MAPS FOR: Jurisdictions Collecting Data | Legislation | Litigation | Community Groups

Planning, Training, and Implementation

Funding the Project

Although data collection can be implemented with a minimal amount of funds (the San Jose Police Department successfully implemented their first data collection program for less than $10,000), funding the project is a significant part of implementing a data collection system. Depending on the needs of the individual jurisdiction, costs can include new technology, modification or updating of older, existing technology, training costs, data collection forms, reference cards for the officers, and data analysis. An important part of the funding process is recognizing that each jurisdiction is different and will require different systems, thus will incur different amounts and types of costs.

Funding can be found from a variety of local, state, and federal sources, and jurisdictions are advised to seek funding from a variety of sources. When data collection is based on federal, state, or local legislation or ordinances, the legislation sometimes provides for sources of funding for certain aspects of the data collection. This can take the form of outside grants or of carrot-and-stick incentives that encourage the individual jurisdictions to collect data. Funding can also come through the normal local or state budget process.

Local, regional, and national nonprofit organizations and foundations might also provide sources of funding. Jurisdictions can look for grants that are offered specifically for racial profiling or data collection efforts, or can talk with foundations to see if they might have grant money that can be awarded from a general pool. The U.S. Department of Justice also awards grant money for data collection programs, especially when they incorporate new uses of technology.

One major role that community groups can play is to help the police department find funding to develop and implement the data collection system. Since funding is often such a major issue in police departments, finding or providing funding can help the police department make the decision to begin collecting data.

ANALYSIS OF RACIAL DISPARITIES IN THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT'S STOP, QUESTION, AND FRISK PRACTICES

RAND Corporation

In 2006, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) stopped a half-million pedestrians for suspected criminal involvement. Raw statistics for these encounters suggest large racial disparities — 89 percent of the stops involved nonwhites. Do these statistics point to racial bias in police officers’ decisions to stop particular pedestrians? Do they indicate that officers are particularly intrusive when stopping nonwhites? The NYPD asked the RAND Center on Quality Policing (CQP) to help it understand this issue and identify recommendations for addressing potential problems. CQP researchers analyzed data on all street encounters between NYPD officers and pedestrians in 2006. They compared the racial distribution of stops to external benchmarks, attempts to construct what the racial distribution of the stopped pedestrians would have been if officers’ stop decisions had been racially unbiased. Then they compared each officer’s stopping patterns with an internal benchmark constructed from stops in similar circumstances made by other officers. Finally, they examined stop outcomes, assessing whether stopped white and nonwhite suspects have different rates of frisk, search, use of force, and arrest. They found small racial differences in these rates and make communication, recordkeeping, and training recommendations to the NYPD for improving police-pedestrian interactions.

ARIZONA: RACIAL PROFILING BY POLICE MUST BE STOPPED, PANEL SAYS

A civil-rights panel will recommend that Arizona police agencies take more steps to combat racial profiling after community leaders raised concerns. The recommendations could include better police training, mandatory data collection by police agencies to help detect patterns of racial profiling, and the creation of an independent citizen commission to investigate racial-profiling complaints.

MISSOURI: RACIAL PROFILING REPORT RELEASE

The Annual Racial Profiling Report of 2007 shows African Americans are more likely to get searched after being pulled over in Columbia. The state mandated the report in 2000 as a nationwide effort to provide transparency in police departments.

KANSAS: SENATE CONSIDERS RACIAL PROFILING BILL

In Topeka, Kansas a new bill could mean a difference in policing practices. The bill would make it illegal for law enforcement to use race as the sole factor in selecting which individuals are subject to routine investigatory activities. It would also create a task force on racial profiling. The bill would require law enforcement agencies to submit annual reports, and mandate two hours of racial profile training for officers. The Senate committee has yet to vote to advance the bill.

WEST VIRGINIA: RACIAL PROFILING STATE PROBLEM?

An ongoing study of whether racial profiling by police is a problem in West Virginia shows that black drivers across the state last year were 1 1/2 times more likely to be stopped than whites.Black drivers statewide were also twice as likely as white drivers to have their cars searched in those same traffic stops, the just-released report states.
The figures come from a statistical analysis of reports over a six-month period from nearly all law enforcement agencies in the state. The Statistical Analysis Center of the state Division of Criminal Justice Services is doing the study in response to a 2006 law. The study will continue this year, with a final report expected in 2009.

CALIFORNIA: HRC: POLICE 'PROFILING' DATA STILL NEEDED

The Human Relations Commission decided that Palo Alto police officers should continue collecting racial and gender data about individual traffic stops however only one, not two, reports per year should be generated. The change, which the commission suggested for a one-year trial period, should save the department about 200 hours a year.