Transparency and accountability are critical components of democratic policing—and the cornerstone of our mission at the Policing Project. From the manuals that cover critical policies (such as the policing agency’s rules on consent searches or surveillance), to the data that informs the public of the agency’s performance (such as the number of complaints against officers or use-of-force incidents), to statutory authority granted to civilian review boards—communities require information about the activities of police that serve them.

To this end, the Policing Project is rolling out a suite of resources outlining concrete steps policing agencies, elected officials, and communities can take to improve policing transparency and accountability. These materials provide clear and reasonable guidance on three critical areas: accessibility of agency policy manuals, community oversight, and agency transparency.

The Manuals Initiative

Police manuals hold the policies that define how officers are supposed to act in various situations. Having access to agency manuals allows communities to evaluate whether their interactions with police are aligned with agency policies, and whether those policies themselves align with community expectations. Our team evaluated the police manuals of the 200 largest cities in the United States along six different transparency criteria. What we found was troubling. For starters, about 40% of the cities in our survey do not post their manuals online at all.

Of course, how an agency posts its manual is almost as important as posting it in the first place. Of the cities in our survey that post their manuals online, only a quarter do so in a way that satisfies our basic transparency criteria.

These criteria are nothing but common sense. We looked at factors such as where the manual was posted (“Is it easy to find on the department’s website, or must the public undertake an exhaustive search through layers of subpages?”), when it was posted (“Are the policies posted online the most recent version and how can the public know?”), as well as how it was posted (“Can the manual text be recognized by screen readers or the web browser’s translation tools to improve accessibility for non-English speakers or people with visual impairments?”).

Our findings and the accompanying guide, “How to Post an Accessible Manual,” offer key steps to not only satisfy the minimum every city should meet when it comes to providing public access to its policing agency’s manual, but also attainable methods to make the manual easy to find, easy to read, and easy to understand.

A Framework for Data & Transparency

Access the resource, “Data & Transparency Framework for Policing Agencies.”

Getting the policy manual online is only a first step. The Policing Project’s new resources also aim to improve broader agency transparency so that the public has clear information on what police are doing, and how they are doing it.

But knowing what data to provide can be overwhelming—policing agency personnel might fear they lack the time and resources to collect and post data, or they may not know precisely what information the community needs or wants to know.

The Policing Project’s new framework on data and transparency provides streamlined guidance on what sorts of data should be made available from policing agencies, and how providing it can address community concerns, foster mutual trust, and improve community-police relations. The framework is intended to provide a robust form of transparency—it goes beyond current practice and may prove challenging for some jurisdictions to implement (depending on state and local records laws, union contracts, records management systems, analytical capabilities, and the like). But with those challenges in mind, we provide two tiers of guidance—an ideal that agencies should aim for, as well as immediate and doable steps to take now.

What Does Police Accountability Look Like?

Access the resource, “What Does Police Oversight Look Like?”

Beyond transparency, communities also want accountability when things go wrong in policing. However, there are often very few avenues available for concerned community members who wish to tackle the root causes of problems. Other areas of government have formal bodies that may help enact community priorities or respond to public concerns on issues such as schools, parks, and zoning. But where do members of the public go when they have concerns about policing?

To answer this question, we examined the ordinances of the 100 largest cities in the United States to see what their formal police oversight bodies look like. And while our survey found that police oversight bodies are not uncommon, many are likely ill-equipped to facilitate the sort of reimagined public safety so many communities are calling for.

For starters, more than half of these bodies only have "back-end authority”—meaning they can review particular incidents or claims of police misconduct only after they happen. Only a small sliver of the oversight bodies we reviewed had the power to actually set the policies that govern the policing agency. And of these, even fewer had the budget or staff to do so effectively.

How then can communities ensure their oversight bodies are equipped to truly address their priorities and needs? We identified five factors—from adequate budgeting to access to critical information—communities and police should consider to improve accountability.

Together, these resources aim to promote policing policies and practices that not only promote transparency, but begin the process of reimagining our systems of public safety. If you have any questions about the materials, or would like additional guidance on how your jurisdiction can implement their recommendations, don’t hesitate to reach out.