Advancing Policing Through Continuous Action

Consent decrees, authorized by the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, give the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Civil Rights Division the authority to investigate local law enforcement agencies that may be engaging in unconstitutional policing practices. This study, conducted by the National Policing Institute (NPI) and the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies Inc. (CALEA), will explore DOJ’s pattern and practice investigations to assess three key components: (1) what precipitated DOJ involvement, (2) how DOJ conducted its investigations, and (3) DOJ’s findings. All of these will be used to assist law enforcement agencies in proactive assessments of their own agencies.

Project Overview

As part of the accreditation process, agencies can access resources on evidence-based best practices, model policies, and training standards to help inform police practice. However, although a national guide on constitutional policing practices can be particularly valuable to agencies, one isn’t widely available. It is understood that outcomes (settlements and consent decrees) of DOJ’s “pattern or practice” investigations outline important aspects of 21st-century policing, and changes made by agencies after these incidents should demonstrate constitutional policing.

Until now, there has been limited empirical examination of organizational conditions and practices that precede or follow formal intervention by DOJ. The systematic identification of these factors can provide critical insights for law enforcement executives who seek to be proactive in reviewing and enhancing their agency’s policies, training, and practices. In this vein, CALEA contracted the services of NPI in 2022 to review recent pattern or practice investigations conducted by DOJ to identify:

The events and organizational factors that precede an investigation;
The issues most commonly examined by pattern or practice investigators;
The investigative process and methodological approaches used to identify patterns or practices of unconstitutional policing;
The evidence cited to support observations of unconstitutional policing; and
The remedial measures outlined by the DOJ to address unconstitutional policing practices.

Methodology

NPI’s research team examined the content of 27 investigative reports and findings letters from pattern or practice investigations initiated by DOJ between 2010 and 2022. These 27 investigations were eligible for inclusion in the qualitative analysis, however, a systematic search for available documents on these cases using the University of Michigan’s Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse¹ and DOJ’s online resources revealed that DOJ published an investigative report and/or findings letter for only 19 of the 27 eligible cases.² These 19 cases comprise the final sample of investigations under consideration in the research study.

As part of the qualitative analysis, NPI reviewed 21 documents, including 11 investigative reports and 10 findings letters from the 19 investigations. A detailed coding instrument was developed to systematically capture the content in the investigative reports and findings letters under review. The coding instrument comprised 1,170 items organized under four primary categories: (1) Case Overview, (2) Investigation, (3) Findings, and (4) Recommendations.

Coding was accomplished using a multi-method approach, including the use of a numeric database to quantify findings across the areas of the coding instrument. This quantitative database was subsequently analyzed using SPSS, a statistical software package. The findings from this study are presented in the final report. Key takeaways for law enforcement executives can be found within the report or in a condensed version for easy review.

¹ https://clearinghouse.net/

² The systematic search for available documents was completed in April 2023. For this reason, the DOJ’s investigation into the Minneapolis (MN) Police Department – initiated in 2021 with findings published in June 2023 – is not included within the study sample. For more information on the DOJ’s findings in Minneapolis see https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-finds-civil-rights-violations-minneapolis-police-department-and-city#:~:text=Following%20a%20comprehensive%20investigation%2C%20the,U.S.%20Constitution%20and%20federal%20law.