Buren Practitioner Perspective on Engaging with Researchers

What is an Experiment? Experiments are a natural way of learning The basic idea of an experiment is the same no matter what you are investigating: Collect evidence to assess whether an “intervention” produced change in the outcome of interest Did body-worn cameras (treatment) cause a reduction in citizen complaints (outcome of interest)?

The Two Key Issues Did the Intervention work?? Work compared to what? Do you have a comparison group? What does it mean to “work”? What is the outcome? When are you measuring the outcome?

Cause and Effect: What are the Standards? Maryland Scientific Method Scale (SMS) (Sherman et al., 1997) Level 1 Correlation between intervention and an outcome (e.g., crime) at one point in time. Level 2 Measures of outcome before and after intervention, with no comparable control conditions Level 3 Measures of outcome before and after intervention in two conditions (1 that received intervention, 1 that did not) Level 4 Measures of outcome before and after intervention in treatment and comparison units, controlling for other variables Level 5 Random assignment of intervention to treatment and control conditions Inferring cause and effect is a complex and difficult process. Sherman and colleagues created a scale to evaluate the methodological quality of studies. Examples: Level 1: areas with CCTV have lower crime rates than areas without CCTV. Level 2: crime decreased after CCTV was installed. Level 3: crime decreased after CCTV was installed in an experimental area, but there was no decrease in crime in a comparable area. Level 4: victimization of premises under CCTV surveillance decreased compared to victimization of control premises, after controlling for features of premises that influenced their victimization. Level 5: victimization of premises randomly assigned to have CCTV surveillance decreased compared to victimization of control premises.

The Gold Standard Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)- the gold standard of scientific research (level 5 in SMS) Random assignment – can assume treatment and control groups equivalent …except for the intervention (BWCs) Thus we can assume that changes in the outcome of interest are due to the intervention

Randomized Controlled Trials – Gold Standard (Level 5) Random assignment to control and treatment groups Intervention to the treatment group No intervention to control group Comparison of outcomes between treatment and control groups, pre- and post-implementation Purpose of random assignment is to make the groups equivalent, so that the true effect of the intervention can be estimated.

Methodological Considerations Fidelity: Was the intended intervention actually delivered? Think about BWC activation compliance… Statistical power: Was the size of the treatment and control groups large enough to estimate statistical significance?

Ethical and Practical Considerations RCTs in the field – uncontrolled factors Cost and buy-in Withholding treatment (BWCs) from officers Contamination

The RCT Principles What can be randomized? Most commonly people, places, or shifts What can be a “intervention”? Just about anything: in our case, body-worn cameras What can be the outcome of interest (or dependent variable)? Examples: officer attitudes, use of force, citizen satisfaction, citizen complaints, officer injuries, etc.

Body-Worn Camera Research in Practice

The Current Study Funded by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation Turning Phased Rollouts into RCTs Spokane Phase I (May 2015): 82 officers Phase II (November 2015): 67 officers Tempe Phase I (November 2015): 101 officers Phase II (May 2016): 99 officers

Officer Perception Surveys (Spokane and Tempe)

Officer Perception Surveys: Methods Self-administered survey (Katz et al.’s PHX survey) Officer general perceptions Impact on citizen behavior Impact on officer behavior Ease of use, comfort, familiarity Evidentiary value Indicate your level of agreement with each item (Likert) Administered 5-6 times pre-post deployment Attended all patrol roll calls Response rates from 85-95%

Ease of Use (Spokane)

Citizen Behavior (Spokane)

Co-Worker Perceptions (Tempe)

Citizen Interviews (Tempe and Spokane)

Citizen Phone Surveys Process Spokane: 5 TX officers each week (random) Tempe: 5 TX and 5 Control officers each week (random) Receive contact info for all citizens who interacted with selected officers in the past week Small army of grad students work the phones Questions Satisfaction/procedural justice questions General perceptions of BWCs Awareness of BWC during the encounter (civilizing effect)

Citizen Perceptions of BWCs Spokane (249) Tempe (383)   % Agree/ Strongly Agree Video cameras should be worn by all officers in Spokane/Tempe PD. 85.9% 92.2% Using video cameras will make officers act more professionally. 76.6% 79.3% Citizens will be more cooperative when they become aware that an officer is wearing a video camera. 70.2% 76.2% Police will be more respectful to citizens when wearing video cameras. 78.9% 79.6% The benefits of police using video cameras outweigh the costs. 77.0% 82.5%

Citizen Perceptions of the Encounter Spokane (249) Tempe (280)   % Agree/ Strongly Agree Procedural Justice Components The police officer you spoke to treated you with respect. 81.9% 92.5% The police officer treated you fairly. 81.6% 90.4% The police officer was honest with you. 83.5% 87.1% The police officer listened carefully to what you had to say. 74.5% 87.5%

Use of Force, Complaints, Officer Injuries (Spokane)

Use of Force (Spokane)

Complaints against Officers (Spokane)

Officer Injuries (during citizen contacts)

Percent of Each Group with an Event Percent Change Force (Control) – 39% Complaints (Control) – 50% Complaints (TX) – 78%   Pre-RCT RCT Post-RCT 11/14 - 4/15 % (n) 5/15 - 10/15 11/15 - 4/16 Use of Force Control 28.4 (19) 26.9 (18) 16.4 (11) Treatment 24.4 (20) 25.6 (21) 28.0 (23) Complaints 10.4 (7) 9.0 (6) 4.5 (3) 11.0 (9) 2.4 (2) 6.1 (5)

Other Outcomes Interviews with external stakeholders prosecutors, defense, judiciary, school officials, city officials, victim’s advocates Activation compliance Activity levels Call activity; officer-initiated activity

Discussion: The Practitioner Perspective on Engaging with Researchers Dr. Brenda Buren Assistant Chief Tempe Police Department

Thanks! Dr. Michael D. White Dr. Brenda Buren Assistant Chief/Director Professor, School of Criminology & Criminal Justice Associate Director, Center for Violence Prevention & Community Safety Co-Director, Training and Technical Assistance, BJA BWC PIP mdwhite1@asu.edu Dr. Brenda Buren Assistant Chief/Director Tempe Police Department Brenda_buren@tempe.gov

Workshop Review Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University Dr. Michael White, Professor, Arizona State University & BWC TTA Co-Director

Meeting Wrap-Up and Evaluation Dr. Charles Katz, Professor, Arizona State University John Markovic, Senior Policy Advisor, Bureau of Justice Assistance

Thank you! BWC TTA Website: www.bwctta.com BJA BWC Toolkit: www.bja.gov/bwc John Markovic, Senior Policy Advisor, BJA john.markovic@ojp.usdoj.gov Denise Rodriguez, BWC TTA Project Manager rodriguezd@cna.org or bwctta@cna.org