The Most Common Barriers to Accessing Police Data

One of the biggest drivers behind the current police reform demands in the US is police data.

There are a myriad of police datasets available within a police department that paint a picture of the inner workings and behavior of its officers with the public. There are many different datasets circulating within a police agency. One of the least ‘sensitive’ data points (the lowest hanging fruit) is the data SpotCrime asks for from police agencies nationwide - Records Management System (RMS) data and Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD/911) data. This data has been around and released to the media and public for centuries. It includes what is known as a ‘crime blotter’ - a list of what and where crime occurs throughout the day within a police jurisdiction and what where and when police respond to the public’s calls for service.

At SpotCrime we believe in and encourage police departments to embrace open crime data. ‘Open’ meaning the data is available in machine readable format (ex. API, xls, csv, txt, etc) for anyone to collect, use, and share without restrictions. We are dedicated to advocating for stronger transparency within local jurisdictions by demanding open crime data as the bare minimum for a community minded and transparent police force. 

We have been asking for this kind of data for 13 years, and we still find it frustratingly difficult to get some police agencies to release this information in a timely, open, and unrestricted format. Our goal of surfacing this ‘base’ data nationwide will create an avenue for the more complex data datasets to be opened up that include but are not limited to use of force, arrest data, officer complaints, stop and frisks, and traffic stops. 

The point of this blog post is to highlight the barriers to accessing crime data SpotCrime collects in hopes it helps dissolve data silos across all facets of policing, apply constructive pressure to ensure data continuity, and encourage systems to produce data easily and efficiently. If a police agency has trouble surfacing their least sensitive and most used dataset like a crime blotter, will they be able to reliably and routinely release other datasets?

Lack of regulations or guidelines in place 

There have been past attempts to address the lack of guidelines in place, like the White House Police Data initiative developed in 2014 and the SpotCrime Open Crime Standard (SOCS), however there are no formal laws in place laying out the type, frequency, format, and continuity of police datasets.

Currently, there are 18,000+ police departments in the us. Without some sort of standards in place each police department’s policy on data sharing is determined by the individual 18,000+ police chiefs.

FOIA 

Placing access to data encompassing citizens and government interaction behind a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request is a barrier of time and money.

It takes a considerable amount of time to find the records officer, write and submit a request, make any clarifications to the request, and wait for the agency to respond. Right now during COVID, there are quite a few police agencies using COVID as a reason to not respond to records requests.

After the request has been made, there is the possibility of a charge for the request. Some agencies have been known to use FOIA costs as a way to deter access to records. 

Gwinnett County PD has required SpotCrime to FOIA the crime data they send to their vendor for free since at least 2014, and we never charged for the data. Recently, Gwinnett County PD notified us that due to ‘procedural change’ dealing with an influx in records requests recently they will now be charging us around $5 per request. 6+ years later with the same request and we are now being charged to access this information.

Additionally out of state residents, media companies, or researchers wanting data from an agency in states like VA and TN are out of luck. FOIA law in some states does not require the government agency to respond to FOIA requests from out of state requesters. In the age of the internet it is mind boggling why any state wouldn’t release public information across state lines.

Interpretation of FOIA 

FOIA exemptions have been used by some to deny the release of records that may paint the government in bad light. Each police agency has a different interpretation of the law. For example, Park City (UT) requires anyone wanting to access the police blotter to come into the office to look at it instead of simply emailing it out.

And in some states, like CA, there is no formal appeal process when a denial to records is given. So in Baldwin Park (CA), where other local agencies surrounding the jurisdiction of Baldwin Park release crime data electronically,  if you want access to their electronically available (txt) file with public crime data, you have to pay a flat fee of $15 and wait for a CD to be snail mailed to you due to a ‘city policy’ of not emailing records. It would require a lawsuit in order to get this policy revoked.

Vendors 

Approximately 14% of the US population lost access to open crime data in December 2019 due to vendor infighting. Motorola and Socrata parted ways turning off an open crime data API for hundreds of police agencies crime data. The infighting caused cities and police agencies to lose a valuable tool in connecting with their communities due to arbitrary decision making by their vendors. 

Additionally, government vendors are  trying to place restrictions on the public data they are paid to curate. This is not OK and it destroys transparency with the community when a private company is given preferential access to crime information over the public.

The solution

Right now, the US relies on the good will of police agencies who voluntarily embrace 21st century transparency. The police departments who understand the best way to cultivate a police-community relationship are the ones embracing open crime data. 

Because crime data gives imperative insight into the citizen-government interaction needed in order to address and solve problems, one of the best solutions to democratize data access would be for cities and police agencies to start treating data as a public utility. Services like water and electricity are public utilities because those services are vital for a community and need to be subjected to forms of public control and regulation.

Open crime data standards created and maintained at the federal and state level will relieve tension encountered when each of the 18,000+ different police department personalities (and priorities) approach data transparency. We do argue building infrastructure to release crime data is not very expensive to build or maintain as some might think with today's technology available. But even if there is an initial incurred cost, laying down this ‘pipeline’ will allow better standardization, regulation, and continuity with the appropriate oversight.