Search results

In 2018 Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. (JSS) recieved funding from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to code and analyze detailed homicide data collected by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). The data in this study were compiled from the LAPD's digitized homicide casefiles, or Murder Books, stored at the Homicide Library. These digitized casefiles included relevant information from the chronological log of detective activity, crime scene log, first responder statements and officer reports, incident history from the CAD and 911 tapes, Los Angeles Fire Department medical service report, death/autopsy report, suspect arrest report, evidence reports, follow-up reports, investigator final report, search warrants, crime scene sketches, crime scene notes, scientific evidence analysis, witness statements and notes, suspect interview notes, and case status information. A total of 4,111 Murder Books detailing homicides from four of 21 LAPD area stations in South Los Angeles between 1990 to 2010 were digitally scanned and preserved for posterity. Through a grant from the National Institute of Justice, JSS researchers 'tagged' the data to facilitate sharing these Murder Books among detectives in the South Bureau. These 'tags' also serve to encode features and outcomes from the Murder Book case files.

The data archived from this project consist of the digital database of the tagged Murder Books. There are two files included in this project. The victim file contains information about both the incident (obtainable from unique incident numbers) and information about the victim (victim number associated with each incident). The suspect file contains information about the suspects associated with each incident and can be linked to the original incident through the incident number.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This research was an evaluation of the Los Angeles Police Department's (LAPD) Training Evaluation and Management System II (TEAMS II) Early Intervention System conducted by Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. TEAMS II was designed to identify officers at-risk for engaging in future problematic behavior. This system was mandated as part of the Consent Decree (Section II) that was formally entered into on June 15, 2001 between the U.S. Department of Justice and the LAPD. Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. research staff worked with the Information Technology Bureau to obtain and analyze TEAMS II data, conducted informal interviews with officers, sergeants, civilians, command staff, and technologists involved with TEAMS II, and worked with the TEAMS II contractors to examine and provide recommendations.

The data collection includes 3 Stata data files. The concentration analysis dataset (TEAMS-Concentration-Analysis-FINAL-v2.dta) with 143 variables for 15,710 cases, the regression-discontinuity dataset (TEAMS-Regression-Discontinuity-FINAL.dta) with 98 variables for 297,779 cases, and the time series dataset (TEAMS-Time-Series-FINAL.dta) with 43 variables for 192 cases. Demographic variables included as part of this data collection include officer age, gender, ethnicity, education level, and total number of officers employed by demographics.

This research sought to examine and evaluate geospatial predictive policing models across the United States. The purpose of this applied research is three-fold: (1) to link theory and appropriate data/measures to the practice of predictive policing; (2) to determine the accuracy of various predictive policing algorithms to include traditional hotspot analyses, regression-based analyses, and data-mining algorithms; and (3) to determine how algorithms perform in a predictive policing process.

Specifically, the research project sought to answer questions such as:

• What are the underlying criminological theories that guide the development of the algorithms and subsequent strategies?
• What data are needed in what capacity and when?
• What types of software and hardware are useful and necessary?
• How does predictive policing "work" in the field? What is the practical utility of it?
• How do we measure the impacts of predictive policing?

The project's primary phases included: (1) employing report card strategies to analyze, review and evaluate available data sources, software and analytic methods; (2) reviewing the literature on predictive tools and predictive strategies; and (3) evaluating how police agencies and researchers tested predictive algorithms and predictive policing processes.

This research sought to evaluate the implementation of body worn cameras (BWCs) in the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). Researchers employed three strategies to evaluate the impact of BWCs in the department: 1) two-wave officer surveys about BWCs, 2) two-wave Systematic Social Observations (SSOs) of citizen interactions from officer ride-alongs, and 3) a time series analysis of existing LAPD data of use of force and complaint data.

The officer surveys were conducted in the Mission and Newton divisions of the LAPD before and after BWCs were implemented. The survey instrument was designed to measure perceptions of BWCs across a variety of domains and took approximately 20 minutes to complete. Researchers attended roll calls for all shifts and units to request officer participation and administered the surveys on tablets using the Qualtrics software. The pre-deployment survey was administered in both divisions August and September 2015. The post-deployment surveys were conducted with a subset of officers who participated in the pre-deployment surveys during a two-week period in the summer of 2016, approximately nine months following the initial rollout of BWCs.

The SSO data was collected in the Mission and Newton divisions prior to and following BWC implementation. The pre-administration SSOs were conducted in August and September 2015 and the post-administration SSOs were conducted in June and August, 2016. Trained observers spent 725 hours riding with and collecting observational data on the encounters between officers and citizens using tablets to perform field coding using Qualtrics software. A total of 124 rides (71 from Wave I and 53 from Wave II) were completed between both Newton and Mission Divisions. These observations included 514 encounters and involved coding the interactions of 1,022 citizens, 555 of which were deemed to be citizens who had full contact, which was defined as a minute or more of face-time or at least three verbal exchanges.

Patrol officers (including special units) for ride-alongs were selected from a master list of officers scheduled to work each day and shift throughout the observation period. Up to five officers within each shift were randomly identified as potential participants for observation from this master list and observers would select the first available officer from this list. For each six-hour observation period, or approximately one-half of a shift, the research staff observed the interactions between the assigned officer, his or her partner, and any citizens he or she encountered. In Wave 2, SSOs were conducted with the same officers from Wave 1.

The time series data were obtained from the LAPD use of force and complaint databases for each of the 21 separate patrol divisions, a metropolitan patrol division, and four traffic divisions of the LAPD. These data cover the time period where BWC were implemented throughout the LAPD on a staggered basis by division from 2015 to 2018. The LAPD operates using four-week deployment periods (DPs), and there are approximately 13 deployment periods per year. These data span the period of the beginning of 2012 through the 2017 DP 12. These data were aggregated to counts by deployment period based on the date of the originating incident. The LAPD collects detailed information about each application of force by an officer within an encounter. For this reason, separate use of force counts are based on incidents, officers, and use of force applications. Similarly, the LAPD also collects information on each allegation for each officer within a complaint and public complaint counts are based on incidents, officers, and allegations.