Criminal Justice

Public Integrity, 20: 370–385, 2018 Copyright © American Society for Public Administration ISSN: 1099-9922 print/1558-0989 online DOI: 10.1080/10999922.2017.1416880

Improving Community Relations: How Police Strategies to Improve Accountability for Social

Equity Affect Citizen Perceptions

Sean McCandless

University of Colorado—Denver

Social equity research increasingly focuses on how accountability for social equity is achieved, or how public administrators improve the access, outcomes, processes, and quality of public services. This is particularly important to examine in police departments, which are more frequently using strategies such as community policing programs (CPPs), social equity performance measurement (SEPM), and ethics training to yield better community relations. This article explores how these strategies affect citizen perceptions through testing three propositions related to CPPs, SEPM, and ethics training. Findings are reported from interviews with 72 citizens, local-level elected leaders, and police officers from 12 purposively selected locales in the United States. Findings reveal that when CPPs foster more citizen involvement as decision-makers, SEPM is used to shape practice, and more ethics training is required, citizen perceptions of how socially equitable departments are increase. Further, as political leaders and departments more actively incorporate community groups, perceptions of social equity are more positive. These findings are discussed in terms of what they reveal about accountability for social equity.

Keywords: community relations, policing, social equity

Social equity scholarship is increasingly examining how accountability for social equity is achieved, or how public agencies improve public services’ access, outcomes, processes, and quality (Gooden, 2015). Social equity accountability refers to how administrators take steps to promote fairness, such as admitting social equity issues, making equity a priority equal to efficiency, measuring and tracking progress, giving everyone a place at the table, and establishing community partnerships (Johnson & Svara, 2011). Ideally, these steps enhance answerability and improve perceptions of legitimacy (Gooden, 2014).

Policing particularly showcases the need for greater accountability for social equity (Brunet, 2011). Crises manifest in police-community relations in that minorities often experience inequitable experiences with police, whether being stopped, searched, and arrested in greater proportions or being killed while unarmed (Epp, Maynard-Moody, & Haider-Markel, 2017; Schulenberg, Chenier, Buffone, & Wojciechowski, 2015). Crises occur in a context in which police have nearly unlimited police powers to stop persons, possibly making equity issues pervasive (Withrow, 2007). Police often acknowledge these issues and take steps to address inequities, such as engaging in community policing, undertaking performance measurement

none defined

Correspondence should be sent to Sean McCandless School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado Denver, 1380 Lawrence Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80204, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

related to equity, and expanding ethics training, yet little is understood about how strategies affect perceptions, which is critical to understand given perceptions’ roles in shaping police-community relations (Brunet, 2011; Terrill & Ingram, 2016) and how administrators’ actions affect whether social equity is achieved or not (Gooden, 2015).

This study addresses the intersections between departments’ strategies—particularly community policing, social equity performance measurement, and ethics training—to promote social equity and improve perceptions. It addresses this question: “How do strategies of police agencies that foster accountability for social equity affect citizen perceptions?” Using an exploratory phenomenological collective case study, it reports on interviews with 72 citizen group leaders, police, and councilors from 12 purposively selected U.S. locales to investigate how these strategies affect citizen perceptions.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Improving accountability for social equity focuses on administrators’ strategies to improve fairness (Johnson & Svara, 2011). In policing, these strategies regularly center on community policing, performance measurement, and ethics training. These are discussed, and three propositions are advanced.

Community Policing

Community policing programs (CPPs) are frequently cited ways to improve fairness, because they emphasize building police-community partnerships and can give more groups a place at the table (Choi & Choi, 2012; Police Foundation, 2016). In CPPs, communities help police solve issues, shape policy, assist crime prevention, and promote trust (Bronson, Braga, Hureau, & Pegrram, 2015). CPPs can promote social equity by enhancing responsiveness, decreasing crime, strengthening community relationships, and promoting Scanning-Analysis- Response-Assessment (SARA) projects that involve community input in identifying and researching problems, developing solutions, and evaluating success (Cordner, 2014). Many departments operate some type of CPP. According to the Department of Justice’s 2013 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 71.3%� (n ¼ 2014) of surveyed departments reported CPP components in mission statements, and 39.9%�(n ¼ 1127) reported encouraging SARA-type problem solving (DoJ, 2013).

Despite wide usage, little is known about how CPPs impact communities (Rukus, Warner, & Zhang, 2017). CPPs seem to most positively affect youth services in low-crime metropolitan cores and are less effective in high-crime areas (Rukus et al., 2017). Further, CPPs may face difficulties addressing inequities. Some studies find that dialogue between officers and citizens is rare, and that officers frequently dismiss petitioners’ concerns (Russell & Gascón, 2014). Critics charge CPPs may be little more than “PR” and platforms for police to justify inaction (Liederbach, Fritsch, Carter, & Bannister, 2008). CPPs may do little to reduce officer-involved gun deaths and foster positive community relations, and other policies (e.g., filing reports when pointing yet not firing a gun) are more associated with lower rates of gun deaths (Jennings & Rubado, 2017). Departments often find CPPs difficult to operate due to capacity issues,

IMPROVING COMMUNITY RELATIONS 371

prioritization of federal crime fighting initiatives, police militarization, and general declines in police-community partnerships (Boettke, Lemke, & Palagashvili, 2016).

The extent to which CPPs foster community engagement and community understanding is critical—the less engaged, the less likely a CPP positively affects equity. CPPs informed by awareness of and respect for communities of color, cultures, and relationships might promote socially equitable quality and outcomes (Bent-Goodley & Smith, 2017). Departments informed by this paradigm acknowledge co-dependence of officers and communities through: building trust via neighborhood watches, town halls, deterrence strategies that have community support, challenging negative stereotypes, not casting communities en masse as criminals, and better understanding cultures (Bent-Goodley & Smith, 2017). Yet it is unknown how (and how many) departments employ these practices in their CPPs. Thus, the following proposition is advanced:

P1: Citizen perceptions of social equity will be more positive in locales served by departments in which police more actively use citizen involvement to shape practice.

Social Equity Performance Measurement

Another form of social equity accountability concerns measuring and tracking progress (Johnson & Svara, 2011). While performance measurement typically focuses on efficiency (Moynihan, 2008), traditional measures often ignore social equity and powerful groups socially construct measures (Kroll, 2017). Social equity performance measurement (SEPM), however, examines how agencies differentially impact groups (Gooden, 2014), and its use is becoming more common in policing (Brunet, 2011). Racial equity analysis is a cornerstone of SEPM, and it examines how public services vary for groups concerning access, outcomes, procedural fairness, and quality (Gooden, 2014).

For instance, ascertaining racial profiling’s extent, or examining procedural fairness, is one manifestation of SEPM (Brunet, 2011; Epp et al., 2017). To analyze quality and outcomes, citizen surveys are often used, particularly to measure satisfaction and whether citizens view themselves as equal partners (Brunet, 2011; Moore & Braga, 2003). SEPM is rarer than CPPs. According to LEMAS, 28.9%� (n ¼ 816) of surveyed departments reported surveying citizens within the past 12 months about crime, fear of crime, or satisfaction with law enforcement, whereas 29.7%�(n ¼ 839) reported conducting research or statistical analyses (DoJ, 2013).

Two areas in SEPM research remain underexplored: (a) the extent to which police use SEPM, and (b) how agencies use SEPM to shape practice. Two studies highlight these areas. First, one study surveyed literature on performance measurement in policing, finding that of 128 indicators, 14 were related to social equity. Measures often pertained to citizen perceptions of officers (e.g., officer integrity, fairness, and respectfulness) or how policing tactics (e.g., use of force) were associated with demographics (Charbonneau & Riccucci, 2008). Second, a follow-up study examined the self-reported use of social equity indicators in the U.S. and Canadian urban police departments (Charbonneau, Riccucci, Van Ryzin, & Holzer, 2009). The authors assumed that departments serving more diverse communities, already engaged in performance measurement, and headed by a minority police chief were more likely to use SEPM. Fewer than 5%�of the 148 surveyed police departments reported using SEPM. High commitment to social equity in management practices was evident: departments that involve

372 MCCANDLESS

citizens in management seemed more likely to use SEPM. The authors called for interviews with public officials to see whether SEPM presence is linked to increased social equity practices. As such, it is reasonable to assume that SEPM usage positively affects citizen perceptions:

P2: Citizen perceptions of social equity will be more positive in communities served by departments that employ social equity performance measurement.

Ethics Training

Another manifestation of social equity accountability is making fairness a greater priority (Johnson & Svara, 2011), which can be advanced through ethics training. Training can reduce corrupt behaviors and yield better public service (Johnson & Cox, 2004). Police ethics frame officers’ fundamental duties as serving the community, respecting constitutional rights, not allowing prejudices to influence decisions, acting courteously, and viewing one’s job as a symbol of public faith (International Association of Chiefs of Police, 2017). Ethical awareness is needed to promote social equity (Svara, 2014) and aspirational goals and guidelines can help officials develop ethical competency (Meine & Dunn, 2013), yet enforcement frequently focuses on legal compliance, not developing personal and organizational integrity (Roberts, 2009).

Given that cities can be held liable if constitutional rights are violated and if a lack of training is a factor (Wyatt-Nichol & Franks, 2009), police ethics training has received considerable attention (Kaul, 2017). Post-Ferguson discussions of ethics often focus on promoting body camera usage, but a criticism of this approach is that cameras externalize ethics and cast police and communities in combative relationships, whereas training internalizes ethics (Stalcup & Hahn, 2016).

Ethics and integrity are taught in 98%�of law enforcement academies, averaging 8 hours (Reaves, 2016), which typically account for 0.9–1.3%� of all instruction (Meine & Dunn, 2009). However, training may not affect officers’ sense of ethics. One study examined academy training effects on self-reported integrity among recruits in southern California (Blumberg, Giromini, & Jacobson, 2016). Findings indicated that participants began with high self- perceived integrity levels and that training did not significantly impact those scores, which suggests academies need to improve teaching of ethical decision-making. Offering training outside of academy settings, such as in pre-shift briefings, is difficult due to balancing shifts, time requirements, and finding qualified trainers (Meine & Dunn, 2009). One study surveyed 34 U.S. police departments, finding that most departments emphasized ethics training in academies, not in in-service trainings (Wyatt-Nichol & Franks, 2009). Most training lasted a half-day or less. Chiefs argued that ethics training should be continual, and many asserted that training reinforces policies, promotes discussion, and bolsters community expectations. Thus, it can positively shape department practice and likely could improve perceptions. The following proposition is advanced:

P3: Citizen perceptions of social equity will be positive in communities served by departments that require more training on ethics, both in the academy and in-service.

IMPROVING COMMUNITY RELATIONS 373

METHODOLOGY

This article addresses the question, “How do strategies of police agencies that foster accountability for social equity affect citizen perceptions?” This question warrants detail-rich qualitative data with interviewees who can inform how strategies affect social equity in practice (Charbonneau et al., 2009). An exploratory phenomenological collective case study with purposive maximum variation sampling was undertaken. This approach is useful when: (a) interviews are data sources, (b) and perspectives across numerous individuals must be understood (Cresswell & Poth, 2018).

It was important to draw widely to select U.S. locales. Four strategies were employed. First, U.S. Census information was used to identify ranges in communities’ populations and demographics. The U.S. Census Bureau’s four statistical regions were used as sampling frames—West, Midwest, South, and Northeast. Second, the Department of Justice’s 2013 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) dataset was utilized to identify variations in departments’ reporting of CPPs, SEPM, use of force incidents in the past year, which showcases how many times police have violent interactions with community members (Shjarback, 2015), and presence of minority police chiefs. Third, the 2006 State and Local Law Enforcement Training Academies was used to identify departments’ reported hours on ethics training. Fourth, Websites and newspapers were consulted to pinpoint communities with African American citizen groups that recently interacted with the police on social equity issues. Given the need to account for all of these factors, only urban locales were considered.

Thirty locales were selected that exhibited maximum variation on: (a) population size, demographics, and geographic location; (b) presence of an African American community group with recent police interactions; (c) use of force incidents; and (d) CPPs, SEPM usage, ethics training hours, and presence of a minority police chief. Given that interactions between multiple actors shape social equity priorities (Gooden, 2014), the researcher e-mailed and phoned poss- ible interviewees representing three broad groups at the city level—police, elected leaders, and citizen groups. Interviewees representing these groups were secured for 12 of the 30 locales, or three from each U.S. Census region. Table 1 presents information on each locale and department.

Before interviews occurred, questions were pilot-tested with law enforcement officers enrolled at the researcher’s university. Next, the methodology underwent and passed an ethics review.

Data from 72 phone interviews are reported herein. Per locale, these include: (a) two representatives of local citizen groups who recently interacted with police to address social equity, (b) two city-council members who sit on a public safety committee, and (c) two police officers in an administrative position. As seen in Table 2, questions were open-ended and asked about how CPPs, SEPM, and ethics training affect police practices and citizen perceptions. Interviews lasted between 40 and 120 minutes.

Data analysis followed strategies appropriate for phenomenological data (Cresswell & Poth, 2018). Interviews were transcribed and coded individually using constant comparison and open coding to develop a list of significant statements on effects of CPPs, SEPM, and ethics training. Axial coding grouped significant statements into broader themes with descriptions created of interviewees’ experiences. This involved identifying an open coding category, going back to

374 MCCANDLESS

the data, and creating further categories. Interviewees’ responses were then compared within and across locales, allowing an examination of how themes differ across interviewees (Miles, Huberman, & Saldana, 2013). A university colleague assisted the researcher to develop a codebook, code, and to compare interviews, groups, and locales. After the researcher coded the data, the colleague separately coded interviews, and results were compared. There was 92%�agreement. The 8%�disagreement concerned whether some comments warranted being a new category or subcategory.

However, limitations are evident. First, while cases were selected to maximize variation, results are not generalizable, particularly to rural locales, but they can help inform future large-N testing. Second, selection bias could be evident in the choice of locales and

TABLE 1 Locale Details and Citizen Group Perceptions

Regions

Northeast South Midwest West

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Estimated use of force incidents in past year (as indicated by interviewees)

50 60 90 450 750 100 70 600 700 500 350 440

Minority police chief N N N N Y N N N Y N Y Y

Community policing information Community policing mission statement Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y N Y Y At least 8hours of community policing

training for recruits Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Community policing training in-service Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y SARA-type problem-solving projects

actively encouraged Y Y N Y Y N Y N Y Y Y N

Problem-solving partnership or written agreement with community group

Y Y Y Y N N Y N Y Y Y Y

SEPM information Evaluation criteria for patrol officers

includes collaborative problem- solving projects

Y N N N N N Y N Y Y N Y

Utilized information from community survey

Y Y N N N Y N Y Y N Y Y

Conducted research and statistical analyses

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Ethics training information Reported hours of ethics training

(academy) 8 8 5 5 4 4 4 4 8 6 8 8

Reported hours of ethics in-service training (in last 12 months)

8 8 2 0 0 2 2 0 4 0 4 8

Citizen group perception P P P M N M N M N N M P

Note: Y ¼ Yes; N ¼ No; M ¼Mixed perception; N ¼ Negative perception; P ¼ Positive perception.

IMPROVING COMMUNITY RELATIONS 375

interviewees. It is possible that there are differences between those who participated and those who did not, which is the reason these findings should be followed up in future studies. Third, all interviewees were leaders in their respective groups, which was undertaken because of these individuals’ roles in shaping police practice and community relations, so some variation in perceptions is lost both within and between groups. The experiences of leaders in these groups may not be reflective of “ordinary” members. Fourth, social acceptability bias may be present. Steps were taken to reduce this bias, such as guaranteeing confidentiality and questions prompting interviewees to “tell their story” without judgment.

FINDINGS

Overall, positive citizen group leader perceptions of departments were found in four locales (see Table 1). Mixed but largely negative perceptions were found in four locales. Negative perceptions were found in four locales.

TABLE 2 Interview Questions

Group Questions

Citizen groups .� How have you and your citizen group interacted with police to address social equity issues? With elected leaders?

.� What types of policing equity issues have you seen in your community? How have police and elected leaders addressed these issues?

.� How does the local police department’s community policing program affect how equitable police are?

.� How does the local police department’s use of performance measurement affect how equitable police are?

.� How does the local police department’s ethics training affect how equitable police are?

.� How socially equitable would you characterize the local police department and why?

.� What else affects the quality of community-police relations, and why?

Police .� How have you interacted with citizen groups to address social equity issues? With elected leaders? .� What types of equity in policing issues have you seen in your community? How have you

addressed these issues? .� How would you characterize your CPPs’ effects on community relations? .� How would you characterize SEPM’s effects on community relations? .� How would you characterize ethics training’s effects on community relations? .� What affects your department’s ability to achieve accountability for social equity?

Councilors .� How have you interacted with citizens to address social equity issues? With police? .� What types of equity in policing issues have you seen in your community? How have these issues

been addressed? .� How do decisions made by elected leaders like yourself affect policing strategies? Accountability

for social equity? .� How would you characterize CPPs’ effects on community relations? .� How would you characterize SEPM’s effects on community relations? .� How would you characterize ethics training’s effects on community relations? .� What affects how accountability for social equity is achieved in your community?

376 MCCANDLESS

This section discusses results for CPPs, SEPM, and ethics training with results broken down by perception and interviewee groups (citizen, police, and elected leaders) discussed sequentially. Identifiers are employed. Citizen group leaders are termed “Leaders,” police administrators “Officers,” and city council members “Councilors.” For instance, “Leader la” refers to the first citizen group leader interviewed in Locale 1.

Community Policing Programs

Ten departments mention CPPs in their mission statements. All required at least 8 hours of academy-based community policing training. Eleven required CPP in-service. Nine had a problem-solving partnership or written agreement with a local community group. Results indicate that the most positively perceived departments engage in CPPs that more actively incorporate citizens as decision-makers, whereas more negatively perceived departments run CPPs fostering limited engagement, as reported by interviewees.

Positive Perceptions

Leaders who positively perceived departments reported that departments’ CPPs contributed to social equity. First, leaders independently characterized these CPPs as “proactive.” Leader 1a said: “[Police] have made it a point to reach out before something occurs and get our input.” Second, interviewees reported that CCPs promoted regular meetings that “provide evidence police do something about issues” (Leader 2b), give community leaders “a pipeline to the top” (Leader 1b), and entail chiefs offering “an open door to discuss anything, anytime” (Leader 12a). Third, leaders in Locales 1, 2, and 3 noted how strong community mobilization promoted active and continual discussions of equity. They attributed this mobilization to communities’ small size, thus making mobilization easier, and widespread desire amongst citizens to be engaged. Leader 1b emblematically noted that this mobilization “helps us speak in a united voice,” which “makes it easier for police to pay attention [to us].”

Police in these positively perceived departments noted that their CPPs were more engaged than were those in many other departments. First, all independently noted “Ferguson” as a motivating factor in having engaged CPPs. Officer 2b commented: “Ferguson was caused by bad community relations,” noting “we’ve been wanting to avoid a Ferguson here.” Second, all interviewees noted departments had both the capacity and “zeal,” as Officer 1b termed it, to see CPPs succeed, which they noted differentiated them from many departments. Officer 12b commented that many departments view CPPs as “the softer side of policing, which makes some guys pretty skeptical.” Further, all noted their departments had the capacity to run CPPs and devote personnel exclusively to them. Third, all noted that their CPPs produced positive results that were difficult to quantify. Officer 3a noted: “It took a while to see [the positive changes]. But then we noticed social media complimenting us. It took faith to continue.” Officer 1b noted: “If we didn’t notice a positive change, we wouldn’t continue these programs. But giving people a voice and showing we take care of issues means all the difference in the world. Some departments just tell people, ‘Here’s the way it’s going to be.’”

Fourth, officers underscored the importance of giving what leaders called “pipelines to the top,” which is related to interviewees’ ubiquitous comments about how community

IMPROVING COMMUNITY RELATIONS 377

understanding and promoting trust are linked. Officer 3a said: “Understanding cultures means we act from a place of knowledge, not just being reactive. Being just reactive is where problems happen.” Having an “open door policy” with community leaders was often cited as promoting greater trust, with officers frequently noting they told community leaders to inform them of problems before they occur. Officer 3b said: “I told [redacted] that he can call me any day, anytime. And he does.” When probed about support for CPPs throughout the ranks, interviewees responded programs had near-universal support. Officer 1a said: “Once officers saw that targeted community outreach actually made their jobs easier, they bought into it. Before, yeah, they were skeptical.”

Councilors noted that CPPs, while costly, were positive. Costs, as Councilor 2a emblematically stated, “are paid now to see benefits later.” Councilors in Locales 1 and 2 underscored how “never turning down a request from the chief” (Councilor 1b) signaled trust in the chief to foster better community relations and that funds were sufficient to support CPPs. Councilors noted the importance of elected leaders and police sharing a common vision in promoting social equity. Councilor 12b noted, “we all bought into the idea that [programs] would pay off down the road. This doesn’t always happen.” Councilors in Locales 1, 2, and 3 underscored how the communities’ smaller size made one-on-one community engagement easier and sustainable.

Mixed and Negative Perceptions

Leaders in remaining locales reported that departments’ CPPs negatively contributed to their per- ceptions because these CPPs seemingly perpetuated inequities. Several quotations illustrate these assessments, namely, that CPPs: (a) were “nothing but lip service to fairness” (Leader 4a); (b) were “just PR moves” (Leader 6a); (c) were “only occasional meetings where we get told we’re wrong [about whether something is an equity issue]” in which police “ignore or explain away our concerns” (Leader 8b); and (d) did not “meaningfully include” community leaders to obtain their input (Leader 11a). Five leaders in locales with the most negative perceptions used the term “col- lusion” between police and elected leaders to describe how public officials ignore inequities. All asserted that police and elected leaders argued, “things are largely fine the way they are” (Leader 5b) and that “[citizens] overstate concerns about fairness” (Leader 10a). A recurrent theme was elucidated by Leader 5a, who noted that police think “equity is compliance,” meaning inequities would be nonexistent if citizens obeyed all officer commands when stopped.

Comments from police and councilors exhibited similarities. First, both noted that CPPs, while “making everyone feel good” (Officer 5a), do little to address crime. Interviewees opined that CPPs were valuable but unreasonable and unsafe in high crime areas. With the exception Councilors 7a/b, interviewees pointed to use of force incidents as indicators communities were dangerous and required “a tough hand on crime” (Officer 9b). Second, most remarked that departments continually reach out and have “countless community engagements” (Officer 7a) but that citizens who would most benefit from better understanding police “just don’t show up” (Officer 11a). Third, many alleged citizen groups overstate equity issues due to insufficiently understanding police. In a representative comment, Officer 9a said: “if people comply with the officer, there isn’t an issue.” Councilors nearly universally de-emphasized CPPs’ importance, noting that when issues are present, greater oversight “gives us more bang for our buck” (Councilor 10b), such as body cameras or external review boards.

378 MCCANDLESS

Social Equity Performance Measurement

SEPM practices varied. Five departments reported using evaluation criteria for patrol officers that include collaborative problem solving. Seven reported utilizing community surveys, and all conducted statistical analyses. Overall, results suggest that departments actively using SEPM to shape practice are more positively perceived, but leaders noted that they are often suspicious of explanations for why disparities occur.

Positive Perceptions

Two of the four positively perceived departments reported using evaluation criteria for patrol officers that include collaborative problem-solving projects, and all reported regularly examining data for disparities. First, leaders asserted police provided groups with evidence that departments were “doing something about problems” and “not hiding results” (Leader 3b). The most commonly reported benefits were fostering greater transparency and making officers more responsible for being equitable. Second, despite these positives, leaders were skeptical about what departments did to address issues, which were often concentrated in poorer neighborhoods. Leader 2b said: “They basically found they were stopping more Blacks in [redacted]. Why are they being stopped more? We don’t buy the explanation they gave—they’re ‘color-blind.’”

Officers reported actively using SEPM to guide practice and obtain community support. First, SEPM allowed police to spot issues and report findings that, as termed by Officer 2b, are “things that look bad but actually aren’t when you delve into it.” All departments reported analyses that revealed that African Americans are disproportionately stopped. In Locale 12, for instance, “We noticed that more stops seemed to be occurring in [redacted], and most being stopped were Black. We asked why and shared the information. We can’t do anything about the need to stop, but we made the community aware of why it wasn’t an issue” (Officer 12b). Police had mixed assessments about SEPM’s usefulness, noting that publicizing and explaining results positively affected community trust and allowed police better to understand communities, but that analyses often revealed that poorer areas had greater issues with crime, thus necessitating a greater police presence. Officers frequently noted that this presence meant, as characteristically put by Officer 3a, “more people will, of course, be stopped” and that “[SEPM] makes us more transparent, but sometimes people don’t want to accept the findings.”

Councilors were divided on SEPM’s usefulness. Those who supported it noted that more data fostered proactivity and transparency. Those who were skeptical asserted that SEPM might lead to inefficiencies. Councilor 2b said: “[SPEM] adds time to calls. Does the extra information necessarily pay off when 99.9%�of the time there aren’t issues? I don’t know.”

Mixed and Negative Perceptions

Four of the mixed and negatively perceived departments reported using evaluation criteria for collaborative problem-solving projects. Four use a community survey, and all reported conducting statistical analyses. Leaders asserted SEPM did not result in improved equity, by arguing police did not share results of analyses and that only departments saw and analyzed

IMPROVING COMMUNITY RELATIONS 379

data. Leaders claimed police used data analysis to target neighborhoods, resulting in equity violations in the poorest areas.

Officers noted that departments regularly analyzed data, which revealed differences, not disparities, in stop, search, and arrest rates. First, the most commonly occurring sentiment was that officers stopped people solely for breaking the law, which “unfortunately means people in a particular area” (Officer 5a). Officers acknowledged more stops occurred in high-crime and impoverished areas. As Officer 7b said: “I hate saying this, but there’s just more crime [in these areas]. We got to respond to it.” All interviewees asserted that SEPM is valuable, because “it keeps us transparent, but it overwhelmingly shows that bias is practically non-existent. Less than the media would have you believe” (Officer 8a). Second, while supportive of SEPM, officers expressed skepticism about its usefulness, noting if taken too far, it wastes resources, plays into media bias suggesting officers incorrectly do their jobs, makes policing more difficult, and erodes officers’ authority through what Officer 5b termed “excessive scrutiny.” Officers noted calls for more SEPM suggested the public insufficiently understood police. Officer 9a representatively said: “I don’t think people realize. If our hands are tied, responding to crime is more difficult. People need to have more faith we’re doing our jobs right. They’d hate to see it if we were less active.”

Councilors mirrored officers’ comments, noting SEPM provided data suggesting the need for greater police presence in poorer areas. Councilor 10a said: “It’d be irresponsible not to put more police where crime is. I wish people got that.” While most noted SEPM could be a powerful oversight mechanism, many (especially in Locales 4, 6, 8, and 11) wished police better acted on SEPM information, whereas others (those in Locales 5, 7, 9, and 11) argued SEPM might send the wrong message that police are doing their jobs incorrectly.

Ethics Training

Academy hours devoted exclusively to ethics ranged from 4 to 8 hours of all instruction time. Eight departments required ethics in-service training within the last 12 months, ranging from 2 to 8 hours. Findings reveal citizens more positively perceive departments requiring more ethics training because training foster trust that officers behave respectfully. Officers and councilors tended to be more skeptical of training’s effects.

Positive Perceptions

Positively perceived departments tend to require more ethics training, both in the academy and in in-service. Three of four positively perceived departments require a full day for ethics in the academy as well as the equivalent of a full day of in-service training. Leaders commented that training positively affects police behavior. In Locales 1, 2, and 12, whose departments recently began requiring more training on ethics, leaders noted two positive effects: (a) officers seemed more respectful than before, and (b) the training showed “good faith,” as Leader 3a said, that police take ethics seriously. Most asserted ethics training by itself was insufficient to affect equity, with Leader 3b emblematically noting, “The whole department needs to take fairness seriously, which isn’t going to happen with a training.”

380 MCCANDLESS

Officers noted training, while important, needed to go hand-in-hand with community engagement strategies emphasizing inclusive decision-making. As Officer 2b said, these “remind us all of what’s pretty obvious—be respectful.” Officers noted training’s primary ben- efits were reinforcing policy and the need to “[act] wisely when using discretion” (Officer 3a). All interviewees pointed to the importance of capacity to support training, noting the expense of taking officers off patrol to receive training. Councilors mirrored these comments, noting that their cities were fortunate to be able to afford training. However, funding for training would be cut if the city were to face budgetary issues, and as Leader 3b said, “[training] makes people feel good, but academy training with informal reinforcement might accomplish the same goal.”

Mixed and Negative Perceptions

Negatively perceived departments tend to require fewer academy and in-service trainings. Leaders commented that trainings were insufficient, which manifested in how officers inter- acted with the community. Leaders associated lack of training with officers’ disrespecting citi- zens during stops, not treating minorities equally, and not understanding what they are constitutionally empowered to do. All asserted training emphasizes “shooting people, not respecting them” (Leader 9a). Despite wanting further training, leaders most often called for prosecutions of officers as ways to improve equity. One noted: “We can train officers more, but nothing’s going to change without prosecutions of officers who shoot unarmed people or firing officers who racially profile” (Leader 6b).

Police and councilors comments were mirrored. First, both highlighted that training was already sufficient and that expanding training would not improve policing. Officer 6b said, “We reinforce ethics all the time. We always treat people equally. The issue is that fighting crime is tough. We’re always respectful, but we got to be tough.” Second, most referenced the prohibitive costs of expanding training, noting “a perennial debate over what to fund” (Councilor 8b), with decisions to fund requests for equipment taking priority over ethics train- ing. Councilors often noted ethics training “might promote confidence among people who care” (Councilor 11a) but that training’s effects on equity were uncertain and that more substantive accountability mechanisms, especially body cameras, would better improve equity.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This study focused on how police strategies to foster accountability for social equity affect citizen perceptions. It assumed citizens would most positively perceive departments more actively using CPPs, employing SEPM, and requiring more ethics training.

Proposition 1 is supported. Perceptions were most positive for departments using citizen involvement to shape practice. Negative perceptions occurred when leaders felt unincorporated and dismissed and in tandem with police and councilors arguing: equity is largely achieved through compliance, citizens overstated inequities, CPPs are infeasible in unsafe areas warranting “tough-on-crime” approaches, and capacity is a barrier to expanding CPPs. These findings match the literature noting that CPPs seem to work best in low-crime metropolitan areas (Rukus et al., 2017), that many departments find CPPs difficult to operate (Boettke et al., 2016), and that some CPPs, as reported by interviewees, were for public relations

IMPROVING COMMUNITY RELATIONS 381

(Liederbach et al., 2008). CPPs yielded the most positive perceptions in smaller communities, those in which officers stressed the importance of understanding culture to build effective rela- tionships, and when those throughout the ranks “bought in” to CPPs (Bent-Goodley & Smith, 2017).

Proposition 2 is largely supported. Departments employing SEPM were more positively perceived, but leaders tended to be skeptical of results. SEPM practices varied considerably, but all departments regularly conducted statistical analyses, a practice increasingly more common in law enforcement agencies (Brunet, 2011). The critical differences between positively and negatively perceived departments appear to be the extent to which officers demonstrate modifying practice and showcasing SEPM usage as “acting in good faith.” Positively perceived departments termed disproportional police contact as “disparities” and highlighted to leaders how departments were changing practices. Leaders charged departments insufficiently admitted biases as the causes of disparities, but lauded departments for transparency and proactivity. Negatively perceived departments argued disproportions were “differences,” that African Americans tended to commit more crimes, that leaders insufficiently understood officers’ authority, and that SEPM could erode the officers’ authority. These findings add to the growing literature on SEPM in that increased use of SEPM appears associated with greater equity in practice (Charbonneau & Riccucci, 2008; Charbonneau et al., 2009), albeit solely when police term disproportions as disparities and incorporate leaders to discuss results, both of which can fail to occur even when SEPM is used. SEPM analyses shared transparently can improve perceptions, suggesting SEPM alone might not improve equity. As other literature has found, departments must be willing to accept and share results, shape practice, and promote successes (Ho & Cho, 2017).

Proposition 3 is supported. Departments requiring more ethics training were more positively perceived, usually by reinforcing that police act in good faith and making officers more respectful. Leaders asserted training in negatively perceived departments did little to combat what they called officers’ gruff, impersonal, and disrespectful behaviors. Both officers and councilors pointed to capacity as a reason to offer or not offer training, yet most interviewees were skeptical regarding trainings’ effects. Findings match literature indicating ethics training comprise small portions of officers’ overall training (Meine & Dunn, 2009). Police and councilors acknowledged the need for ethics training in promoting respectful behavior (Kaul, 2017), yet city discourses often focused on promoting strategies externalizing ethics, such as establishing greater oversight of police through body camera adoption (Stalcup & Hahn, 2016). While departments offered in-service training less frequently, police argued ethics training reinforce policy and bolster community expectations (Wyatt-Nichol & Franks, 2009). While this study did not examine how training affects officers’ sense of ethics (Blumberg et al., 2016), findings indicate expanded training in departments already extensively engaged with communities may be associated with officers’ acting more respectfully.

These findings add to social equity literature by pointing to numerous factors’ effects on accountability strategies. What happens in a police-citizen interaction is a microcosm of discourses on the meaning of fairness, particularly whether agencies admit issues, which is the beginning of social equity accountability (Gooden, 2015). Whether this occurs appears dependent on how officials socially construct the meaning of their and others’ experiences (Kroll, 2017). The decision to include more citizen decision-making, or the degree to which

382 MCCANDLESS

everyone is given a place at the table (Johnson & Svara, 2011), affects what police ultimately do. When officials cast equity and safety as competing goals, levels of citizen inclusion drop.

Distinctions between the desirability and extent of greater front-end inclusion are evident. Citizens appear included more when groups mobilize to air grievances and when officials sup- port inclusion as a way to improve practice. When officials feel inclusion results in practices inappropriate for dangerous locales, officials emphasize compliance, being “tough on crime,” and that discussions of equity undermine officer safety, authority, and efficacy. Competing interpretations of equity manifest. When city-level groups cooperate to define what equity means in practice, departments engage in practices that positively affect citizen perceptions. When discourses favor officials, the result appears to be more negative perceptions. While not altogether surprising, this underscores the literature’s point that social equity accountability requires some redrawing of power relationships so historically marginalized groups can exercise their voice (Johnson & Svara, 2011).

Future studies should expand upon the findings from this exploratory study. More needs to be understood about these city-level discourses, namely how citizens and officials interact to define equity priorities. Regardless, making equity a greater priority appears to make a positive difference.

REFERENCES

Bent-Goodley, T., & Smith, C. M. (2017). An African-centered approach to community policing. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 27(1–2), 92–99. doi:10.1080/10911359.2016.1266856

Blumberg, D. M., Giromini, L., & Jacobson, L. B. (2016). Impact of police academy training on recruits’ integrity. Police Quarterly, 19(1), 63–86. doi:10.1177/1098611115608322

Boettke, P. J., Lemke, J. S., & Palagashvili, L. (2016). Re-evaluating community policing in a polycentric system. Journal of Institutional Economics, 12(2), 305–325. doi:10.1017/s174413741500034x

Bronson, R. K., Braga, A. A., Hureau, D., & Pegrram, K. (2015). We trust you, but not that much: Examining police–Black clergy partnerships to reduce youth violence. Justice Quarterly, 32(6), 1006–1036. doi:10.1080/ 07418825.2013.868505

Brunet, J. R. (2011). Social equity in criminal justice. In N. J. Johnson & J. H. Svara (Eds.), Justice for all: Promoting social equity in public administration (pp. 165–186). New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/ 9781315703060-17

Charbonneau, E., & Riccucci, N. M (2008). Beyond the usual suspects: An analysis of the performance measurement literature on social equity indicators in policing. Public Performance & Management Review, 31(4), 604–620. doi:10.2753/pmr153-9576310405

Charbonneau, E., Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G., & Holzer, M. (2009). The self-reported use of social equity indicators in urban police departments in the United States and Canada. State & Local Government Review, 41(2), 95–107. doi:10.1177/0160323x0904100203

Choi, C. G., & Choi, S. O. (2012). Collaborative partnerships and crime in disorganized communities. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 228–238. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02498.x

Cordner, G. (2014). Community policing. In M. D. Reisig & R. J. Kane (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of police and policing (pp. 148–171). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199843886.013.012

Cresswell, J. H., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Epp, C., Maynard-Moody, S., & Haider-Markel, D. (2017). Beyond profiling: The institutional sources of racial disparities in policing. Public Administration Review, 77(2), 168–178. doi:10.1111/puar.12702

Gooden, S. T. (2014). Race and social equity: A nervous area of government. New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/ 9781315701301

IMPROVING COMMUNITY RELATIONS 383

Gooden, S. T. (2015). From equality to social equity. In M. E. Guy & M. M. Rubin (Eds.), Public administration evolv- ing: From foundations to the future (pp. 209–229). New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315718958-18

Ho, A.T.-K., & Cho, W. (2017). Government communication effectiveness and satisfaction with police performance: A large-scale survey study. Public Administration Review, 77(2), 228–239. doi:10.1111/puar.12563

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2017). Code of ethics. Retrieved from http://www.theiacp.org/ codeofethics

Jennings, J. T., & Rubado, M. E. (2017). Preventing the use of deadly force: The relationship between police agency policies and rates of officer-involved gun deaths. Public Administration Review, 77(2), 217–226. doi:10.1111/ puar.12738

Johnson, N. J., & Svara, J. H. (2011). Toward a more perfect union: Moving forward with social equity. In N. J. Johnson & J. H. Svara (Eds.), Justice for all: Promoting social equity in public administration (pp. 265–290). New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe. doi:10.4324/9781315703060-24

Johnson, T. A., & Cox III, R. W. (2004). Police ethics: Organizational implications. Public Integrity, 7(1), 67–79. doi:10.1080/10999922.2004.11051270

Kaul, G. (2017, July 25). How Minnesota determines who’s fit—and unfit—to be a police officer. MinnPost. Retrieved from https://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2017/07/how-minnesota-determines-who-s-fit-and-unfit-be-police- officer

Kroll, A. (2017). Can performance management foster social equity? Stakeholder power, protective institutions, and minority representation. Public Administration, 95(1), 22–38. doi:10.1111/padm.12289

Liederbach, J., Fritsch, E. J., Carter, D. L., & Bannister, A. (2008). Exploring the limits of collaboration in community policing: A direct comparison of police and citizen views. Policing: International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 31(2), 271–291. doi:10.1108/13639510810878721

Meine, M. F., & Dunn, T. P. (2009). Distance learning and ethics education and training. Public Integrity, 12(1), 51–60. doi:10.2753/pin1099-9922120104

Meine, M. F., & Dunn, T. P. (2013). The search for ethical competency. Public Integrity, 15(2), 149–166. doi:10.2753/ pin1099-9922150203

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (3rd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Moore, M. H., & Braga, A. A. (2003). Measuring and improving police performance: The lessons of CompStat and its progeny. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 26(3), 439–453. doi:10.1108/ 13639510310489485.

Moynihan, D. P. (2008). The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctt2tt51c

Police Foundation. (2016). Community policing. Retrieved from https://www.policefoundation.org/projects/community- policing

Reaves, B. A. (2016, July 21). State and local law enforcement training academies, 2013. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5684

Roberts, R. (2009). The rise of compliance-based ethics management. Public Integrity, 11(3), 261–278. doi:10.2753/ pin1099-9922110305

Rukus, J., Warner, M. E., & Zhang, X. (2017). Community policing: Least effective where need is greatest. Crime & Delinquency, 1–24. doi:10.1177/0011128716686339.

Russell, A., & Gascón, L. (2014). Defining “policeability”: Cooperation, control, and resistance in South Los Angeles community-police meetings. Social Problems, 61(2), 237–258. doi:10.1525/sp.2014.12059

Schulenberg, J. L., Chenier, A., Buffone, S., & Wojciechowski, C. (2015). An application of procedural justice to stakeholder perspectives: Examining police legitimacy and public trust in police complaint systems. Policing and Society, 25(1), 1–18. doi:10.1080/10439463.2015.1102252

Shjarback, J. A. (2015). Emerging early intervention systems: An agency-specific pre-post comparison of formal citizen complaints of use of force. Policing: A Journal of Policy & Practice, 9(4), 313–325. doi:10.1093/police/ pav006

Stalcup, M., & Hahn, C. (2016). Cops, cameras, and the policing of ethics. Theoretical Criminology, 20(4), 482–501. doi:10.1177/1362480616659814

Svara, J. H. (2014). Who are the keepers of the code? Articulating and upholding ethical standards in the field of public administration. Public Administration Review, 74(5), 561–569. doi:10.1111/puar.12230

384 MCCANDLESS

Terrill, W., & Ingram, J. R. (2016). Citizen complaints against the police: An eight city examination. Police Quarterly, 19(2), 150–179. doi:10.1177/1098611115613320

United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics (DoJ). (2013). Law enforcement management and administrative statistics. https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=248

Withrow, B. L. (2007). When Whren won’t work: The effects of a diminished capacity to initiate a pretextual stop on police officer behavior. Police Quarterly, 10(4), 351–370. doi:10.1177/1098611106293681

Wyatt-Nichol, H., & Franks, G. (2009). Ethics training in law enforcement agencies. Public Integrity, 12(1), 39–50. doi:10.2753/PIN1099-9922120103

IMPROVING COMMUNITY RELATIONS 385

Copyright of Public Integrity is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.