The Quarterly
keeps our law enforcement agencies and their partners and supporters informed of developments, trends, and news within the body-worn camera (BWC) field and encourages involvement in our ongoing activities.
The Quarterly
provides the most up-to-date tools and technical assistance materials for your continued success in navigating and implementing a long-lasting, successful BWC program.
|
|
In this Issue:
- BWC TTA Team Spotlight
- Spotlight on BWC Resource
- Featured BWC TTA Resources
- Latest Research on BWCs
- Special Feature: Drafting Body-Worn Camera Policy
- In Case You Missed It!
- Practices from the Field
- BWCs in the News
Quick Links
|
|
The BWC TTA Team Spotlight
|
|
|
In addition to CNA and its partners, ASU and JSS, our team also includes a network of subject matter experts. These subject matter experts have expertise in a wide variety of topics, such as - use of force, technology, body-worn cameras, community collaboration, prosecution, crime prevention, and research.
Chief O'Connor has served as a BWC TTA Lead and subject matter expert since 2019. As a 22-year veteran in the law enforcement profession, she has been a proven leader in evidence-based policing and community engagement. Her entire law enforcement career was spent with the Tampa Police Department, where she worked her way to Assistant Chief and retired in 2016. Community partnerships and technology were two cornerstones of the plan that Chief O'Connor implemented contributing to a 61% reduction in crime and 54% reduction in arrests over a ten-year period.
Chief O'Connor works today to share best practices in command leadership and community collaboration as a faculty member of the FBI LEEDA's Supervisor and Command Leadership Institutes and as a Special Advisor for the National Association of Women Law Enforcement Executives. She has great expertise in many different areas of law enforcement. Some of the areas include but are not limited to: evidence-based policing, community engagement, intelligence-led policing, technology, officer health and wellness, and inter-agency partnerships.
Meet the rest of the BWC TTA team
here.
|
|
Welcome to the FY 19 Sites!
|
|
As part of President Trump’s commitment to expand funding, training, and evidentiary tools for law enforcement agencies, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) significantly increased the Body-Worn Camera Policy and Implementation Program (BWC-PIP) in 2019 with an additional 82 awards to grantees, bringing the four-year total to 420 awards. BWC-PIP funding will enable the deployment of close to 100,000 BWCs across the country as part of broader BWC implementation strategies. Overall, Congress and BJA have provided more than $73 million to BWC-PIP grantees during the past 5 years to meet the immediate needs of local and tribal law enforcement organizations. The BWC-PIP program has supported agencies in nearly every state, as well as several agencies operating in tribal areas and territories, as depicted in the BWC Policy and Implementation Program Award Map. A number of BWC-PIP awards are administered as multiagency partnerships or through regional and state organizations. For example, in FY 2019, the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency received a BWC-PIP award to support BWC implementation in 29 law enforcement agencies throughout the state.
For a complete list of the FY19 BWC sites, click
here.
|
|
Spotlight on BWC Resource
|
|
Key Trends in Body-Worn Camera Policy and Practice
The CNA Corporation, Arizona State University (ASU), and Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. (JSS) provide training and technical assistance (TTA) to law enforcement agencies who have received funding for body-worn cameras (BWCs) through the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) BWC Policy and Implementation Program (PIP).
Administrative policy review is a central feature of the TTA provided to the PIP sites. The TTA team developed a policy review process and BWC Policy Review Scorecard to assess the comprehensiveness of BWC policies.
This report describes the results of an analysis of 304 policies from FY 2015, FY 2016, FY 2017, and FY 2018 grantees that had their BWC policy scorecards approved through the scorecard process. Through review of the 304 agency policies, the authors identified key BWC policy trends across ten important BWC issues: activation, deactivation, citizen notification, officer authority to review, supervisor authority to review, off-duty assignment, activation during demonstrations, temporary deactivation (and muting), frequency of supervisory auditing, and mentions of non-patrol units wearing BWCs.
To view the report, click
here
.
|
|
Featured BWC TTA Resources
|
|
|
BJA & BWCTTA Roles
As you begin implementing your body‐worn camera (BWC) programs, it is important to know who to contact with your specific questions. Understanding whether your questions should be directed toward your Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) “state policy advisor” or your BWC Training and Technical Assistance (TTA) “subject matter expert” (SME) will ensure a more
accurate and timely response and the ultimate success of your program.
See the roles described
here.
|
In View: Commentary from BWC Experts
In View Commentaries feature commentary from BWC experts, including researchers, practitioners, and policy makers.
Read the recent In Views
here
:
|
BWC TTA Weekly Newsletters
The BWC TTA Weekly Newsletters provide up to date information on current In View Commentaries, BWC Resources, Webinars, Podcasts, BWCs in the News, and the BWC Technology Corner.
To subscribe to these newsletters, please email the BWC TTA team at
bwctta@cna.org.
|
|
Latest Research on Body-Worn Cameras
|
|
Abstract:
This study assessed the early deployment of the Anaheim Police Department’s body-worn camera
(BWC) program in 2015 by examining camera activations across officers, trends in activations over time, and how different police–community contacts predict BWC activations. These were assessed with correlational analyses among 40 BWC-equipped officers in the first 6 months of their use. Activation of the BWCs among officers varied widely, with 6-month average activations ranging
from 0% to 72%. Average activation rates increased over time from 3% to 54%. Officers disproportionately activated their cameras for events related to crimes; for example, activation rates for other categories were significantly lower compared to violent crimes, with odds ratios ranging from 0.148 to 0.663. The article concludes with a discussion on how the failure to activate a BWC limits the potential benefits of the technology. While officers have considerable discretion on when to activate their BWCs, law enforcement agencies must not only train and deploy BWCs among their officers but also audit and supervise individual use to ensure successful BWC programs.
|
Abstract:
Police departments use body-worn cameras (body cams) and
dashboard cameras (dash cams) to monitor the activity of police
officers in the field. Video from these cameras informs review of police conduct in disputed circumstances, often with the goal of determining an officer’s intent. Eight experiments (N = 2,119) reveal that body cam video of an incident results in lower observer judgments of intentionality than dash cam video of the same incident, an effect documented with both scripted videos and real police videos. This effect was due, in part, to variation in the visual salience of the focal actor: the body cam wearer is typically less visually salient when depicted in body versus dash cam video, which corresponds with lower observer intentionality judgments. In showing how visual salience of the focal actor may introduce unique effects on observer judgment, this research establishes an empirical platform that may inform public policy regarding surveillance of police conduct.
|
|
Abstract:
Body-worn cameras (BWCs) are increasingly more common in their use among police officers. Research on BWCs is the focus of an increasing number of studies seeking information on stakeholder perceptions and the impact of the technology on behavior and other related outcomes. Although the emerging research is mixed, several studies find that officers have concerns about the use of BWCs and may not fully support their use. The current study utilizes survey data from two Southern police departments. Police officers and supervisors were surveyed on their perceptions of BWCs prior to the implementation of BWCs, then again after their implementation. The analysis
focuses on changes in perceptions before and after BWC implementation and examines the impact of respondent rank on perceptions. Overall, perceptions became more positive toward BWCs after
the implementation; however, differences emerged when considering rank. Respondents at the supervisor rank expressed significantly less concern and more support for BWCs than those at the
officer level after implementation. These results are discussed in the context of the importance of officer support and buy-in for BWCs. Policy suggestions and future directions are also discussed.
|
Abstract:
In the past five years, body-worn cameras (BWCs) have disseminated widely and rapidly to police departments across the United States (White & Malm, 2020). In 2013, only one-third of agencies had some form of BWC program, most of which were small-scale pilot programs of the relatively new technology (Reaves, 2015). By 2016, about half of agencies had BWCs, including nearly 80% of large agencies (more than 500 sworn personnel) (Hyland, 2018). The push for BWCs came at a time when there was a severe dearth of research from which to draw guidance or best practices. In 2014, at the time of the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, there were only five published studies or agency reports documenting findings related to the impacts of BWCs (White, 2014). The number of rigorous assessments had reached more than 70 by March 2019 (Lum, Stoltz, Koper, Scherer, & Scherer, 2019) and continues to grow.
|
|
Special Feature:
Drafting Body-Worn Camera Policy
|
|
An agency's body-worn camera (BWC) policy is essential to the successful implementation of its BWC program. This document provides sample policy language that previous BWC Policy and Implementation Program (PIP) grantees have used in their BWC policies to sufficiently address objectives on the BWC Training and Technical Assistance (TTA) Scorecard. The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the BWC TTA providers, CNA, Arizona State University (ASU), and Justice and Security Strategies Inc. (JSS), provide examples of policy language that agencies can use to address Scorecard objectives and BWC topics (i.e., activation, deactivation, citizen notification, etc.) in a variety of ways. This document is not prescriptive nor does it direct agencies to address Scorecard objectives or BWC topics in a specific manner. The full document can be found at the link below. Example policies on individual BWC topics can be found at the links below, organized by category.
Read the full document
here.
|
|
|
BWCs in the Medical Field: How Can BWC Programs Work Within HIPAA?
On November 19, 2019, the BWC TTA provider hosted a webinar on body-worn cameras (BWC) in the medical field and discussed how these programs can work within HIPAA. The webinar provided insights and experiences regarding how body-worn camera programs have or have not impacted police agencies as they relate to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). Panelists discussed several ways that BWC programs can incorporate HIPAA language.
To view the webinar, clic
k
here
.
|
|
Leading the Way on Body-Worn Camera Implementation: Las Vegas Metropolitan, Nevada Police Department
The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) was established in 1973 and is a joint city-county police force for the City of Las Vegas and Clark County, Nevada. With a sworn police force of over 3,000 officers, LVMPD serves over 2.2 million people. In FY 2015, LVMPD received a Body-Worn Camera Policy and Implementation Program award of $250,000 to purchase over 250 cameras. As one of the first agencies to implement BWCs, LVMPD has become an innovative leader in many aspects of BWC implementation, including policy development, research and evaluation, and BWC technology management. Agencies across the country look to LVMPD for guidance, particularly on policy issues regarding officer and citizen review of video as well as policy auditing and compliance.
The development of LVMPD’s first BWC policy was challenging. In 2013, the department created a team to evaluate BWCs and write the initial policy. At this time, very little material on best practices existed, and no large agency policies could be adapted to meet LVMPD’s unique needs. The department was only in the camera evaluation stage as the request for proposals was under development. They understood a solid policy that covered activation, deactivation, supervisory review, maintenance, upload procedures, and the handling of cameras at critical incidents had to be written prior to procuring and deploying cameras. However, real-world camera use is critical for refining policies. By the time the first set of cameras arrived in early 2014, LVMPD had created a formal BWC Section, headed by a program manager (PM). The PM scoured available references and reached out to smaller agencies to glean valuable lessons learned from their deployments. LVMPD updated the policy with these lessons as well as some common-sense refinements, such as recording crime scenes and using BWCs during overtime assignments. Shortly after LVMPD revised its policy, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) published “Implementing a Body-Worn Camera Program.” This publication would serve as a foundational benchmark reference for agencies, and it helped validate the LVMPD’s policy. The third revision of the LVMPD policy drew from this report and included recommendations not covered in previous versions.
The national events of summer and fall of 2014 in Ferguson, MO and New York City, NY, were catalysts for dramatic and rapid increases in BWC deployments around the country. Agencies began discussing best practices for BWC policy and deployment. LVMPD fielded 200 cameras in 2014 and steadily increased that number over the following four years until the department reached full deployment. The BWC Section continued to monitor all aspects of the program and continually adjust policy to account for lessons learned both internally and from other agencies. On the national front, the BJA funded the BWC TTA Team to help agencies that received federal grants for BWC procurement develop comprehensive policies. LVMPD was among the initial 2015 grant year awardees. The assistance of the TTA Team helped LVMPD further revise its policy. Once most cameras were deployed, the BWC Section concentrated on revising policy and procedures even further to address issues not previously considered. Areas that needed to be addressed or refined in the policy included BWC use compliance, audits, transfer of video to the prosecutor’s office, cameras on plain-clothes officers, BWC use during major public disturbance incidents, and handling of public records requests. This continuous monitoring and refinement is ongoing to this day.
Takeaways from the initial LVMPD experience include the following:
- Agency policy continually evolves and should be monitored and adjusted in response to agency needs and lessons learned from using the cameras.
- Do not develop policy in a vacuum. Reach out to other agencies and community stakeholders and make use of all available references.
- Consider creating a BWC PM position (or section if you have the resources). Designate someone to monitor all aspects of the program and policy, at least until BWC usage becomes “institutionalized.”
- Know that once deployment is over, unanticipated issues will arise, such as BWC technology failures and storage capacity requirements. The agency must address these as quickly as possible.
- Finally, ensure that other policies and practices are reviewed for the impact of BWCs. Handling of BWCs post-officer-involved shooting and public records requests are two examples.
If your agency would like to be featured in the next issue of
The Quarterly
, please
contact us
.
|
|
Body-Worn Cameras in the News
|
|
Hennepin County elected officials on Tuesday finalized a $5.1 million plan to equip sheriff’s deputies and corrections officers with body cameras — joining the majority of Minnesota law-enforcement agencies and an estimated 10,500 departments nationwide that have adopted or procured the video technology.
|
|
Rural agencies face growing pressure to add body-worn cameras to their tech toolboxes, as officers, attorneys and the public increasingly depend upon recorded evidence. Since more than half of all U.S. law enforcement agencies serve jurisdictions with 10,000 or fewer residents, and nearly half have 10 officers or less, this is a financial and administrative concern too large to leave to inertia.
|
|
What could have been a horrible situation was turned into a peaceful resolution after Montgomery County (MD) police officers thwarted a possible attack. Last week a man who was armed, walked into a 7-Eleven with employees and customers. An officer’s bodycam footage shows how it all went down.
|
|
Police body camera video is shown in court, and in the media, during high-profile cases. But most cases are routine, and the video doesn’t show much. Still, the footage is considered evidence, and it must be accounted for whenever a case goes forward. In Marion County (FL), prosecutors and public defenders found themselves increasingly bogged down with the vast number of videos given to them for review. So the two entities, though adversaries in the courtroom, decided to join forces and look for some help.
|
|
Don't forget to follow us on social media!
Click on the icons below to stay up to date on all that
BWC TTA has to offer!
|
|
Points of view or opinions in this content are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the US Department of Justice.
|
|
This project was supported by Grant No. 2015-DE-BX-K002 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Office for Victims of Crime, and the SMART Office. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the US Department of Justice.
Points of view or opinions in this content are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the US Department of Justice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|