The Comprehensive School Safety Initiative: Study of Police in Schools, California and Florida, 2011-2019 (ICPSR 37591)

Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)

Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection

Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes

Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose

This study assessed the effects of school resource officers (SROs) in schools using a longitudinal design. The research questions addressed in this study were: (1) What are the effects of SROs on school disciplinary offenses and disciplinary actions? and (2) Do the effects of SROs vary by student characteristics, SRO approach and dose, or community and school characteristics?

To answer those questions, the study examined the effects of an increase in SRO staffing on schools and students and the conditions under which those effects were most likely to occur. This study focused on public secondary schools in California that enhanced SRO staffing through the 2013 and 2014 Department of Justice's Community Policing Services (COPS) Hiring Program (CHP) (33 treatment schools) and on matched schools that neither received SROs funded by CHP grants nor increased SRO staffing at the same time as treatment schools (72 comparison schools). In longitudinal analyses of monthly school-level administrative data, the study compared the treatment and comparison schools on disciplinary offenses and actions. In addition, the study analyzed data from self-report surveys of school administrators and SROs at the sample schools, and from interviews with law enforcement officials at the agencies that placed the SROs.

Study Design View help for Study Design

The research team gathered and analyzed data on public middle and high schools in California that increased school resource officer (SRO) staffing levels at a specific time (treatment schools) and on a set of matched schools that did not increase SRO staffing levels at the same time as the treatment schools (comparison schools). The increases in SRO staffing levels at the treatment schools resulted from the award of Community Policing Services (COPS) Hiring Program (CHP) grants to local law enforcement agencies in 2013 or 2014 that were intended to support the placement of SROs in schools. California schools were selected because law enforcement agencies in that state received a large number of CHP grants, and the state had administrative data on schools that could support the analyses planned.

Florida schools were also planned to be included in the study. Data collection activities were initiated with Florida schools but were ultimately excluded for the following reason: Although the research team, following the research protocol, selected treatment schools that increased their SRO dosages and excluded any potential comparison schools that also increased their dosage at the same time as the treatment schools, the team later discovered that the Florida treatment and comparison schools were similar in their number of SRO hours per week after the intervention point. The research team observed no significant difference in SRO dose between treatment and comparison schools after the intervention point. Because the two sets of schools did not differ in SRO usage, any treatment vs. comparison differences on outcome measures could not be interpreted as due to the addition of SROs. The higher than anticipated level of SRO usage in the comparison schools is likely due to the widespread use of SROs in Florida schools generally - the research team was unable to locate comparison schools that were not already using SROs at high dosage levels.

The study used both administrative data and self-report data. For the selected treatment and comparison schools, the research team drew upon monthly school-level administrative data from California Department of Education on counts of disciplinary offenses and actions for the 2011-2012 to 2016-2017 school years. The administrative data was augmented with self-report data from the local law enforcement agencies (CHP grantees for treatment schools) responsible for SROs in the selected schools at the intervention point, and from school administrators and SROs at those schools.

Sample View help for Sample

Using administrative data from the Common Core of Data (CCD) and information gathered from Community Policing Services (COPS) Hiring Program (CHP) grantees in California, the research team applied the following criteria to identify the sample of treatment schools: (1) highest grade was greater than 6, (2) school resource officer (SRO) staffing level was at least 8 hours per week, and (3) SRO hours increased as result of the 2013 or 2014 CHP funding. Thirty-three schools met these criteria.

Researchers selected one or more comparison schools for each treatment school. To ensure the treatment and comparison schools were as equivalent as possible prior to an increase in SRO staffing level in the treatment schools, the research team used data from the CCD and the California Department of Education (CDE) to match schools on the following characteristics:

1. instructional level;
2. metropolitan status;
3. percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch;
4. percentage of white non-Hispanic, black non-Hispanic, and Hispanic students;
5. school enrollment;
6. rate of suspensions and expulsions for the year preceding the increase in SRO staffing levels; and
7. geographic proximity (e.g., same part of the state, if not the same school district).

Once the pool of matched comparison schools was selected, researchers confirmed with the schools and, as appropriate, local law enforcement agencies that each school neither received 2013 or 2014 CHP-funded SROs nor had an increase in SRO hours at the same time as its corresponding treatment school. Of the schools that matched the treatment schools, 72 schools met these criteria. Tests of statistical significance indicated no differences between conditions on the matching characteristics or on the pre-treatment trajectories of total disciplinary incidents or exclusionary discipline practices. Likewise, no statistically significant differences were found between treatment and comparison schools on administrator reports of security or prevention practices prior to the intervention. Geographic proximity was more difficult to achieve because the increase in SRO staffing level tended to occur in small school districts with few schools available for matching; 18.2 percent of the treatment schools had at least one matched comparison school in the same school district.

Time Method View help for Time Method

Universe View help for Universe

• California and Florida law enforcement agencies
• California middle and high schools
• California and Florida school administrators
• California and Florida school resource officers

Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation

Data Source View help for Data Source

Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)

Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection

Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables

Linking and School Resource Officer (SRO) Program Information Data Files: These files contain unique researcher-assigned identifiers that can be used to link the project data files across various levels (i.e., school level, district-level, agency-level). It also contains SRO program information obtained from telephone calls.

California Department of Education Administrative Data Files: These data encompass the 2011-2012 to 2016-2017 school years and include enrollment information as well as counts broken out by student characteristics (e.g., special education status, race).

SRO and School Administrator Web Survey Data Files: The SRO web survey includes data on the background and experience of the SRO, the time spent and activities engaged in at the school, collaboration and integration with the school, training and supervision, and policies and programs related to school safety (including SRO approach and disciplinary philosophy). The school administrator web survey includes data on the school administrator's background and work experience, safety-related practices and programs at the school, and information on the use of different types of school security personnel (e.g., number, hours, activities, training, and type of officers present in the school).

Law Enforcement Agency Interview Data Files: The interview data include a mix of open- and close-ended questions about the agency's SRO program including the program goals, activities, and costs as well as the SRO's role, responsibilities, level of effort, training, and supervision.

Moderator Data File: This school-level file contains a unique researcher-assigned school-level identification number and five dichotomized school-level variables about school, community, and SRO program characteristics. The study team created variables to examine possible moderating effects of school (whether high school vs. non-high school instructional levels) and community information (located in urban-suburban vs. town-rural areas) using the Department of Education's Common Core of Data (publicly-available). The study team also created variables to examine possible moderating effects of SRO program characteristics including having a full-time vs. part-time SRO and SRO high dose vs. low dose (based on information collected during the telephone calls with California law enforcement agencies). Finally, this data file also contains a variable measuring SRO approach (i.e., primarily law enforcement vs. other) using data collected through the SRO web survey and the law enforcement agency interviews.

School Administrator Interview Data File: For analysis and archiving purposes, the qualitative interview data were coded into a quantitative format indicating the presence or absence of a variety of themes such as, "implemented new policies", "experienced staffing changes", and "SRO staffing may increase vigilance". All archived variables are categorical and do not include information that could identify a specific individual, school, or district.

Response Rates View help for Response Rates

School Resource Officer and School Administrator Surveys: Between April 2016 and May 2017, Westat administered web surveys to 67 California school resource officers (SROs) and 105 California school administrators. Of those who received a web survey invitation, 46 California SROs (69 percent) and 84 California school administrators (80 percent) completed the survey. During this same time period, Westat administered web surveys to 38 Florida SROs and 37 Florida school administrators. Of those who received a web survey invitation, 32 Florida SROs (84 percent) and 22 Florida school administrators (59 percent) took the survey.

Law Enforcement Agency Interviews: Between January and April 2017, Westat conducted 16 California Community Policing Services (COPS) Hiring Program (CHP) grantee and 14 California non-CHP grantee law enforcement agency telephone interviews, for an overall response rate of 71 percent (30/42). Westat also conducted 5 Florida CHP grantee and 5 Florida non-CHP grantee law enforcement agency telephone interviews, for an overall response rate of 91 percent (10/11).

Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales

None.

Original Release Date View help for Original Release Date

2022-12-13

Version History View help for Version History

Weight View help for Weight

Not applicable.