Full Text of Boston Police Department Statement on ACLU Stop and Frisk Report
Editor's Note: The following statement from the Boston Police Department was sent to Open Media Boston by Sergeant Michael P. McCarthy, director of the BPD Office of Media Relations, in response to our request for comment on a 10/9/14 rally held by the new Boston Coalitition for Police Accountability and allied organizations following the release of the American Civil Liberties Union's report on BPD stop and frisk policies. We are running the statement in its entirety in the public interest.
“In 2010, the Boston Police Department initiated and commissioned a study to determine how Boston Police Officers are utilizing the Field Interrogation and Observation program in the City. From the beginning, the BPD invited and included the ACLU. The independent study, done by Dr. Anthony Braga and Dr. Jeff Fagan, (selected for this study by the ACLU) looked at all Field Interrogation and Observation (FIO) reports done by BPD officers from 2007 – 2010 (approximately 205,000 FIO’s). While the final report is not complete, the Department is committed to transparency, and therefore is releasing the researchers’ preliminary findings.
The preliminary findings of that independent study clearly show the efforts of the Boston Police Department are focused on the areas most responsible for violent crime and the individuals committing those crimes. While the study did identify racial disparities, it was unable to determine what caused them. A fact the ACLU was informed of. The BPD is committed to reducing whatever disparity exists regardless of why it exists and encourages the involvement of the community we serve. The Department believed the ACLU shared this philosophy, however, their actions over the past 24 hours have shocked and surprised the Department. When asked on 10/7/14 to participate in a joint announcement on 10/8/14 (the day that the ACLU released its report) to inform the public of the preliminary findings, the ACLU replied to the BPD that it was not prepared to announce any findings. This leads the BPD to question the motive of the ACLU given its active participation from the beginning.
When the final report is complete, the BPD will seek the advice of an outside consultant to advise on whether there are further steps the Department can take to ensure officers are appropriately conducting FIO’s. Until then it would be irresponsible and inflammatory to promulgate study findings out of context.”
The FIO program in Boston is not a traditional stop and frisk program. FIO’s are used to document not only when an individual is stopped and frisked, but also to document when an officer engages in a consensual encounter with an individual, and when an officer merely observes an individual, and needs to document that observation for intelligence purposes.
Preliminary findings show the Department is targeting gang members in high crime areas.
The study showed that the amount of crime in a neighborhood is the most powerful predictor of the number of FIO’s done in a neighborhood and that officers are repeatedly stopping or observing individuals with criminal records and/or gang membership (5% of the individuals FIO’ed account for more than 40% of the total FIO’s). Gang Membership and prior arrest history are very strong predictors of repeated FIO’s.
· The study did show some racial disparities that must be addressed.
o Specifically, the study showed that during the given time period, minority neighborhoods do experience higher levels of FIO activity, approximately 50 per month, when controlling for crime.
o It also showed that Black subjects are 8% more likely to be stopped repeatedly and 12% more likely to be frisked and searched when controlling for other factors like Criminal History and Gang Membership in Violent Crime areas.
· While there is still some work be to done to ensure we are closing the gap on these racial disparities, the numbers of overall FIO activity are encouraging, and indicates the Department is headed in the right direction.
o BPD has decreased the number of FIOs it completes by almost 42% since 2008 and has decreased arrests by 33%, with steady reductions in overall crime. These numbers demonstrate that officers are utilizing targeted enforcement to reduce crime.
Steps the Department has taken since 2010 to ensure a fair and effective FIO program
· Significant Changes to Department FIO Rule in 2011:
o Mandates Better Documentation: Adds an encounter to the list of documentable interactions, to ensure that those interactions that do not rise to a Terry Stop are properly documented.
o Mandates Better Supervision: Officers will submit the FIO to a detective supervisor for approval prior to the end of his/her tour of duty. Once the FIO is approved, the officer has 48 hours to enter the report into the database and forward the original to the BRIC.
o Limits the Retention of an FIO: An FIO will be retained in the electronic database for a period not to exceed five (5) years. If an individual does not appear in the database for five (5) years, all FIO Reports naming that individual as the subject will be deleted from the electronic database and any related paper copies will be destroyed.
· Improved Technology:
o We have had a new CAD / RMS system in the works for 3 years to better improve our systems and provide accurate reporting to share with the community
o In November 2014, the Boston Police Department will begin utilizing a electronic Records Management System that:
§ Allows for more specific documentation on the reasons for the stop
§ Allows for more immediate data entry into a database that will provide accurate statistics faster
§ Provides area for narrative to include factual basis
· Increased Training on FIO’s, Racial Profiling and Unconscious Bias:
o Currently utilize a step by step recruit training presentation to describe the requirements of updated FIO Rule. Instructors provide examples of situations that warrant FIOs for a legitimate intelligence purpose.
o Created a Carousel Video featuring Superintendent Paul Fitzgerald of the BRIC re: changes and expectations re: FIO’s
o Procedural Justice training for Sergeant In-Service Training and the past 4-5 Recruit Classes.
§ Provided key terms of Procedural Justice and their meanings including police legitimacy, unconscious bias, and community perceptions.
§ Provided examples of interactions common to officer responsibilities and identifying and overcoming possible biases
o In September 2013, 73 middle managers and command staff personnel attended a training on Procedural Justice given instructed by Dr. Tracey Meares, an expert in procedural justice.
· Diverse Upcoming Promotions: We are in the process of making 6 supervisors in short term, 50% of which will be minorities.
Next Steps to Continue Improving the FIO program
· Training: The academy is going to further distribute the existing trainings and continue providing the training Department-wide:
o Ensuring the Procedural Justice Training is given Department-wide
o In-person speaker series with individuals from different community organizations
o Full-day Community Interaction dates
o Re-circulate FIO carousel learning on proper use of FIOs
o Ensuring those officers who do the most FIO’s are more frequently receiving training on the constitutional standards for stops, and proper documentation.
· Report out statistics on stops once data is electronically reported
o Devote an analyst in our Bureau of Intelligence and Analysis to report out periodically statistics in context related to FIOs.
· Continue to train Supervisors on monitoring officers’ FIO activity
o Detective Supervisors to sign off on all FIOs
o Monitoring for details of stop and determining any unjust stops
o Holding officers accountable for their actions relative to stops and disciplining for unjust actions, if appropriate
· Officers handing out business cards after an interaction
o Already instituted name tags, and am in favor of personalizing interactions between police and citizens, as demonstrated during the Occupy Boston movement.
o We already have police officers who do this as a matter of course, and I will look to expand on enhancing the person-to person interaction.
· Body Cameras
o At this point there are a lot of issues with using them from a technology perspective. I need to see if they would work for Boston.
o I am not dismissing the idea, I just need to flesh out the details more to determine if the expense associated with cameras will help us in achieving our goals.
· Have an outside consultant review the final report, and give recommendations: This individual will advise on whether there are further steps the Department can take to ensure officers are appropriately stopping and searching people. The Department plans to contact the Police Executive Research Forum to discuss the findings and recommended next steps.
· Increase Community Involvement in the solutions: The Department will convene a community group to review the final report to directly provide me with ideas how to move the Department forward. Over the past month, the Department has held three separate meetings with the ACLU to receive feedback and engage the organization in the solutions. As a result of the meetings, the Department agrees that publishing FIO statistics going forward is necessary, and the Department is working toward personalizing interactions between officers and citizens. The Department will continue to engage the ACLU in these discussions moving forward, as well as other community leaders and partners.“In 2010, the Boston Police Department initiated and commissioned a study to determine how Boston Police Officers are utilizing the Field Interrogation and Observation program in the City. From the beginning, the BPD invited and included the ACLU. The independent study, done by Dr. Anthony Braga and Dr. Jeff Fagan, (selected for this study by the ACLU) looked at all Field Interrogation and Observation (FIO) reports done by BPD officers from 2007 – 2010 (approximately 205,000 FIO’s). While the final report is not complete, the Department is committed to transparency, and therefore is releasing the researchers’ preliminary findings.
The preliminary findings of that independent study clearly show the efforts of the Boston Police Department are focused on the areas most responsible for violent crime and the individuals committing those crimes. While the study did identify racial disparities, it was unable to determine what caused them. A fact the ACLU was informed of. The BPD is committed to reducing whatever disparity exists regardless of why it exists and encourages the involvement of the community we serve. The Department believed the ACLU shared this philosophy, however, their actions over the past 24 hours have shocked and surprised the Department. When asked on 10/7/14 to participate in a joint announcement on 10/8/14 (the day that the ACLU released its report) to inform the public of the preliminary findings, the ACLU replied to the BPD that it was not prepared to announce any findings. This leads the BPD to question the motive of the ACLU given its active participation from the beginning.
When the final report is complete, the BPD will seek the advice of an outside consultant to advise on whether there are further steps the Department can take to ensure officers are appropriately conducting FIO’s. Until then it would be irresponsible and inflammatory to promulgate study findings out of context.”
The FIO program in Boston is not a traditional stop and frisk program. FIO’s are used to document not only when an individual is stopped and frisked, but also to document when an officer engages in a consensual encounter with an individual, and when an officer merely observes an individual, and needs to document that observation for intelligence purposes.
Preliminary findings show the Department is targeting gang members in high crime areas.
The study showed that the amount of crime in a neighborhood is the most powerful predictor of the number of FIO’s done in a neighborhood and that officers are repeatedly stopping or observing individuals with criminal records and/or gang membership (5% of the individuals FIO’ed account for more than 40% of the total FIO’s). Gang Membership and prior arrest history are very strong predictors of repeated FIO’s.
· The study did show some racial disparities that must be addressed.
o Specifically, the study showed that during the given time period, minority neighborhoods do experience higher levels of FIO activity, approximately 50 per month, when controlling for crime.
o It also showed that Black subjects are 8% more likely to be stopped repeatedly and 12% more likely to be frisked and searched when controlling for other factors like Criminal History and Gang Membership in Violent Crime areas.
· While there is still some work be to done to ensure we are closing the gap on these racial disparities, the numbers of overall FIO activity are encouraging, and indicates the Department is headed in the right direction.
o BPD has decreased the number of FIOs it completes by almost 42% since 2008 and has decreased arrests by 33%, with steady reductions in overall crime. These numbers demonstrate that officers are utilizing targeted enforcement to reduce crime.
Steps the Department has taken since 2010 to ensure a fair and effective FIO program
· Significant Changes to Department FIO Rule in 2011:
o Mandates Better Documentation: Adds an encounter to the list of documentable interactions, to ensure that those interactions that do not rise to a Terry Stop are properly documented.
o Mandates Better Supervision: Officers will submit the FIO to a detective supervisor for approval prior to the end of his/her tour of duty. Once the FIO is approved, the officer has 48 hours to enter the report into the database and forward the original to the BRIC.
o Limits the Retention of an FIO: An FIO will be retained in the electronic database for a period not to exceed five (5) years. If an individual does not appear in the database for five (5) years, all FIO Reports naming that individual as the subject will be deleted from the electronic database and any related paper copies will be destroyed.
· Improved Technology:
o We have had a new CAD / RMS system in the works for 3 years to better improve our systems and provide accurate reporting to share with the community
o In November 2014, the Boston Police Department will begin utilizing a electronic Records Management System that:
§ Allows for more specific documentation on the reasons for the stop
§ Allows for more immediate data entry into a database that will provide accurate statistics faster
§ Provides area for narrative to include factual basis
· Increased Training on FIO’s, Racial Profiling and Unconscious Bias:
o Currently utilize a step by step recruit training presentation to describe the requirements of updated FIO Rule. Instructors provide examples of situations that warrant FIOs for a legitimate intelligence purpose.
o Created a Carousel Video featuring Superintendent Paul Fitzgerald of the BRIC re: changes and expectations re: FIO’s
o Procedural Justice training for Sergeant In-Service Training and the past 4-5 Recruit Classes.
§ Provided key terms of Procedural Justice and their meanings including police legitimacy, unconscious bias, and community perceptions.
§ Provided examples of interactions common to officer responsibilities and identifying and overcoming possible biases
o In September 2013, 73 middle managers and command staff personnel attended a training on Procedural Justice given instructed by Dr. Tracey Meares, an expert in procedural justice.
· Diverse Upcoming Promotions: We are in the process of making 6 supervisors in short term, 50% of which will be minorities.
Next Steps to Continue Improving the FIO program
· Training: The academy is going to further distribute the existing trainings and continue providing the training Department-wide:
o Ensuring the Procedural Justice Training is given Department-wide
o In-person speaker series with individuals from different community organizations
o Full-day Community Interaction dates
o Re-circulate FIO carousel learning on proper use of FIOs
o Ensuring those officers who do the most FIO’s are more frequently receiving training on the constitutional standards for stops, and proper documentation.
· Report out statistics on stops once data is electronically reported
o Devote an analyst in our Bureau of Intelligence and Analysis to report out periodically statistics in context related to FIOs.
· Continue to train Supervisors on monitoring officers’ FIO activity
o Detective Supervisors to sign off on all FIOs
o Monitoring for details of stop and determining any unjust stops
o Holding officers accountable for their actions relative to stops and disciplining for unjust actions, if appropriate
· Officers handing out business cards after an interaction
o Already instituted name tags, and am in favor of personalizing interactions between police and citizens, as demonstrated during the Occupy Boston movement.
o We already have police officers who do this as a matter of course, and I will look to expand on enhancing the person-to person interaction.
· Body Cameras
o At this point there are a lot of issues with using them from a technology perspective. I need to see if they would work for Boston.
o I am not dismissing the idea, I just need to flesh out the details more to determine if the expense associated with cameras will help us in achieving our goals.
· Have an outside consultant review the final report, and give recommendations: This individual will advise on whether there are further steps the Department can take to ensure officers are appropriately stopping and searching people. The Department plans to contact the Police Executive Research Forum to discuss the findings and recommended next steps.
· Increase Community Involvement in the solutions: The Department will convene a community group to review the final report to directly provide me with ideas how to move the Department forward. Over the past month, the Department has held three separate meetings with the ACLU to receive feedback and engage the organization in the solutions. As a result of the meetings, the Department agrees that publishing FIO statistics going forward is necessary, and the Department is working toward personalizing interactions between officers and citizens. The Department will continue to engage the ACLU in these discussions moving forward, as well as other community leaders and partners.
