PPCS Attachments with Table of Contents

2015 Police Public Contact Survey OMB Supporting Statement

Attachments

Attachments

1. Language regarding data on use of excessive force (42 USC 14142 [sec. 210402])

2. Copy of the regulatory authority (42 USC 3731 and 3732)

3. Description of 2015 changes to the 2011 PPCS instrument

4. 2011 nonresponse bias analysis

5. Introduction letters for the NCVS collection: NCVS-572 and NCVS-573.

6. Report of Cognitive Testing of the 2014-2015 Police Public Contact Survey Questionnaire

7. Copy of the 2015 PPCS survey instrument

Attachment 1

42 USC § 14142. [Sec. 210402] Data on use of excessive force

(a) Attorney General to collect. The Attorney General shall, through appropriate means, acquire data about the use of excessive force by law enforcement officers.

(b) Limitation on use of data. Data acquired under this section shall be used only for research or statistical purposes and may not contain any information that may reveal the identity of the victim or any law enforcement officer.

(c) Annual summary. The Attorney General shall publish an annual summary of the data acquired under this section.

Attachment 2

DERIVATION

Title I

THE OMNIBUS CRIME CONTROL AND SAFE STREETS ACT OF 1968

(Public Law 90-351)

42 U.S.C. § 3711, et seq.

AN ACT to assist State and local governments in reducing the incidence of crime, to increase the effectiveness, fairness, and coordination of law enforcement and criminal justice systems at all levels of government, and for other purposes.

As Amended By

THE OMNIBUS CRIME CONTROL ACT OF 1970

(Public Law 91-644)

THE CRIME CONTROL ACT OF 1973

(Public Law 93-83)

THE JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION ACT OF 1974

(Public Law 93-415)

THE PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS’ BENEFITS ACT OF 1976

(Public Law 94-430)

THE CRIME CONTROL ACT OF 1976

(Public Law 94-503)

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1979

(Public Law 96-157)

THE JUSTICE ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1984

(Public Law 98-473)

STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1986

(Public Law 99-570-Subtitle K)

THE ANTI-DRUG ABUSE ACT OF 1988

TITLE VI, SUBTITLE C - STATE AND LOCAL NARCOTICS CONTROL

AND JUSTICE ASSISTANCE IMPROVEMENTS

(Public Law 100-690)

THE CRIME CONTROL ACT OF 1990

(Public Law 101-647)

BRADY HANDGUN VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT

(Public Law 103-159)

VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1994

(Public Law 103-322)

NATIONAL CHILD PROTECTION ACT OF 1993, AS AMENDED

(Public Law 103-209)

and

CRIME IDENTIFICATION TECHNOLOGY ACT OF 1998

(Public Law 105-251)

BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS

CHAPTER 46 - SUBCHAPTER III

[TITLE I - PART C]

42 USC § 3731 [Sec. 301.] Statement of purpose

It is the purpose of this subchapter [part] to provide for and encourage the collection and analysis of statistical information concerning crime, juvenile delinquency, and the operation of the criminal justice system and related aspects of the civil justice system and to support the development of information and statistical systems at the Federal, State, and local levels to improve the efforts of these levels of government to measure and understand the levels of crime, juvenile delinquency, and the operation of the criminal justice system and related aspects of the civil justice system. The Bureau shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible State governmental organizations and facilities responsible for the collection and analysis of criminal justice data and statistics. In carrying out the provisions of this subchapter [part], the Bureau shall give primary emphasis to the problems of State and local justice systems.

42 USC § 3732 [Sec. 302.] Bureau of Justice Statistics

(a) Establishment. There is established within the Department of Justice, under the general authority of the Attorney General, a Bureau of Justice Statistics (hereinafter referred to in this subchapter [part] as “Bureau”).

(b) Appointment of Director; experience; authority; restrictions. The Bureau shall be headed by a Director appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Director shall have had experience in statistical programs. The Director shall have final authority for all grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts awarded by the Bureau. The Director shall report to the Attorney General through the Assistant Attorney General. The Director shall not engage in any other employment than that of serving as Director; nor shall the Director hold any office in, or act in any capacity for, any organization, agency, or institution with which the Bureau makes any contract or other arrangement under this Act.

(c) Duties and functions of Bureau. The Bureau is authorized to–

(1) make grants to, or enter into cooperative agreements or contracts with public agencies, institutions of higher education, private organizations, or private individuals for purposes related to this subchapter [part]; grants shall be made subject to continuing compliance with standards for gathering justice statistics set forth in rules and regulations promulgated by the Director;

(2) collect and analyze information concerning criminal victimization, including crimes against the elderly, and civil disputes;

(3) collect and analyze data that will serve as a continuous and comparable national social indication of the prevalence, incidence, rates, extent, distribution, and attributes of crime, juvenile delinquency, civil disputes, and other statistical factors related to crime, civil disputes, and juvenile delinquency, in support of national, State, and local justice policy and decisionmaking;

(4) collect and analyze statistical information, concerning the operations of the criminal justice system at the Federal, State, and local levels;

(5) collect and analyze statistical information concerning the prevalence, incidence, rates, extent, distribution, and attributes of crime, and juvenile delinquency, at the Federal, State, and local levels;

(6) analyze the correlates of crime, civil disputes and juvenile delinquency, by the use of statistical information, about criminal and civil justice systems at the Federal, State, and local levels, and about the extent, distribution and attributes of crime, and juvenile delinquency, in the Nation and at the Federal, State, and local levels;

(7) compile, collate, analyze, publish, and disseminate uniform national statistics concerning all aspects of criminal justice and related aspects of civil justice, crime, including crimes against the elderly, juvenile delinquency, criminal offenders, juvenile delinquents, and civil disputes in the various States;

(8) recommend national standards for justice statistics and for insuring the reliability and validity of justice statistics supplied pursuant to this chapter [title];

(9) maintain liaison with the judicial branches of the Federal and State Governments in matters relating to justice statistics, and cooperate with the judicial branch in assuring as much uniformity as feasible in statistical systems of the executive and judicial branches;

(10) provide information to the President, the Congress, the judiciary, State and local governments, and the general public on justice statistics;

(11) establish or assist in the establishment of a system to provide State and local governments with access to Federal informational resources useful in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of programs under this Act;

(12) conduct or support research relating to methods of gathering or analyzing justice statistics;

(13) provide for the development of justice information systems programs and assistance to the States and units of local government relating to collection, analysis, or dissemination of justice statistics;

(14) develop and maintain a data processing capability to support the collection, aggregation, analysis and dissemination of information on the incidence of crime and the operation of the criminal justice system;

(15) collect, analyze and disseminate comprehensive Federal justice transaction statistics (including statistics on issues of Federal justice interest such as public fraud and high technology crime) and to provide technical assistance to and work jointly with other Federal agencies to improve the availability and quality of Federal justice data;

(16) provide for the collection, compilation, analysis, publication and dissemination of information and statistics about the prevalence, incidence, rates, extent, distribution and attributes of drug offenses, drug related offenses and drug dependent offenders and further provide for the establishment of a national clearinghouse to maintain and update a comprehensive and timely data base on all criminal justice aspects of the drug crisis and to disseminate such information;

(17) provide for the collection, analysis, dissemination and publication of statistics on the condition and progress of drug control activities at the Federal, State and local levels with particular attention to programs and intervention efforts demonstrated to be of value in the overall national anti‑ drug strategy and to provide for the establishment of a national clearinghouse for the gathering of data generated by Federal, State, and local criminal justice agencies on their drug enforcement activities;

(18) provide for the development and enhancement of State and local criminal justice information systems, and the standardization of data reporting relating to the collection, analysis or dissemination of data and statistics about drug offenses, drug related offenses, or drug dependent offenders;

(19) provide for research and improvements in the accuracy, completeness, and inclusiveness of criminal history record information, information systems, arrest warrant, and stolen vehicle record information and information systems and support research concerning the accuracy, completeness, and inclusiveness of other criminal justice record information;

(20) maintain liaison with State and local governments and governments of other nations concerning justice statistics;

(21) cooperate in and participate with national and international organizations in the development of uniform justice statistics;

(22) ensure conformance with security and privacy requirement of section 3789g of this title and identify, analyze, and participate in the development and implementation of privacy, security and information policies which impact on Federal and State criminal justice operations and related statistical activities; and

(23) exercise the powers and functions set out in subchapter VIII [part H] of this chapter [title].

(d) Justice statistical collection, analysis, and dissemination. To insure that all justice statistical collection, analysis, and dissemination is carried out in a coordinated manner, the Director is authorized to–

(1) utilize, with their consent, the services, equipment, records, personnel, information, and facilities of other Federal, State, local, and private agencies and instrumentalities with or without reimbursement therefor, and to enter into agreements with such agencies and instrumentalities for purposes of data collection and analysis;

(2) confer and cooperate with State, municipal, and other local agencies;

(3) request such information, data, and reports from any Federal agency as may be required to carry out the purposes of this chapter [title];

(4) seek the cooperation of the judicial branch of the Federal Government in gathering data from criminal justice records; and

(5) encourage replication, coordination and sharing among justice agencies regarding information systems, information policy, and data.

(e) Furnishing of information, data, or reports by Federal agencies. Federal agencies requested to furnish information, data, or reports pursuant to subsection (d)(3) of this section shall provide such information to the Bureau as is required to carry out the purposes of this section.

(f) Consultation with representatives of State and local government and judiciary. In recommending standards for gathering justice statistics under this section, the Director shall consult with representatives of State and local government, including, where appropriate, representatives of the judiciary.

42 USC § 3733 [Sec. 303.] Authority for 100 per centum grants

A grant authorized under this subchapter [part] may be up to 100 per centum of the total cost of each project for which such grant is made. The Bureau shall require, whenever feasible as a condition of approval of a grant under this subchapter [part] , that the recipient contribute money, facilities, or services to carry out the purposes for which the grant is sought.

42 USC § 3735 [Sec. 304.] Use of data

Data collected by the Bureau shall be used only for statistical or research purposes, and shall be gathered in a manner that precludes their use for law enforcement or any purpose relating to a particular individual other than statistical or research purposes.

42 USC § 3789g [Sec. 812.] Confidentiality of information

(a) Research of statistical information; immunity from process; prohibition against admission as evidence or use in any proceedings. Except as provided by Federal law other than this chapter, no officer or employee of the Federal Government, and no recipient of assistance under the provisions of this chapter shall use or reveal any research or statistical information furnished under this chapter by any person and identifiable to any specific private person for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was obtained in accordance with this chapter. Such information and copies thereof shall be immune from legal process, and shall not, without the consent of the person furnishing such information, be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in any action, suit, or other judicial, legislative, or administrative proceedings.

(b) Criminal history information; disposition and arrest data; procedures for collection, storage, dissemination, and current status; security and privacy; availability for law enforcement, criminal justice, and other lawful purposes; automated systems: review, challenge, and correction of information. All criminal history information collected, stored, or disseminated through support under this chapter shall contain, to the maximum extent feasible, disposition as well as arrest data where arrest data is included therein. The collection, storage, and dissemination of such information shall take place under procedures reasonably designed to insure that all such information is kept current therein; the Office of Justice Programs shall assure that the security and privacy of all information is adequately provided for and that information shall only be used for law enforcement and criminal justice and other lawful purposes. In addition, an individual who believes that criminal history information concerning him contained in an automated system is inaccurate, incomplete, or maintained in violation of this chapter, shall, upon satisfactory verification of his identity, be entitled to review such information and to obtain a copy of it for the purpose of challenge or correction.

(c) Criminal intelligence systems and information; prohibition against violation of privacy and constitutional rights of individuals. All criminal intelligence systems operating through support under this chapter shall collect, maintain, and disseminate criminal intelligence information in conformance with policy standards which are prescribed by the Office of Justice Programs and which are written to assure that the funding and operation of these systems furthers the purpose of this chapter and to assure that such systems are not utilized in violation of the privacy and constitutional rights of individuals.

(d) Violations; fine as additional penalty. Any person violating the provisions of this section, or of any rule, regulation, or order issued thereunder, shall be fined not to exceed $10,000, in addition to any other penalty imposed by law.

Attachment 3

Memo: For the record

Subject: Issues with 2011 Police-Public Contact Survey and Proposed Revisions for Cognitive Testing

Date: June 21, 2013

This document details problems identified in the 2011 Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) and describes the proposed revisions. The survey instrument with proposed revisions will be cognitively tested by the Census Bureau in July of 2013 and will be used for future PPCS data collection efforts. While the 2011 instrument was administered to a split sample of respondents to test the impact of instrument changes on rates of contact, such an experiment should not be necessary with the revisions proposed in this memo. The screening items will be consistent in the 2011 and revised instruments and the addition of new questions associated with each screener are not designed to provide additional cueing, rather to collect information that has not been previously collected.

Issue 1: Inability to count the number of screener contacts that occurred in a 12 month period and generate prevalence rates.

The 2011 PPCS instrument (as well as prior iterations of the PPCS) asked a single question pertaining to the total number of face-to-face contacts with police during the prior year. Because face-to-face contacts could include contacts occurring in social or routine settings (such as contacts with a neighbor who is an officer) in addition to contacts identified through the survey screener, the number of contacts could not be attributed to particular types of contact. The range of responses (from 0 to over 365) also made it challenging to analyze the number of contacts in a meaningful way and most analyses resort to recoding the responses into three categories: no face-to-face contact, one face-to-face contact, and more than one face-to-face contact.

For purposes of measuring disparities in the criminal justice system as well as better understanding the frequency of contact between the police and the public, it would be also useful to generate contact intensity or incidence rate by type of contact specifically included in the screener. For example, while the prevalence rate of whites and blacks stopped in traffic stops may be similar, it may also be the case that blacks are stopped more times during the year and have a higher intensity or incidence rate than whites. The 2011 instrument does not allow for this type of analysis.

Resolution: Rather than asking a single question about the total number of face-to-face contacts in a given year, if the respondent answers ‘yes’ to a screener, s/he is then asked how many times that contact occurred during the prior 12 months.

This change allows for the calculation of the prevalence of different types of contact for various subgroups. It is not expected to significantly increase the burden on respondents because only those who experienced the type of contact will be asked about the number of times it occurred. For respondents with multiple types of contact, it may in fact be easier for them to count the occurrence of each type of contact as they are thinking about it, rather than to try to calculate a sum total at the end of the screener.

Issue 2: Inability to accurately estimate the percentage of respondents stopped in traffic or street stops who were arrested.

The 2011 PPCS screener asked respondents if they had been involved in a series of police initiated contacts including street stops, traffic stops, and if they had been arrested. Respondents with more than one type of contact were then instructed to think about their most recent contact with police and were asked separate follow-up questions depending on the most recent type. However, if a respondent was arrested during a traffic or street stop, it is not clear whether s/he would classify the most recent contact as the arrest or as the traffic or street stop. Respondents who reported that the most recent contact was a traffic or street stop were asked additional questions about whether the contact resulted in an arrest and these rates were surprisingly low. It is possible that this is due to the fact that respondents arrested during either of these types of contact simply reported the most recent contact as the arrest and were not moved into the correct section of the instrument.

Resolution: For all screener questions except those about voluntary contact, respondents are asked following the screener whether any of the contacts resulted in an arrest. The arrest screener is changed to ask about any arrests other than those already mentioned (i.e. excluding arrests resulting from traffic or street stops).

Issue 3. Inability to generate a rate of police use-of-force.

In the 2011 instrument, only respondents for whom the most recent contact was a traffic or street stop or those with more than one contact were asked questions about police use-of-force. Respondents with a single contact due to a traffic accident, an arrest, or an other type (not a traffic or street stop) police initiated contact were not asked questions about police use-of-force.

Resolution: Respondents for whom the most recent contact with police involved a traffic accident, an arrest, or an other type of police initiated contacts are now asked additional questions about being ticketed, searched, and having force used against them.

Asking these questions of all respondents with involuntary contact also provides additional information about the nature of those contacts and the interactions between the police and public. Following the cognitive testing of the 2011 instrument, the Census Bureau advised that respondents involved in traffic accidents should not be asked questions about being ticketed, searched, or arrested. However, this advice failed to consider that traffic accidents could result from a variety of illegal behavior, such as speeding or driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, which may result in these types of outcomes. The resolution allows for a more accurate measure of the total number of respondents who have experienced outcomes such as ticketing, searches, and police use-of-force.

Additionally, while it may be rare for respondents with a voluntary contact as their most recent to have experienced use-of-force, there are scenarios in which it could occur. Therefore, a question is added to ask respondents with a voluntary contact whether that contact involved police using or threatening to use force. Finally, at the end of the instrument, a final question is added to ask any respondent who reported more than one contact if any of the earlier contacts involved the police using or threatening to use force. With these changes, it will now be possible to compute an overall rate of persons who had force used against them during the prior 12 months.

Issue 4: Small sample sizes and repetitive and contradictory questions on compliance with police during street stops.

Respondents who had a street stop as their most recent contacts were asked a series of question about compliance with the police. The series started with the question, “Did the police give you a command during the stop?” If the respondents answered yes, s/he was then asked about whether they complied with the request and “which of these factors influenced how you responded to the request by the officer?” followed by 21 questions pertaining to why the respondent complied or not.

There are a number of issues with this series of questions. For starters, the initial question is too vague to provide any type of meaningful information. Additionally, the sample sizes for each of the response categories were very small. For example, of the 93 respondents who said the officer gave them a command, only 4 reported that they did not comply. The way the question was worded, however, even those who said they did comply could answer that their compliance was related to the fact that they did not trust the police, or other similar responses that seem contradictory to compliance. Finally, within the series of 21 factors influencing responses were items such as, “because the officer yelled at you,” “because the officer handcuffed you,” “because the officer aimed a weapon at you.” These questions seem very repetitive since the next series of question on the instrument asked about behaviors of the police including such things as, “shout at you,” “handcuff you,” "point a gun at you.”

Resolution: The series of street stop questions pertaining to compliance with police commands was dropped from the instrument.

Issue 5: Race of officer questions do not allow for the identification of officer race when more than one officer was present.

Respondents with a traffic or street stop as the most recent police contact were asked a series of questions about the race of the officer. If one or more officer was present during the stop the questions read, “Was one or more of the police officers of Hispanic or Latino origin?” and “Were one or more of the officers: (Select all that apply) White, Black, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Don’t know.” The problem is that, for example, if a respondent says there were two officers present and then says ‘yes’ to the Hispanic origin question and selects ‘white’ and ‘black’ in the next question, there is no way of knowing whether a. one officer was Hispanic and the other was two or more races; b. one officer was Hispanic and the black; c. one officer was white and the other was black and Hispanic, or even whether d. one officer was white and Hispanic and the other was black and Hispanic. Essentially unless only one race or Hispanic origin is selected for a group of officers, it is not clear how the race of the group should be classified.

Resolution: The race of officer questions were revised to match the core NCVS race of offender questions.

With this approach, if there is a group of officers and multiple races are selected, the respondent is asked if the officers were ‘mostly white, mostly black, mostly Hispanic, etc.’ allowing for the race of the group to be more accurately classified.

Issue 6: Failure to collect information on officer gender, which is important as a growing number of women enter law enforcement.

Resolution: Questions added to traffic and street stop sections to ask about the gender of the officer(s).

The wording of the questions mirrors the questions on the core NCVS about the gender of offenders.

Issue 7: Lack of transitions from one part of the instrument to the next.

In the paper copy of the instrument, sections are labeled with headings such as “Characteristics of Traffic stops” and “Outcomes of Traffic stops.” When reading the paper copy of the instrument, these headings allow the reader to understand what the next series of questions will be about. However, these headings do not translate into the interview in any way, so the respondents do not have any indication that the interviewer is switching gears.

Resolution: Transitional sentences added throughout the instrument to be read to the respondent and let them know that, for example, “Now I’m going to ask you some questions about the outcome of the traffic stop that you have been telling me about.”

Attachment 4

March 26, 2012

MEMORANDUM FOR Enrique Lamas

Acting Chief, Demographic Surveys Division

From: Ruth Ann Killion

Chief, Demographic Statistical Methods Division

Prepared By: Lindsay Longsine

Victimization and Expenditures Branch

Demographic Statistical Methods Division

Subject: Nonresponse Bias Plan for the 2011 Police Public Contact Survey (PPCS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)

1. Introduction

This document describes our plan for evaluating nonresponse in the 2011 PPCS, a supplement to the NCVS. The Office of Management and Budget provides guidelines for conducting a nonresponse bias study when the expected unit response rate of a survey is below 80 percent [1].

This study plan is similar to the study plan that was created for the 2011 School Crime

Supplement (SCS) to the NCVS [2]. We have also incorporated suggestions made by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to improve the original nonresponse bias plan for the PPCS [3].

2. Overview of 2011 Police Public Contact Survey

The 2011 PPCS is sponsored by the Law Enforcement Statistics Unit of BJS and is conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. The purpose of the 2011 PPCS is to measure the public’s face-to-face contact with the police and to collect many important characteristics of these contacts. The primary variable of interest is the prevalence of contact with the police.

The supplement will be administered during July-December 2011 to units that are in sample for NCVS during that time period. The population of interest for PPCS includes all civilian, non-institutionalized persons in the U.S. aged 16 and older who have successfully completed an NCVS interview.

A new questionnaire was introduced for the 2011 PPCS. For comparison purposes, it was decided that 15% of the PPCS respondents should receive the old, 2008 questionnaire while the rest receive the new questionnaire. However, there was an instrument problem in July 2011 that caused 19% of the respondents to receive the old questionnaire. As a result, separate nonresponse bias analyses will be conducted for the 15/19% split samples and the 81/85% split samples. In other words, there will be one analysis for the old questionnaire and one for the new questionnaire.

3. Discussion of Nonresponse Bias in the 2011 Police Public Contact Survey

Nonresponse bias exists in a survey if the value of the survey estimate varies significantly between respondents and nonrespondents. The magnitude of nonresponse bias is determined by the response rate and how much the respondents and nonrespondents differ on the survey estimate. For PPCS, nonresponse bias is a problem only if both of the following are true:

• Response rate is low

• The amount of contact with the police varies greatly between respondents and nonrespondents

If the response rate is high, or if contact with the police is similar for respondents and nonrespondents, then nonresponse would not have much effect on the overall estimates.

Minimizing Nonresponse

Methods are in place to minimize nonresponse and nonresponse bias. These methods include:

For NCVS only:

• Advance letters for all cases. These letters are available in English, Spanish, and a few other languages.

• Follow up letters (for refusals, no-one-at-home, temporarily absent) in English, Spanish, and a few other languages.

For NCVS and PPCS:

• Training Field Representatives (FR) to gain respondent cooperation

• Follow up attempts by the same FR at different days and times

• Providing brochures and examples of BJS reports to respondents

• Making appointments for interviews

• Interviewing in pairs (“Buddy interviewing”) in dangerous neighborhoods

• Follow up with nonrespondents multiple times

• Conducting the PPCS right after NCVS minimizes lost contacts

• Completing interviews with two modes of data collection: personal visit or telephone

• Providing Spanish language Computer Assisted Personal Interview questionnaire

• Reducing nonresponse bias by applying weight adjustments to respondents within the same demographic groups during estimation. For the NCVS household nonresponse adjustment, the demographic groups are formed by the Core Based Statistical Area status, urbanicity, and race variables. For the NCVS person nonresponse adjustment, the groups are formed by region, age, race and sex. For the PPCS nonresponse adjustment, the groups are formed by region, age, race, and sex.

In the nonresponse adjustments, we create the demographic groups so that the cases within one group share a lot of similar characteristics. Although it is not guaranteed for any one group, as a rule, “similar characteristics” means that members of the group are similar in likelihood both to respond to the survey and to have had contact with the police. The groups were initially established by choosing variables, which were thought to be related to nonresponse and nonresponse bias. There could be nonresponse bias associated with demographic characteristics not included in the nonresponse adjustment groups.

Another reason nonresponse bias can still be present in the estimates after the nonresponse adjustment is simply because we do not have all the information about nonrespondents. It would be ideal to measure the rate of police contact for respondents and nonrespondents in order to adjust for more of the nonresponse bias. However, we do not know the police contact rate or any other characteristics of the nonrespondents.

4. Unit Nonresponse Measures

Response Rates

There are three ways that a person can be a nonrespondent to the PPCS:

• If the entire household did not respond to NCVS

• If the household responded to NCVS, but a person within the household (that would be in scope for PPCS) did not respond to the NCVS interview

• If a person responded to NCVS, but not to the PPCS interview

We will use all of three of these components of nonresponse to compute PPCS response rates for each of the split samples. We will also compute response rates for the levels of several different demographic variables in order to try to identify groups where nonresponse exists and therefore where nonresponse bias potentially exists.

In order to compute response rates by demographic variables, we need values of the variables for nonrespondents. We will attempt to get variables for the nonrespondents from earlier interviews or from household data. We will not be able to get values of variables for people that never respond to the survey.

We will compute response rates for the following variables (levels shown in parenthesis):

• Sex (male, female)

• Race (white only, black only, Asian only, all others)

• Hispanic origin (Hispanic, non-Hispanic)

• Urbanicity (urban, suburban, rural)

• Census Region (Northeast, Midwest, South, West)

We will then look at estimates of police contact that are available for any of the subgroups, and use that along with the response rates to determine where nonresponse bias may exist. This will be done separately for each split sample¹.

Other variables for which we can compute response rates for comparison purposes include time in sample, mode of interview, etc.

Respondent and Nonrespondent Distributions

We will compute respondent and nonrespondent distributions for the same subgroups for which we are computing response rates. The respondent distributions will show the percentage of respondents that are male, etc. This is different from response rates, which would show the percentage of males that respond. The nonrespondent distributions will show the percentage of nonrespondents that are male, etc.

Nonresponse Bias Estimates

True response bias is a measure that is based on the survey estimate and response rates for different subgroups. We do not know whether nonrespondents have had contact with the police or not. Because we cannot measure true nonresponse bias, our nonresponse bias estimates in this study can be described as reflecting the amount of bias in the sample composition caused by respondents relative to the split sample to which they belong¹.

The formula that we will use for nonresponse bias is as follows:

Where:

= the mean based on all sample cases within each split sample

= the mean based only on respondent cases within each split sample

Sr = total respondents in split sample

St = total persons in split sample

Y_k = one person with characteristic of interest

W_k = weight of a person

For example, to compute nonresponse bias for males for each split, the formula would look like the following:

5. Item Nonresponse Measures

We will compute response rates for some PPCS items/questions in order to determine whether or not respondents are more reluctant to answer certain questions related to police contact. We selected questions for this study that we judged to be some of the most important items.

We will compute item response rates for the following items from the 2008 PPCS:

• Question #2: During the last 12 months, did you have any face-to-face contact with a police officer?

• Question #7: Do you feel any of the force used or threatened against you was excessive?

• Question #8: Were you injured as a result of this contact?

• Question #8a: What were the injuries you suffered?

• Question #14a: Did this contact occur during a traffic STOP?

• Question #14b: Were you the driver or the passenger of the vehicle that was stopped?

• Question #24a: Was the race of the police officer White, Black, or some other race?

• Question #24b: Were the police officers (all, mostly, or equally mixed) White, Black, or some other Race?

We will compute item response rates for the following items from the 2011 PPCS:

• Question #3a-d: Have you reported any kind of crime, disturbance, or suspicious activity to the police? Have you reported a non-crime emergency such as a traffic accident or medical emergency to the police? Have you participated in block watch or other anti-crime program WITH police? Have you approached or sought help from the police in the last 12 months for something I haven’t mentioned?

• Question #28 and 60: Do you feel any of the force used or threatened against you was excessive?

• Question #30 and 62: Were you injured as a result of this contact?

• Question #26f, h-j and 58f, h-j: Did the police…Actually push or grab you? Actually kick or hit you? Actually spray you with a chemical or pepper spray? Actually use an electroshock weapon against you, such as a stun gun?

• Question #3f: Have you been stopped by the police while driving a motor vehicle?

• Question #3f-g: Have you been stopped by the police while driving a motor vehicle? Have you been the passenger in a motor vehicle that was stopped by police?

• Question #12, 13, 39, and 40: Was the police officer of Hispanic or Latino origin? Was the race of the police officer White, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, or Don’t know?

• Question #14, 15, 41, and 42: Was one or more of the police officers of Hispanic or Latino origin? Were one or more of the police officers White, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, or Don’t know?

6. Methods

The ideal way of looking at nonresponse bias is to compare the estimate of interest to a known value of that estimate. This is not possible in practice as we do not have a known value for police contact. An alternative is to compare other characteristics that may be related to the estimate of interest to a known value or to compare the characteristics of the respondents and the nonrespondents to see if they are similar.

The response rates tell us the percentage of a particular subgroup that responds to the PPCS or the NCVS. It is useful to compare response rates for different subgroups. Respondent and nonrespondent distributions show us the relative number of respondents or nonrespondents within the different levels of a subgroup variable. The nonresponse bias estimates will give us information about the impact of nonresponse that exists.

Obtaining Person Level Subgroup Variables for Nonrespondents and for Interviews with Missing Data

For PPCS noninterviews and interviews with missing values for the subgroup variables, we will attempt to get values for the variables from the corresponding NCVS person interviews in the second half of 2011. If values cannot be found there, we will attempt to get values from previous NCVS person interviews.

Similarly, for NCVS noninterviews in the second half of 2011 and NCVS interviews with missing values for the subgroup variables, we will attempt to get values from previous NCVS person interviews.

If values cannot be found from previous NCVS person interviews, we can attempt to get age and sex from the household interviews. In the household interview, the respondent is supposed to report the age and sex for all household members.

If we cannot get values for race from previous NCVS person interviews, we will use race of the reference person from the household interview. Similarly, if we cannot get Hispanic origin from previous NCVS person interviews, we will use Hispanic origin of reference person.

In NCVS production, when a variable for a person is still blank after looking at past data, the variable is given a value through allocation in program edits (i.e. imputed). However, we are not using values that are allocated in edits in this study.

Weights

In the detailed weighting process for NCVS, baseweights were adjusted with several different factors, which are: weighting control factor, new permit factor, weighting factor cap, within-household noninterview factor, household noninterview factor, first-stage ratio-estimate factor, and second-stage ratio estimate factor.

Since the noninterview adjustment components of the final NCVS weights are created so that respondents represent the nonrespondents, nonrespondents do not have final person weights. Therefore, baseweights will be used in this study when computing weighted data. The baseweight is the inverse of the probability of selection of a unit or person.

All NCVS households have the same base weight. Therefore, weighted response rates are the same as unweighted response rates, due to the weights cancelling out in the formula.

7. References

[1] Office of Management and Budget., Standards and Guidelines for Statistical Surveys,

September 2006.

[2] U.S. Census Bureau Memorandum for Cheryl R. Landman from Ruth Ann Killion,

“Nonresponse Bias Plan for the 2011 School Crime Supplement (SCS) to the National

Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS),” November 24, 2010

[3] U.S. Department of Justice Memorandum for Ruth Ann Killion and Cheryl Landman

from William Sabol,“BJS response to DSMD memos on the Police Public Contact

Survey (PPCS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey,” October 12, 2011

cc:

W. Sabol (BJS) P. Flanagan (DSMD)

L. Bynum (DSD) S. Ash

D. Watt B. Blass

C. Seamands J. Burcham

S. Bittner L. Longsine

A. Peregoy

Attachment 5

Attachment 6

Attachment 6

Final Report of the Cognitive Testing of the 2014 Police-Public Contact Survey

Theresa DeMaio and Jessica Holzberg

U.S. Census Bureau

January 24, 2014

INTRODUCTION

At the request of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Center for Survey Measurement conducted cognitive testing of the 2014 Police-Public Contact Survey questionnaire to evaluate changes, including revisions to transitions between sections of the survey and to questions on the number of face-to-face contacts with the police. In addition, questions were added to ask respondents whose most recent contact was a traffic accident to provide information about tickets, searches, and police use of force and to collect the month and year of the most recent contact for all types of contact.

METHODOLOGY

Between August and December 2013, two rounds of cognitive interviews were conducted by Census Bureau Field Representatives. Fourteen interviews were conducted in each round. Because the questionnaire was not ready for Round 1 testing at the time that questions about contact with police in the last 12 months were inserted in the respondent screening questionnaire, one respondent in Round 1 was asked about contacts that occurred outside of the reference period. As a result of recruiting errors in Round 2, two respondents did not have contact with police during the reference period and are not included in these results. The results reported here are based on interviews with 26 respondents; 14 in Round 1 and 12 in Round 2.

Respondents were recruited in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area through advertisements on craigslist.com and in the Gazette, which is a local Maryland newspaper that serves Montgomery County, Prince Georges County, and Carroll County. Respondents were recruited who had contact with the police in the last 12 months in three categories: traffic stops, street stops, and voluntary contacts with police. The interviews were mostly conducted at the Census Bureau’s cognitive laboratory; however, some interviews were conducted at locations more convenient to respondents, such as local coffee shops and libraries. They were paid $40 for their participation.

Interviews were conducted using a paper version of a questionnaire designed for automated administration. Because of this, it contained a complicated series of skip patterns and fills that will not appear in the final instrument, The Field Representatives were not comfortable navigating the paper questionnaire and as a result, there were interviewer errors that resulted in respondents not being asked questions they should have been and vice versa. A member of the research staff observed the Round 1 interviews, but the Round 2 interviews were not observed.

The following table describes the demographic characteristics of the cognitive interview respondents:

	Number of Rs
Gender
Male	9
Female	17
Race
White	10
Black	14
Other	2
Education
High school or GED	2
Some college	11
College graduate	9
Graduate education	4
Age groups
30 and younger	3
31-45	5
46-60	10
61+	8

The following table contains the types of total contacts and most recent contacts reported by respondents, separately by round.

	Round 1		Round 2
Type of Contact	# of Total contacts	# of Most recent contacts	# of Total Contacts	# of Most recent contacts
report a crime, disturbance or suspicious activity	9	5	8	4
report a non-crime emergency	4	0	1	0
participate in block watch	1	0	1	0
approached or sought help for some other reason	6	1	2	0
involved in a traffic accident	0	0	5	3
stopped in a public place	3	3	1	1
stopped while driving a motor vehicle	2	2	5	4
passenger in a stopped motor vehicle	0	0	3	1
arrested during some other contact	1	1	0	0
stopped or approached police for some other reason	4	1	1	0

RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Below are the results from the two rounds of cognitive testing and recommendations for changes for each question.

1. Before I get to the questions about contacts you may have had with the police, I would like to find out how often you usually drive. Do you currently drive…

1  Every day or almost every day?

2  A few days a week?

3  A few days a month?

4  A few times a year?

5  Never?

In the first round, eight respondents chose “Every day or almost every day” and five chose “Never.” Another respondent had trouble deciding between “A few times a year” and “Never,” but ultimately decided “Never” was the best answer.

In the second round, we actively recruited respondents who had been in traffic accidents. In this round, nine reported driving “Every day or almost every day,” one reported “A few days a week,” one reported “A few times a year,” and two reported “Never.”

Many respondents thought that “Every day” and “Almost every day” were separate answer choices and chose one option when answering the question. However, this did not affect respondents’ answers.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

2. I am going to read some questions about experiences you may have had seeking help or assistance from the police. Have you approached or sought help from the police for any of the following reasons in the last 12 months?

2a. Have you reported any kind of crime, disturbance, or suspicious activity to the police?

 Yes  No

2a1. How many times did this happen during the past 12 months?

2a2. Was this contact a face-to-face (in person) interaction with police?

 Yes  No

2a3. How many of these contacts were face-to-face (in person) interactions with police?

Nine respondents in the first round and eight respondents in the second round said “yes” to this question. For five respondents in the first round and four in the second round this was the most recent contact.

Two respondents reported in Q. 2a.1 that they had spoken to the police multiple times.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

2b. Have you reported a non-crime emergency such as a traffic accident or medical emergency to the police?

 Yes  No

2b1. How many times did this happen during the past 12 months?

2b2. Was this contact a face-to-face (in person) interaction with police?

 Yes  No

2b3. How many of these contacts were face-to-face (in person) interactions with police?

Four respondents in the first round and one respondent in the second round said “yes” to this question. This was not the most recent contact for any respondents.

The respondent in the second round also reported this same contact in question 2a and 2e. She immediately volunteered that the contact in 2b was what she was referring to in 2a. She indicated that she did not focus on the “crime, disturbance, or suspicious activity” part of 2a. She later also reported this contact in 2e. This would seem to be the correct place to report the contact, since she was involved in the traffic accident.

Recommendation: We suggest two options for this question. The first is to modify the question to read, “Have you reported a non-crime emergency such as a traffic accident that you were not involved in or a medical emergency to the police?” The other option would be to move questions 2a, 2b, and 2c to the end of the series, so eager respondents would report in the item most relevant. However, we note this might cause other problems and could not be implemented without further testing.

Sponsor’s Feedback: The sponsor accepted this first recommendation and agreed to change 2b to read, “Have you reported a non-crime emergency, such as a medical emergency or a traffic accident you were not involved in, to the police?”

2c. Have you participated in block watch or other anti-crime programs WITH police?

 Yes  No

One respondent in the first round and one respondent in the second round said “yes” to this question; it was not the most recent contact for either respondent.

The respondent who said “yes” in the first round lived across the street from a “problem house” that frequently had problems with loud noise, drug use, and violence. The police wanted to use the roof of her condo building to set up surveillance on the house. The respondent said she was involved because she was a member of the condo association. The respondent in the second round was reporting about a citizen advisory meeting at which there was direct contact with police.

Only four of thirteen and two of thirteen respondents, respectively, had heard the term “block watch” before. Three respondents mentioned this question as being difficult to understand in the cognitive interview debriefing. One respondent explicitly recommended changing this phrase to “neighborhood watch.” However, respondents were able to interpret it as meaning “neighborhood watch” or “community watch.”

Recommendation: Change “block watch” to “community watch.”

Sponsor’s Feedback: The sponsor did not accept this recommendation. However, the sponsor suggested adding a note for field representatives that this refers to “neighborhood watch or community watch programs.”

2d. Have you approached or sought help from the police in the last 12 months for something I haven’t mentioned?

 Yes  No

2d1. How many times did this happen during the past 12 months?

2d2. Was this contact a face-to-face (in person) interaction with police?

 Yes  No

2d3. How many of these contacts were face-to-face (in person) interactions with police?

Six respondents in the first round and two respondents in the second round said “yes” to this question. This was the most recent contact for one respondent in the first round.

Two respondents changed their minds in reporting. One was the person above who had contact with police during National Prescription Drug Take-Back Day. She originally said “no” and changed her response to “yes.” The other was a woman who initially said “yes” because of a traffic stop, but then corrected her answer after thinking about the phrase “approached or sought help from the police.”

One respondent asked the interviewer to clarify whether the question was asking “ever in my life or in the past 12 months?”

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

2e. In the last 12 months, have you been involved in a traffic accident in which the police came to the scene?

 Yes  No

2e1. How many times did this happen during the past 12 months?

2e2. Were you arrested during [this contact/any of these contacts] with police?

 Yes  No

No one said “yes” to this question in the first round. In the second round, five respondents said “yes” to this question. Of these, three were the most recent contact.

In one case, the respondent had been involved in two traffic accidents, one as a driver and the other as a pedestrian. The most recent was about her experience as a pedestrian. The Field Representative asked her about both incidents.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

Now I am going to ask you questions about any time in the last 12 months when police initiated contact with you. In the last 12 months:

2f. Have you been stopped by the police while in a public place, but not while driving or riding in a vehicle? This includes being in a parked vehicle.

 Yes  No

2f1. How many times did this happen during the past 12 months?

2f2. Were you arrested during [this contact/any of these contacts] with police?

 Yes  No

Three respondents in the first round said “yes” to this question and it was the most recent contact for all three of them.

Field Representatives felt that respondents got distracted by the supplemental instruction (“This includes being in a parked vehicle.”). They focused on the parked vehicle rather than the public place. The wording for this question was changed in the second round to “Have you been stopped by the police while in a public place or a parked vehicle, but not while driving or riding in a moving vehicle?”

One respondent who was asked this question said “yes” and it was his most recent contact. He had two contacts of this type and was easily able to identify the most recent. He knew the exact dates of both. He was arrested for trespassing in the most recent incident.

Respondents in Round 2 did not have any problems with the revised question wording.

Respondents focused on “parked car” when asked to paraphrase the question. Six respondents also mentioned parking lots; most did not mention a public place that was not vehicle-related in their interpretation of the question. However, when specifically asked about a “public place,” respondents were clear about what was meant, and mentioned other public areas like shopping centers, schools, movies, restaurants, etc.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any further changes to this question.

2g. Have you been stopped by the police while driving a motor vehicle (NOT including any driving violations captured by camera and ticketed by mail)?

 Yes  No

2g1. How many times did this happen during the past 12 months?

2g2. Were you arrested during [this contact/any of these contacts] with police?

 Yes  No

Two respondents in the first round said “yes” to this question. It was the most recent contact for both of them.

While respondents did not have problems with this question, several of them asked the Field Representative whether this was asking about the last 12 months, or answered about a longer reference period and had to change their answer when the field representative determined that they were answering about the wrong time period. Because of this, the question was changed in Round 2 to include the reference period as follows: “Have you been stopped by the police in the last 12 months while driving a motor vehicle (NOT including any driving violations captured by camera and ticketed by mail)?”

In Round 2, five respondents said “yes” to this question. For four of them it was the most recent contact.

There were no problems with the revised wording; although one respondent did not hear the reference period contained in the question and asked the interviewer to clarify whether the question was asking ever or in the past 12 months.

Respondents gave examples of driving violations that included speeding, running a red light or stop sign, not wearing a seatbelt, texting while driving, illegal U-turn, broken taillights, and expired tags.

One respondent thought that camera ticketing was included here, despite its explicit exclusion in the question wording.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any further changes to this question.

2h. Have you been the passenger in a motor vehicle that was stopped by police?

 Yes  No

2h1. How many times did this happen during the past 12 months?

2h2. Were you arrested during [this contact/any of these contacts] with police?

 Yes  No

No respondents said yes in the first round.

While there were no problems with this question, we added the reference period for the second round to be consistent with the change made to Q.2g after the first round. The wording for Round 2 was as follows: “In the last 12 months, have you been the passenger in a motor vehicle that was stopped by police?”

In the second round, three respondents said yes. For one of them, it was the most recent contact.

This respondent answered in question 48 (later in the questionnaire) that she was given a written warning, but the driver of the car was given the warning, not the respondent. This was a misreport.

Recommendation: We recommend that the sponsor consider whether question 48 should only be asked of drivers of cars who were stopped by the police.

Sponsor’s Feedback: This recommendation was not accepted, because passengers could also receive verbal or written warnings and should be included in the question.

2i. In the last 12 months, have you been arrested during any contact with police not previously mentioned?

 Yes  No

One respondent said yes in the first round. It was her most recent contact.

This Round 1 respondent was answering about an incident that occurred outside the reference period; nevertheless she did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

2j. Have you been stopped or approached by the police in the last 12 months for something else that hasn’t been discussed?

 Yes  No

2j1. How many times did this happen during the past 12 months?

Four respondents said “yes” in the first round and it was the most recent contact for one of them. In the second round, one respondent said “yes.” She described a situation where a police officer pulled her over and asked her if she knew her temporary tags would be expiring soon. This incident also appears to have been reported in 2g, although the FR didn’t probe about this. It might be a double report.

Respondents were trying to be helpful and mentioned more casual police contact. One respondent described interactions with the internal police force at the government agency where she works. Another brought up talking with police officers about dogs at a fair. Neither respondent thought those should count here.

One respondent used this opportunity to change his answer to 2e to “no.”

One respondent “had to think about” whether other contact was in the last 12 months. She said “no.”

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

3. You just mentioned several contacts with the police. Which of these was the most recent?

1  Reported a crime, disturbance, suspicious person to the police

2  Reported a non-crime emergency to the police

3  Participated in block watch WITH police

4  Approached or sought help from the police for something else

5  Involved in a traffic accident in which the police came to the scene

6  Stopped by the police in a public place, but not while driving or riding in a vehicle

7  Stopped by the police while driving a motor vehicle

8  Was a passenger in a motor vehicle that was stopped by the police

9  Was arrested during a contact with police not previously mentioned

10  Was stopped or approached by the police for something else not already mentioned

I’m going to start by asking some questions about the nature of the stop and the officer or officers who stopped you. Please tell me ONLY about the MOST RECENT contact you had with the police.

4. Earlier you mentioned having contact with the police while in a public place but not driving or riding in a vehicle. Were there any other persons with you at the time of the stop?

 Yes  No

In the first round, three respondents were asked this question. Two respondents answered “no.” The respondent who said “yes” expressed some initial hesitation: “Well, there were people outside and I was talking to my brother.”

In the second round, the sponsor added a question about the date of the occurrence before asking about other persons: “Earlier you mentioned having contact with the police while in a public place but not driving or riding in a vehicle. During what month and year did that contact occur?”

One person was asked this question. The respondent was able to answer that the street stop occurred in October 2013.

Were there any other persons with you at the time of the stop?

The respondent said “no.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

5. How many other persons were with you at the time of the stop?

The respondent who was asked this question in the first round answered “yes” was standing outside his brother’s car, exchanging phone numbers, at the end of a family gathering when police approached him. He did not know how to answer this question. It never occurred to him to say one (his brother). There were several family members around and also neighbors who were intervening on his behalf. He finally decided to use the space of within 10 feet and answered “7.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

6. Did the police give a reason for stopping you?

 Yes  No

All three respondents in the first round and the respondent in the second round said “yes.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

7. What was the reason given for this stop? Did the police…

1. Suspect you of something?

All respondents said yes.

2. Match you to the description of someone they were looking for?

All respondents said “no;” however, one respondent should have said “yes.” He later explained, “[someone] reported, ‘a black person just ran out with my wallet’ and along comes me.” This same respondent also answered 7c incorrectly.

Were the police…

3. Seeking information about another person?

Three respondents said “no” to this question. One of these reports was incorrect, as noted above. Police incorrectly believed he committed the crime and therefore did not look for someone else meeting the description. The respondent who said “yes” was asked if he knew a man who the police had stopped across the street.

4. Investigating a crime?

One respondent said “no” to this question and two said yes. The respondent referred to above said “no” because he did not commit the crime, but then changed his answer to “yes” after thinking about what the question was asking.

5. Providing a service or assistance to you?

All respondents said “no,” though one mentioned that the police asked if he needed an ambulance because “they must have thought that I was mentally unstable. I told them no.” One respondent laughed at this question, and another respondent commented the police were providing a “disservice.”

6. Did someone you were with match the description of someone the police were looking for?

One respondent answered this question, and said “no.”

7. Was someone you were with suspected of something?

One respondent answered this question, and said “no.”

8. Was there some other reason?

Three respondents said “no;” one was incorrectly not asked the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

8. Would you say the police had a legitimate reason for stopping you?

 Yes  No

Three respondents said “no.” The fourth was unsure because the police commented about how the area was high in drugs and crime when stopping him. This respondent said he thought a legitimate reason for stopping him would be if the police witnessed him committing a crime, instead of “just assuming it.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Respondents thought that probable cause, or a “real reason to stop me” would be a legitimate reason. One respondent commented the police “were just doing their job.”

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

9. At the time you were stopped, was there one or more than one officer present?

1  One officer

2  More than one officer

3  Don’t know

All respondents said “yes.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

10. Was the police officer male or female?

1  Male

2  Female

3  Don’t know

All respondents were skipped over this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

11. Was the police officer of Hispanic or Latino origin?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

All respondents were skipped over this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

12. What race or races was the police officer? You may select more than one. Was the officer…

1  White?

2  Black or African American?

3  American Indian or Alaska Native?

4  Asian?

5  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander?

6  Don’t know

All respondents were skipped over this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

13. Were the police officers male or female?

1  All male

2  All female

3  Don’t know

4  Both male and female

Three respondents were stopped by police officers who were reported as all male. One respondent reported that she was stopped by one female and one male officer.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

14. Were they mostly male or mostly female?

1  Mostly male

2  Mostly female

3  Evenly divided

4  Don’t know

The respondent who answered the question selected “Evenly divided.”

The respondent did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

15. Was one or more of the police officers of Hispanic or Latino origin?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

One respondent was not asked this question or question 16 due to an incorrect interviewer skip pattern. Of the three respondents who did answer, one said “yes” and two said “no.” The respondent who said “yes” decided on his answer because “when the officer was talking to the dispatcher on the radio they were speaking Spanish.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

16. Were the officers mostly Hispanic, mostly non-Hispanic, or an equal number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic?

1  Mostly Hispanic or Latino

2  Mostly non-Hispanic

3  Equal number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic

4  Don’t know

One respondent said “mostly non-Hispanic.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

17. What race or races were the officers? You may select more than one. Were they…

1  White?

2  Black or African American?

3  American Indian or Alaska Native?

4  Asian?

5  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander?

6  Don’t know

Two respondents selected “only Black or African-American.” The third respondent had contact with four officers, and commented two were “White,” one was “Black or African-American,” and one was “Asian.”

Just one respondent had trouble coming up with his answer. This respondent said the female officer was White, but was not sure about the male officer: “He was something. He may have been Latino now that I think about it, or maybe Hawaiian or something. I don’t know. I don’t think he was Latino. I don’t know what he was but he wasn’t just White.” The interviewer did not ask the respondent to choose an answer and only marked White.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

18. What race were most of the officers?

1  Mostly White

2  Mostly Black or African American

3  Mostly American Indian or Alaska Native

4  Mostly Asian

5  Mostly Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

6  Equal number of each race

7  Don’t know

Two respondents answered this question; one selected “Mostly White.” The interviewer did not mark an answer for the respondent who was unsure of one of the officer’s race in question 17.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

Now I’m going to ask you some questions about the outcome of your most recent stop and your interaction with the police.

19. During this contact were you given a ticket? Please exclude any verbal or written warnings given to you by the police.

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

One respondent in the first round and one respondent in the second round of four total respondents asked this question said “yes.” Both respondents commented they received citations.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

All respondents thought tickets and warnings were different things. Respondents perceived tickets as being written and more serious, whereas warnings were more of a “slap on the wrist” telling a person not to do something again.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

20. What were you ticketed for?

One respondent was ticketed for trespassing; the other could not remember what he was ticketed for: “[something like] impeding traffic.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

21. Were you given a written warning or a verbal warning?

1  Verbal

2  Written

3  Both

4  Neither

5  Don’t know

One respondent said “yes” to this question and one respondent said “no.” The respondent who said “no” explained, “They didn’t give me a warning because the outcome was that I didn’t do what they thought they saw I did.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

22. At any point during the contact, did the police do any of the following:

a. Shout at you?

b. Curse at you?

c. Threaten to arrest you?

d. Threaten you with a ticket (or other tickets)?

e. Threaten to use force against you?

f. Actually push or grab you?

g. Handcuff you?

h. Actually kick or hit you?

i. Actually spray you with a chemical or pepper spray?

j. Actually use an electroshock weapon against you, such as a stun gun?

k. Actually point a gun at you?

l. Use any other type of force?

One respondent said “yes” to a. For part d, he commented that he answered “no” because they did not do it initially. One respondent said yes to a, b, c, e, f, and g. One respondent said yes to c and f. The final respondent said yes to a, c, f, and g. This respondent chose to say no to option d because “they didn’t threaten to do it, they just gave me one.”

One respondent was shocked by the list of options; at part i he laughed and at part j commented, “Awww no! They didn’t do all that!”

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

23. You mentioned that the police [read categories marked yes in Q22]. Do you feel that this action was or these actions were necessary?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

One respondent said “no” because he was in a public space that he visits on regular basis and was not doing anything wrong. Another respondent said “yes” because, “to get my attention I guess they had to shout.”

The other two respondents hesitated. One sighed then said “yes” because he “wasn’t gentle” and kept saying he did not do anything. The other respondent decided on “no” because, “I wasn’t doing anything, I was just getting a phone number. In my case, the police didn’t know anything and they couldn’t prove anything.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

24. Do you feel any of the actions used against you were excessive?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Two respondents said “yes” and two said “no”. One respondent said “yes” because he felt the police were trying to embarrass him and used handcuffs that were too tight. He said he felt they were “trying to let people see me in handcuffs, and I didn’t like that.”

One respondent sighed and then said “no.” The other said “no,” and commented, “if I had not acted out, there wouldn’t have been any reason for that.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Examples of excessive force given included using a siren more than needed, and grabbing, throwing, or searching someone.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

25. At any time during this contact did you…

a. Disobey or interfere with the officer(s)?

b. Try to get away?

c. Push, grab, or hit the police officer(s)?

d. Resist being handcuffed, arrested, or searched?

e. Complain to the officer(s)?

f. Argue with the police officer(s)?

g. Curse at, insult, or verbally threaten police officer(s)?

h. Physically do anything else?

One respondent said “yes” to e, f, and g. The respondent said that maybe he should not have argued and cursed. Two respondents only said “yes” to e. The final respondent said “yes” to a, b, e, and f.

In this question, it became clear that one respondent interacted with the security force of a hospital and metropolitan police. The respondent was answering about his interactions with both.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Respondents thought of interfering as getting in the way of an officer while conducting investigation, retaliating, or resisting arrest. One respondent commented, “interfering would be cursing, being physical with them, being confrontational or belligerent. But as a citizen, you have a right to question them.”

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

26. You reported earlier that you were arrested during a contact in which the police stopped you. Were you arrested during this most recent contact?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Two respondents answered this question and said “yes."

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

27. At any time during this stop, did the police officer(s) search you, frisk you, or pat you down?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Three respondents said “yes” and one said “no.” The respondent who interacted with both hospital security and the police commented he was searched by both.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

28. Do you think the police officer(s) had a legitimate reason to search you, frisk you, or pat you down?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Two respondents said “yes” and two said “no” to this question. One respondent who said “yes” explained, “Based on what the police officer thought he saw and what I did, yes.” One respondent who said “no” said that it should not have happened “but since they had handcuffed me, of course they’re going to frisk me down to make sure I don’t have anything on me.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Respondents thought that witnessing a crime, such a drug sale, or possession of a weapon would be legitimate reasons for being searched.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

29. During the search, did the police officer(s) find any illegal items, such as a weapon, drugs, or an open container of alcohol?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

All three respondents who were asked the question said no.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

30. Earlier you said that you were arrested during the stop. Did the search occur before you were arrested?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Both respondents said “no.” The respondent with security and police interactions asked the interviewer to clarify whether he should answer about security or police.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

31. I’m going to start by asking you some questions about the officer or officers who stopped you and about why you were stopped, but first during which month and year did this stop occur?

This question was not asked in first round; it was added by the sponsor in the second round. Four respondents who were stopped while driving a motor vehicle answered this question. Three contacts occurred in October 2013 and one in November 2013. One respondent provided an exact date.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

32. Was there one or more than one officer present at the beginning of this stop?

1  One officer

2  More than one officer

3  Don’t know/remember

All respondents reported that only one officer was present at the beginning of the stop. One respondent commented that there were two police cars, but she only talked to one officer. She decided to count this as one officer.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

33. Was the police officer male or female?

1  Male

2  Female

3  Don’t know

All respondents had contact with a male officer.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

34. Was the police officer of Hispanic or Latino origin?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Two respondents said “yes,” four respondents said “no,” and one respondent said he did not know.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

35. What race or races was the police officer? You may select more than one. Was the officer…

1  White?

2  Black or African American?

3  American Indian or Alaska Native?

4  Asian?

5  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander?

6  Don’t know

This question was skipped due to interviewer error for one respondent. Of the remaining six respondents, two chose “Black or African American” and two chose “White.” One respondent who said that the police officer was of Hispanic or Latino origin refused to answer this question: “No, he was Hispanic.” The final respondent initially selected “Black or African American,” then realized she was thinking of a different police contact when she was pulled over for speeding. This contact was not reported in the 2a-2j series, and it is unclear whether it occurred in the last 12 months.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

36. Were the police officers male or female?

1  All male

2  All female

3  Don’t know

4  Both male and female

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

37. Were they mostly male or mostly female?

1  Mostly male

2  Mostly female

3  Evenly divided

4  Don’t know

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

38. Was one or more of the police officers of Hispanic or Latino origin?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

39. Were the officers mostly Hispanic, mostly non-Hispanic, or an equal number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic?

1  Mostly Hispanic or Latino

2  Mostly non-Hispanic

3  Equal number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic

4  Don’t know

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

40. What race or races were the officers? You may select more than one. Were they…

1  White?

2  Black or African American?

3  American Indian or Alaska Native?

4  Asian?

5  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander?

6  Don’t know

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

41. What race were most of the officers?

1  Mostly White

2  Mostly Black or African American

3  Mostly American Indian or Alaska Native

4  Mostly Asian

5  Mostly Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

6  Equal number of each race

7  Don’t know

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

42. Were there any other persons in the vehicle with you at the time of the traffic stop?

1  Yes

2  No

One respondent was not asked this question due to interviewer error. Of the remaining respondents, three said “yes” and three said “no.” The respondent who confused two contacts in question 35 continued to think about both contacts when answering this question: “No, neither time.” She then realized she should be answering about the most recent contact. One respondent who said “yes” to this question was the passenger in the vehicle.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

43. How many other persons were in the vehicle with you at the time of the traffic stop?

All three respondents who had other persons in the vehicle reported that they had just one other person with them.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

44. Did the police officer(s) give a reason for stopping the vehicle?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Six of the seven respondents immediately said “yes.” One respondent seemed to think this was an obvious question.

It is unclear what happened in the contact for the seventh respondent. The respondent explained that she knew she was being pulled over for a broken tail light, so she showed the officer a citation for the tail light she had received a few days earlier and told the officer she was going to get it fixed. She said the officer told her to get it fixed or she would be stopped again. However, the respondent also said, “[the officer] said I was going over the speed limit but I told him I was going with the traffic flow. I think he stopped me because the brake light was out.” She did not address the potential speeding again.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

45. What reason or reasons did the officer(s) give for stopping the vehicle? Was it for…

1  Speeding?

2  Vehicle defect?

3  Record check (for example, a license plate, driver’s license, or vehicle registration)?

4  Roadside check for drunk drivers?

5  Seatbelt violation?

6  Illegal turn or lane change?

7  Stop sign or stop light violation?

8  Using a cell phone while driving (includes talking and texting)?

9  Some other reason? Specify: __________________

Respondents’ reasons included two vehicle defects, an incomplete stop at a stop sign, a seatbelt violation, an illegal U-turn, an illegal right turn on red, and an exit the wrong way out of a parking lot. A respondent who was pulled over for a vehicle defect of a missing license plate was initially confused about whether she should select the record check. The officer looked up her records to verify she had registered license plates. She decided this was not a correct answer.

For this question, one interviewer did not understand he was supposed to read the answer categories to the respondents. He wrote down respondents’ verbatim answers and did not mark a response category.

Respondents understood what was meant by a vehicle defect, explaining it as “something not working like it is supposed to,” and citing examples like a nonfunctioning brake light or a “busted mirror.”

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

46. Would you say that the police officer(s) had a legitimate reason for stopping you?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Six of the seven respondents said “yes.” One respondent who said “yes” and the respondent who said “no” noted they thought the officers were “looking for a reason” to pull them over.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Respondents interpreted a legitimate reason for being stopped as breaking the law. However, the respondent who said “no” commented she thought a legitimate reason was, “something real, not trivial. Driving in a dangerous way.”

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

TRAFFIC INTRO 2:

Now I’m going to ask you some questions about the outcome of the traffic stop that you have been telling me about. (skip to Q47)

ACCIDENT/OTHER CONTACT INTRO 1:

Now I’m going to ask you some questions about possible outcomes of your most recent contact with police that you may have experienced and about your interaction with police during this contact, but first, during what month and year did this contact occur?

Respondents were not asked about the month and year of the police contact in round one. In round two, three respondents who had been in traffic accidents were asked this question. One of them, who had been in two traffic accidents and was asked these questions about both by the Field Representative, remembered the month and year of the first one clearly, but had more difficulty with the more recent one. She could only pinpoint it to “probably summer to fall.” The second respondent “guessed” that the accident occurred in May 2013. The third respondent easily reported that the accident occurred in October 2013.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

47. During this contact were you given a ticket? Please exclude any verbal or written warnings given to you by the police.

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Three respondents said “yes” and eight said “no.” One respondent who said “no” was continuing to think of both accidents, but her answer was no for both.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Respondents perceived warnings as being less serious than tickets. They thought tickets involved fining or charging with a violation, whereas warnings were a “preliminary step,” a way to caution someone not to do something again.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

48. What were you ticketed for?

One respondent received a ticket for failure to stop at a stop sign, one received a ticket for an illegal U-turn, and the final respondent received a ticket for three violations: an exit the wrong way out of a parking lot, an unregistered vehicle, and a lack of insurance. The respondent said that because the vehicle was not hers she could get the second and third charges dropped.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

49. Were you given a written warning or a verbal warning?

1  Verbal

2  Written

3  Both

4  Neither

5  Don’t know

This question was accidentally skipped for several respondents. Of those who were asked this question, three said “no,” one said “written warning,” one said “verbal warning,” and one said “both written and verbal warning.” A final respondent said she received a written warning, but this was a misreport. She was the passenger in the vehicle and the driver received a warning, not the passenger.

The respondent who said she received a written warning had received it for a broken tail light. The interviewer followed the instruction that a request for maintenance does not count and marked “no” instead. The respondent who reported a verbal warning had trouble coming up with his answer because he was confusing the incident with previous incidents.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

ARREST INTRO 1:

I’m going to ask you some questions about your interactions with police during your most recent contact with police in which you were arrested, but first, during what month and year did this contact occur?

This question was added at the sponsor’s request for the second round of testing. No one was asked to report a date in this question, because no one reported an arrest as their most recent contact with police.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

50. At any point during this contact, did the police do any of the following:

a. Shout at you?

b. Curse at you?

c. Threaten to arrest you?

d. Threaten you with a ticket (or other tickets)?

e. Threaten to use force against you?

f. Actually push or grab you?

g. Handcuff you?

h. Actually kick or hit you?

i. Actually spray you with a chemical or pepper spray?

j. Actually use an electroshock weapon against you, such as a stun gun?

k. Actually point a gun at you?

l. Use any other type of force?

All but two respondents said “no” to each part of this question. Two respondents who were in car accidents were shocked by these questions. One gasped at the question about being hit or kicked, and one was alarmed at being handcuffed because she was seriously injured in the accident. They did not feel like these questions applied to them. One respondent initially thought this question was asking about all contacts with the police, not the most recent contact. He initially noted that an officer “shouted at me one time” but then corrected his answer.

The other two respondents both said yes to option d. One of these respondents did receive a ticket.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

51. You mentioned that the police [Read categories marked Yes in Q49]. Did you feel (this action was/these actions were) necessary?

1  Yes

2  No

This question was skipped due to interviewer error for the two respondents who said yes in question 49.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

52. Do you feel any of the actions used against you were excessive?

1  Yes

2  No

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

53. At any time during this contact did you…

a. Disobey or interfere with the officer(s)?

b. Try to get away?

c. Push, grab, or hit the police officer(s)?

d. Resist being handcuffed, arrested, or searched?

e. Complain to the officer(s)?

f. Argue with the police officer(s)?

g. Curse at, insult, or verbally threaten police officer(s)?

h. Physically do anything else?

One respondent said “yes” to e and f and one respondent said “yes” to f. The remaining respondents said “no” to all subquestions.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

54. You reported earlier that you were arrested during a contact with the police. Were you arrested during this most recent contact?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

The one respondent who answered this question said “no.”

The respondent did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

55. At any time during this contact, did the police officer(s) search you, frisk you, or pat you down?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

All but one respondent said “no” to this question. One respondent said she did not know because she was seriously injured in an accident and taken to the hospital. She commented there was no explicit search but the officer had all of her personal belongings and may have looked at them.

Three respondents said that they were thinking about vehicle searches when answering this question. However, it did not affect their answers to this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

56. Do you think the police officer(s) had a legitimate reason to search you, frisk you, or pat you down?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

The respondent who was in a car accident said “yes,” because the officer may have needed to see her identification.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

57. At any time during the contact did the officer(s) conduct a vehicle search?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

All respondents said “no” to this question.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

58. Do you think the police officer(s) had a legitimate reason to search the vehicle?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

59. During the search, did the police officer(s) find any illegal items, such as a weapon, drugs, or an open container of alcohol?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

60. Earlier you said that you were arrested and searched. Did the search occur before you were arrested?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

No respondents answered this question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

61. VOLUNTARY INTRO: Please tell me ONLY about the MOST RECENT contact you had with the police.

During what month and year did you contact the police?

In the second round, four respondents who had voluntary contacts with the police were asked this question. Respondents were able to report that the contacts in March, July, August, and September 2013. One respondent gave an exact date. Respondents are able to answer these questions without difficulty. They are likely to produce good data.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

How did you contact the police?

1  Called the police (this includes calls made to 911, 311, a sheriff’s office or any other type of law
enforcement)

2  Went to police station

3  Security alarm contacted police

4  Someone else contacted the police for me

5  Approached an officer in a public space

6  Other. Specify: _____________

7  Don’t remember

One respondent reported “Approached an officer in a public place,” while the remaining respondents all reported that they “called the police.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

62. Did the police respond promptly to your request?

1  Yes

2  No

Two respondents said “no.” One respondent said “no” because the police took 30 minutes to respond to a noise complaint: “I don’t call that promptly, but then again there wasn’t a crime being committed or anybody in danger. I understand they have other things to do, but waiting is annoying.” Another respondent who reported a non-emergency situation was satisfied with a 30-minute response time.

The other respondent who said “no” called to report her estranged husband becoming violent. The police came within 10-15 minutes, which “felt like a lifetime” to the respondent because of the nature of the situation. She said she thought the police should have come within five minutes because the police station was three minutes away from her house.

The respondents who said “yes” mostly reported response times in the range of 10-20 minutes. One respondent who only spoke with police on the phone did not know how to respond: “I guess yes because they answered the phone quickly, but they didn’t come out.” The respondent added, “it was too late anyway” because the vandalism she was reporting had already occurred.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

63. Did the situation improve after you contacted the police?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Four respondents said “no” to this question and one respondent said she did not know. One respondent said “no” because he had to contact the police again. (This suggests that this was not the most recent contact, but rather the first contact in the most recent episode.) One respondent who had property stolen explained, “I was pleased that they came and that they took a report but the situation did not improve. Using ‘improve’ is just too vague. I still don’t have what was stolen. They couldn’t fix the problem. The situation did not improve but it is not a reflection on the police.” The respondent who had her property vandalized explained that the vandalism has continued, and the police said they would patrol the neighborhood more but have not done so. The last respondent who said “no” to this question said the police let her husband continue to be violent and destroy property even though it was her own property.

The respondent who said that she did not know based her answer on the fact that the police were unable to locate her stolen car tires or determine who committed the crime: “they haven’t found anything.”

Respondents who said “yes” to this question were confident in their answer, with the exception of one respondent who decided to say “yes” because the police encouraged her to take other, more appropriate action. This suggests that this was also the first of a series of contacts in the most recent episode.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

64. Were you satisfied with the police response during your most recent contact?

1  Yes

2  No

Two respondents said “no” to this question. One respondent was particularly disgruntled and expressed she thought the police did not care about the vandalism and the fact that fixing her damaged mailbox and car cost money out of her own pocket.

A few respondents who said “yes” qualified their answers with an area in which the police contact could have improved, including response time, follow-up, and the quality of interaction with other dispatchers at the police station. One respondent commented that she was satisfied with the most recent response, but not earlier responses, indicating she was thinking of the correct police contact for this question.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

65. Would you be more likely, less likely, or just as likely to contact the police in the future?

1  More likely to call

2  Less likely to call

3  Just as likely to call

4  Don’t know

Five respondents said they were “more likely” to contact the police and four said they were “just as likely.” One respondent said “it depends” and did not answer the question. She said that she would never contact the police near her home again because of her experience, but she would contact other police.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH:

Now, just a few questions about the characteristics of your (most recent) contact with the police and how you felt about the officer(s) during that contact.

66. About what time of day did this contact occur?

During day

1  After 6am – 12 noon

2  After 12 noon – 6pm

3  Don’t know what time of day

At night

1  After 6pm – 12 midnight

2  After 12 midnight – 6am

3  Don’t know what time of night

OR

1  Don’t know whether day or night

Responses were evenly distributed between the time of day options. Most respondents did not have any problems with this question and gave an exact hour in their answer. Respondents used information such as the hours they work, the setting of the sun, and the presence of a television program in the background as recall cues.

Four respondents initially struggled with this question. One respondent asked whether this question was asking about when the crime occurred or when she called the police. Another respondent was in contact with hospital security and the metropolitan police all day, from about six in the morning till two in the afternoon. He did not know how to answer. Another respondent struggled to separate the times of two different contacts, but was able to provide an answer after talking through it.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

67. How many minutes would you say this contact lasted?

Respondents varied greatly in how they answered this question, but most contacts lasted less than 20 minutes. Some respondents gave time ranges (“10 to 15 minutes”) while some gave more precise times (“3 minutes”).

Additionally, respondents varied in what they counted as part of the contact. Two respondents only counted time in which they were directly speaking with the police, but most counted the entire contact episode. Two respondents only counted time in person; they did not count time speaking with police on the phone. One respondent gave a time estimate for the phone conversation and a separate time estimate for the in-person contact. Another two respondents who called twice about the same incident gave time estimates for both contacts.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

68. Do you believe the police spent an appropriate amount of time with you?

1  Yes

2  No, too much time

3  No, too little time

4  Don’t know

While the majority of respondents said “yes;” six respondents said no. Four said the police spent too much time and two said two little time. Two of the four who said they spent too much time were frustrated with traffic stops. One respondent said, “How long does it take to check my license and registration? Just give me the ticket and let us go on about our business.” Another said that, “with all that information that they have it shouldn’t take them that long to print the ticket out. Sometimes I feel like they’re just making you sit there to antagonize you.” The other two respondents selecting this answer also had involuntary contact with the police. One respondent was clearly very unhappy with his experience and said that “no time” would have been appropriate, while the other said five minutes would have been appropriate. This respondent added, “If I were the one seeking help I would see this as a good question, [but I wasn’t].”

The respondents who said “no, too little time” complained that the police did not ask many questions and did not “investigate.”

Respondents who said “yes” commented the police spent enough time with them to get a statement and the proper information. One respondent commented she thought the police went “above what they needed to do in a good way.”

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

69. Looking back on this contact, do you feel the police behaved properly?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Two respondents who said yes indicated that they still thought the police’s reaction was “excessive.” One respondent explained that he said yes because the police did not beat him up or use too much force, but that he did not like that they were “trying to make an example of him.”

Three respondents said “no” and one respondent said he did not know. One respondent said “the whole situation was unnecessary” and another expressed that the police were not following proper protocol. A respondent who was pulled over said that the police officer knew the owner of the vehicle she was driving and asked her questions about him and a separate “assault situation,” which she thought was inappropriate. The respondent who said he did not know did not witness police intervening on behalf of his noise complaint.

Respondents did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Respondents thought “behaving properly” meant following police protocol and acting professionally.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

70. Did you file a complaint against the police?

1  Yes

2  No

One respondent filed a complaint. One respondent who said “no” indicated he “probably should have.” Another respondent who said no explained that he just wanted to get the contact “over with” and complaining would have prolonged it.

The respondent did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

71. With whom did you file the complaint?

1  The police

2  Citizen review board

3  Don’t know

The respondent who filed a complaint said she filed it with the state attorney. It is unclear which response option the interviewer marked.

The respondent did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

72. During this contact with police, did the police USE or THREATEN TO USE force against you?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Just one respondent said “yes.” Another respondent who encountered both hospital security and metropolitan police said his answer would be “yes” for the security and “no” for the police.

The respondent did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

73. During any of your EARLIER contacts with the police in the last 12 months, did the police USE or THREATEN TO USE force against you?

1  Yes

2  No

3  Don’t know

Two respondents said “yes.”

One respondent said that the police threatened to arrest her if she did not get a protective order against her husband. The other respondent said that he “mouthed off” to police and thus was threatened.

The respondent did not seem to have a problem answering the question.

Recommendation: We do not recommend any changes to this question.

Attachment 7

2015 PPCS BOOKLET
A. CONTACT SCREEN QUESTIONS
INTRO: Now I would like to ask some questions about any contacts you may have had with the police. 1. Before I get to the questions about contacts you may have had with the police, I would like to find out how often you usually drive. Do you currently drive…	1  Every day or almost every day? 2  A few days a week? 3  A few days a month? 4  A few times a year? 5  Never?
2. I am going to read some questions about experiences you may have had seeking help or assistance from the police. Have you approached or sought help from the police for any of the following reasons in the last 12 months? 2a. Have you reported any kind of crime, disturbance, or suspicious activity to the police?	Yes  No 
2b. Have you reported a non-crime emergency, such as a medical emergency or a traffic accident you were not involved in, to the police?	Yes  No 
2c. Have you participated in block watch or other anti-crime programs WITH police? FR Note: Block watch also refers to neighborhood watch or community watch programs	Yes  No 
2d. Have you approached or sought help from the police in the last 12 months for something I haven’t mentioned?	Yes   No  --> Skip to Q2e Specify ________________________________________
2e. In the last 12 months, have you been involved in a traffic accident in which the police came to the scene?	Yes  No 
Now I am going to ask you questions about any time in the last 12 months when police initiated contact with you. In the last 12 months: 2f. Have you been stopped by the police while in a public place or a parked vehicle, but not while driving or riding in a moving vehicle?	Yes  No 
2g. Have you been stopped by the police in the last 12 months while driving a motor vehicle (NOT including any driving violations captured by camera and ticketed by mail)?	Yes  No 
2h. In the last 12 months, have you been the passenger in a motor vehicle that was stopped by police?	Yes  No 
2i. In the last 12 months, have you been arrested during any contact with police not previously mentioned?	Yes  No 
2j. Have you been stopped or approached by the police in the last 12 months for something else that hasn’t been discussed?	Yes   No  -> Skip to Check Item A Specify ________________________________________
CHECK ITEM A Did the respondent answer ‘Yes’ to at least one item, a-j, in Q2? No  End interview Yes  Go to Check Item A1
CHECK ITEM A1 Did the respondent answer ‘Yes’ to at least one item, a-d, in Q2 No  Skip to Check Item A2 Yes  For each ‘Yes’, a-d in Q2 ask A1a-A1c: (A1a-c will loop multiple times depending on the # of yes responses in Q2a-d- each loop will need a unique designation – eg. A1aCrime; A1aNoncrime; A1aBlock; A1aOtherHelp) A1a. You mentioned that in the last 12 months you <fill in type of request for assistance, a-d in Q2>, how many times did this happen during the past 12 months? ________________ If 1 --> Go to A1b. If > 1 --> Skip to A1c A1b. Was this contact a face-to-face (in person) interaction with police? Yes  No  --> Skip to Check Item A2 A1c. How many of these contacts were face-to-face (in person) interactions with police? _____________________________ Go to Check Item A2
CHECK ITEM A2 Did the respondent answer ‘Yes’ to at least one item, e-h, in Q2 No  Skip to Check Item A3 Yes  For each ‘Yes’, e-h in Q2 ask A2a-A2b: (A2a-b will loop multiple times depending on the # of yes responses in Q2e-h each loop will need a unique designation – eg. A2aAccident; A2aStreet; A2aDriver; A2aPass) A2a. You mentioned that in the last 12 months you <type of contact, e-h in Q2>, how many times did this happen during the past 12 months? ________________ A2b. Were you arrested during [this contact/any of these contacts]? Yes  No  All responses, go to Check Item A3
CHECK ITEM A3 Did the respondent answer ‘Yes’ to item j, in Q2 No  Skip to Check Item B Yes  Ask A3a A3a. You mentioned that in the last 12 months you were stopped or approached for something other than what we had discussed, how many times did this happen during the past 12 months? ________________
CHECK ITEM B Did the respondent answer ‘Yes’ to one or more than one item, a-j, in Q2? One  Go to Check Item B1 More than one  Skip to Q3
CHECK ITEM B1 1. If Screen question 2A = Yes 2. If Screen question 2B = Yes 3. If Screen question 2C = Yes 4. If Screen question 2D = Yes 5. If Screen question 2E = Yes 6. If Screen question 2F = Yes 7. If Screen question 2G = Yes 8. If Screen question 2H = Yes 9. If Screen question 2I = Yes 10. If Screen question 2J = Yes	1. Skip to Section F (page 15) 2. Skip to Section F (page 15) 3. Skip to Check Item P (page 17) 4. Skip to Section F (page 15) 5. Skip to ACCIDENT/OTHER INVOLUNTARY CONTACT INTRO 1 (page 12) 6. Skip to Section B (page 5) 7. Skip to Section D (page 10) 8. Skip to Section D (page 10) 9. Skip to ARREST INTRO 1 (page 13) 10. Skip to ACCIDENT/OTHER INVOLUNTARY CONTACT INTRO 1 (page 12)

3. You just mentioned several contacts with the police. Which of these was the most recent?

Place an “X” in the box to indicate which was most recent

1  Reported a crime, disturbance, suspicious person to the police

2  Reported a non-crime emergency to the police

3  Participated in block watch WITH police

4  Approached or sought help from the police for something else

5  Involved in a traffic accident in which the police came to the scene

6  Stopped by the police in a public place, but not while driving or riding in a vehicle

7  Stopped by the police while driving a motor vehicle

8  Was a passenger in a motor vehicle that was stopped by the police

9  Was arrested during a contact with police not previously mentioned

10  Was stopped or approached by the police for something else not already mentioned

CHECK ITEM B2: What was the most recent contact the respondent reported?

If Question 3 = 1. Skip to Section F (page 15)

If Question 3 = 2. Skip to Section F (page 15)

If Question 3 = 3. Skip to Check Item P (page 17)

If Question 3 = 4. Skip to Section F (page 15)

If Question 3 = 5. Skip to ACCIDENT/OTHER INVOLUNTARY CONTACT INTRO 1 (page 12)

If Question 3 = 6. Skip to Section B (page 5)

If Question 3 = 7. Skip to Section D (page 10)

If Question 3 = 8. Skip to Section D (page 10)

If Question 3 = 9. Skip to ARREST INTRO 1 (page 13)

If Question 3 = 10. Skip to ACCIDENT/OTHER INVOLUNTARY CONTACT INTRO 1 (page 12)

B. CHARACTERISTICS OF STREET STOP
READ STREET INTRO 1A ONLY IF MORE THAN ONE CONTACT WAS REPORTED IN Q2, OR IF MORE THAN ONE OF THE SAME CONTACT WAS REPORTED IN A2a. READ STREET INTRO 1B FOR ALL WHO REPORTED STREET STOP AS THE MOST RECENT CONTACT. STREET INTRO 1a: Please tell me ONLY about the MOST RECENT contact you had with the police. STREET INTRO 1b. I’m going to start by asking some questions about the nature of the stop and the officer or officers who stopped you. 4. Earlier you mentioned having contact with the police while in a public place but not driving or riding in a vehicle. 4a. During what month and year did that contact occur? 4b. Were there any other persons with you at the time of the stop?	Month ______ Year ______ 1  Yes 2  No  Skip to Q6
5. How many other persons were with you at the time of the stop?	___________________ number of persons
6. Did the police give a reason for stopping you?	1  Yes 2  No Skip to Q8
7. What was the reason given for this stop? Did the police… 7a. suspect you of something? 7b. match you to the description of someone they were looking for? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Were the police... 7c. seeking information about another person? 7d. investigating a crime? 7e. providing a service or assistance to you?	Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No 
CHECK ITEM C: Was the respondent alone at the time of the stop? (Q4b = No, Page 5)  Yes  Skip to Q7h  No  Go to Q7f

7f. Did someone you were with match the description of someone the police were looking for? 7g. Was someone you were with suspected of something? 7h. Was there some other reason?	Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Specify ______________________________
8. Would you say the police had a legitimate reason for stopping you?	Yes  No 
9. At the time you were stopped, how many officers were present?	1  One officer Go to Q10 2  Two officers Skip to Q13 3  More than two officers Skip to Q13 4  Don’t know Skip to STREET INTRO 2 (page 7)
10. Was the police officer male or female?	1  Male 2  Female 3  Don’t know
11. Was the police officer of Hispanic or Latino origin?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
12. What race or races was the police officer? You may select more than one. Was the officer…. (enter all that apply)	1  White? 2  Black or African American? 3  American Indian or Alaska Native? 4  Asian? 5  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander? 6  Don’t know SKIP to: STREET INTRO 2 (page 7)
13. Were the police officers male or female?	1  All male skip to Q15 2  All femaleskip to Q15 3  Don’t knowskip to Q15 4  Both male and female If Q9=2, skip to Q15
14. Were they mostly male or mostly female?	1  Mostly male 2  Mostly female 3  Evenly divided 4  Don’t know
15. Was one or more of the police officers of Hispanic or Latino origin?	1  Yes 2  No skip to Q17 3  Don’t know skip to Q17
16. Were the officers mostly Hispanic, mostly non-Hispanic, or an equal number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic?	1  Mostly Hispanic or Latino 2  Mostly non-Hispanic 3  Equal number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic 4  Don’t know
17. What race or races were the officers? You may select more than one. Were they… (enter all that apply)	1  White? 2  Black or African American? 3  American Indian or Alaska Native? 4  Asian? 5  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander? 6  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM D. Is more than one box marked in Q17? Yes Ask Q18 No Skip to STREET INTRO 2 (page 7)
18. What race were most of the officers?	1  Mostly White 2  Mostly Black or African American 3  Mostly American Indian or Alaska Native 4  Mostly Asian? 5  Mostly Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander? 6  Equal number of each race 7  Don’t know
C. OUTCOME OF STREET STOP
STREET INTRO 2: Now I’m going to ask you some questions about the outcome of your most recent stop and your interaction with police. 19. During this contact were you given a ticket? Please exclude any verbal or written warnings given to you by the police.	1  Yes 2  No Skip to Q21 3  Don’t know  Skip to Q21
20. What were you ticketed for?	_________________________________________ Skip to Q22
21. Were you given a written warning or a verbal warning?	1  Verbal 2  Written 3  Both 4  Neither 5  Don’t know
22. At any point during the contact, did the police do any of the following: a. Shout at you? b. Curse at you? c. Threaten to arrest you? d. Threaten you with a ticket (or other tickets)? e. Threaten to use force against you? f. Actually push or grab you? g. Handcuff you? h. Actually kick or hit you? i. Actually spray you with a chemical or pepper spray? j. Actually use an electroshock weapon against you, such as a stun gun? k. Actually point a gun at you? l. Use any other type of force?	Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes   No  Specify ___________________________________
CHECK ITEM E: Is there at least one ‘Yes’ response in Q22a-l? Yes  Go to Q23 No  Skip to Q25
23. You mentioned that the police [read categories marked yes in Q22]. Do you feel (this action was/these actions were) necessary?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
24. Do you feel any of the actions used against you were excessive?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
25. At any time during this contact did you… a. Disobey or interfere with the officer(s)? b. Try to get away? c. Push, grab, or hit the police officer(s)? d. Resist being handcuffed, arrested, or searched? e. Complain to the officer(s)? f. Argue with the police officer(s)? g. Curse at, insult, or verbally threaten police officer(s)? h. Physically do anything else?	Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes   No  Specify ___________________________________
CHECK ITEM F: Was the respondent involved in more than one street stop during the prior 12 months and was the respondent arrested during a street stop (A2a > 1 and A2b = Yes) ? Yes Go to Q26 No Skip to Q27
26. You reported earlier that you were arrested during a contact in which the police stopped you. Were you arrested during this most recent contact?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
27. At any time during this stop, did the police officer(s) search you, frisk you, or pat you down?	1  Yes 2  No Skip to INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH (page 16) 3  Don’t know Skip to INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH (page 16)
28. Do you think the police officer(s) had a legitimate reason to search you, frisk you, or pat you down?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
29. During the search, did the police officer(s) find any illegal items, such as a weapon, drugs, or an open container of alcohol?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM G: Was the respondent arrested and personally searched? (Q27 = Yes and Q26 = Yes) OR (Q27 = Yes and A2a = 1 and A2b = Yes)? Yes  Go to Q30 No  Skip to INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH (page 16)

30. Earlier you said that you were arrested during the stop. Did the search occur before you were arrested?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know Skip to INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH (page 16)
D. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRAFFIC STOP
READ TRAFFIC INTRO 1a ONLY IF MORE THAN ONE CONTACT WAS REPORTED IN Q2a-j, OR IF MORE THAN ONE OF THE SAME CONTACT WAS REPORTED IN A2a. READ TRAFFIC INTRO 1B FOR ALL WITH TRAFFIC STOP AS MOST RECENT CONTACT. TRAFFIC INTRO 1a: Please tell me ONLY about the MOST RECENT contact you had with the police. TRAFFIC INTRO 1b: First, I’m going to start by asking you some questions about the officer or officers who stopped you and about why you were stopped. 31. During what month and year did this stop occur? 32. How many officers were present at the beginning of this stop?	Month ______ Year ______ 1  One officer  Go to Q33 2  Two officers  Skip to Q36 3  More than two officers  Skip to Q36 4  Don’t know/remember  Skip to CHECK ITEM I (PAGE 11)
33. Was the police officer male or female?	1  Male 2  Female 3  Don’t know
34. Was the police officer of Hispanic or Latino origin?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
35. What race or races was the police officer? You may select more than one. Was the officer…. (enter all that apply)	1  White? 2  Black or African American? 3  American Indian or Alaska Native? 4  Asian? 5  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander? 6  Don’t know SKIP TO CHECK ITEM I (Page 11)
36. Were the police officers male or female?	1  All male skip to Q38 2  All female skip to Q38 3  Don’t know skip to Q38 4  Both male and female If Q32=2, skip to Q38
37. Were they mostly male or mostly female?	1  Mostly male 2  Mostly female 3  Evenly divided 4  Don’t know
38. Was one or more of the police officers of Hispanic or Latino origin?	1  Yes 2  No skip to Q40 3  Don’t know skip to Q40
39. Were the officers mostly Hispanic, mostly non-Hispanic, or an equal number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic?	1  Mostly Hispanic or Latino 2  Mostly non-Hispanic 3  Equal number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic 4  Don’t know
40. What race or races were the officers? You may select more than one. Were they… (enter all that apply)	1  White? 2  Black or African American? 3  American Indian or Alaska Native? 4  Asian? 5  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander? 6  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM H. Is more than one box marked in Q40? Yes Ask Q41 No Skip to CHECK ITEM I
41. What race were most of the officers?	1  Mostly White 2  Mostly Black or African American 3  Mostly American Indian or Alaska Native 4  Mostly Asian 5  Mostly Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 6  Equal number of each race 7  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM I: Was the respondent the driver during a traffic stop? ((Q2g=Yes and CHECK ITEM B = one) OR Q3=7)? Yes  Go to Q42 No  Skip to Q44
42. Were there any other persons in the vehicle with you at the time of the traffic stop?	1  Yes  Go to Q43 2  No  Skip to Q44
43. How many other persons were in the vehicle with you at the time of the traffic stop?	_____________________ number of persons
E. REASONS FOR TRAFFIC STOP
44. Did the police officer(s) give a reason for stopping the vehicle?	1  Yes  Go to Q45 2  No  Skip to Q46 3  Don’t know  Skip to Q46
45. What reason or reasons did the officer(s) give for stopping the vehicle? Was it for… (Check all that apply).	1  Speeding? 2  Vehicle defect? 3  Record check (for example, a license plate, driver’s license, or vehicle registration) ? 4  Roadside check for drunk drivers? 5  Seatbelt violation? 6  Illegal turn or lane change? 7  Stop sign or stop light violation? 8  Using a cell phone while driving (includes talking and texting) ? 9  Some other reason?  Specify _________________________________________
46. Would you say that the police officer(s) had a legitimate reason for stopping you?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know READ TRAFFIC INTRO 2
TRAFFIC INTRO 2: Now I’m going to ask you some questions about the outcome of the traffic stop that you have been telling me about.	Skip to Q48
ACCIDENT/OTHER INVOLUNTARY CONTACT INTRO 1: 47. Now I’m going to ask you some questions about possible outcomes of your most recent contact with police that you may have experienced and about your interaction with police during this contact, but first, during what month and year did this contact occur?	Month ______ Year ______
48. During this contact were you given a ticket? Please exclude any verbal or written warnings given to you by the police.	1  Yes 2  No  Skip to Q50 3  Don’t know  Skip to Q50
49. What were you ticketed for?	_______________________________________________  Skip to Q52
50. Were you given a written warning or a verbal warning? (FR NOTE: Work orders or requirements for vehicle maintenance and changes do NOT count as warnings)	1  Verbal 2  Written 3  Both 4  Neither 5  Don’t know ALL RESPONSES SKIP TO Q52
READ ARREST INTRO 1 FOR ALL WITH AN ARREST AS MOST RECENT CONTACT ((Q2i = Yes AND Check Item B=one) OR Q3=9). ARREST INTRO 1: 51. I’m going to ask you some questions about your interactions with police during your most recent contact with police in which you were arrested, but first, during what month and year did this contact occur? 52. At any point during this contact, did the police do any of the following: a. Shout at you? b. Curse at you? c. Threaten to arrest you? d. Threaten you with a ticket [or other tickets]? e. Threaten to use force against you? f. Actually push or grab you? g. Handcuff you? h. Actually kick or hit you? i. Actually spray you with a chemical or pepper spray? j. Actually use an electroshock weapon against you, such as a stun gun? k. Actually point a gun at you? l. Use any other type of force?	Month ______ Year ______ Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes   No  Specify ___________________________________
CHECK ITEM J: Is there at least one ‘Yes’ response in Q52? Yes  Go to Q53 No  Skip to Q55
53. You mentioned that the police [Read categories marked Yes in Q52]. Do you feel (this action was/these actions were) necessary?	1  Yes 2  No
54. Do you feel any of the actions used against you were excessive?	1  Yes 2  No

55. At any time during this contact did you… a. Disobey or interfere with the officer(s)? b. Try to get away? c. Push, grab, or hit the police officer(s)? d. Resist being handcuffed, arrested, or searched? e. Complain to the officer(s)? f. Argue with the police officer(s)? g. Curse at, insult, or verbally threaten police officer(s)? h. Physically do anything else?	Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes   No  Specify ___________________________________
CHECK ITEM K: Was the respondent involved in more than one traffic stop during the prior 12 months and was the respondent arrested during a traffic stop ((Q2g=yes and A2a>1 and A2b = Yes) OR (Q2h=yes and A2a>1 and A2b = Yes))? Yes Go to Q56 No CHECK ITEM L
CHECK ITEM L: Was the respondent involved in more than one traffic accident during the prior 12 months and was the respondent arrested during contact involving a traffic accident (Q2e=yes and A2a>1 and A2b = Yes)? Yes Go to Q56 No Go to Q57
56. You reported earlier that you were arrested during a contact with the police. Were you arrested during this most recent contact?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
57. At any time during this contact, did the police officer(s) search you, frisk you, or pat you down? (This includes searches of the person only; if the police searched the vehicle this should be reported in Q59)	1  YesGo to Q58 2  NoSkip to CHECK ITEM M 3  Don’t knowSkip to CHECK ITEM M
58. Do you think the police officer(s) had a legitimate reason to search you, frisk you, or pat you down?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM M: Was the most recent contact a traffic stop or traffic accident? ((Q2e=1 or Q2g=1 or Q2h=1) and CHECK ITEM B = one) OR (Q3=5 or Q3=7 or Q3=8) Yes Go to Q59 No CHECK ITEM N
59. At any time during the contact did the officer(s) conduct a vehicle search?	1  YesGo to Q60 2  NoSkip to CHECK ITEM N 3  Don’t know Skip to CHECK ITEM N
60. Do you think the police officer(s) had a legitimate reason to search the vehicle?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM N: Did the police officer(s) search the vehicle or the respondent? (Q57 = Yes OR Q59 =Yes)? Yes  Go to Q61 No  Skip to INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH (page 16)
61. During the search, did the police officer(s) find any illegal items, such as a weapon, drugs, or an open container of alcohol?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM O: Was the respondent arrested and a search of vehicle or respondent performed? (Q56 = 1 and (Q57 = 1 or Q59 = 1)) Yes  Go to Q62 No  Skip to INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH (page 16)
62. Earlier you said that you were arrested and searched. Did the search occur before you were arrested?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know All responses, skip to INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH (page 16)
F. OUTCOME OF VOLUNTARY CONTACTS
READ VOLUNTARY INTRO ONLY IF MORE THAN ONE CONTACT WAS REPORTED (Q3=1 or Q3=2 or Q3=4), OR IF MORE THAN ONE OF THE SAME CONTACT WAS REPORTED (A1a>1) . VOLUNTARY INTRO: Please tell me ONLY about the MOST RECENT contact you had with the police. 63. During what month and year did you contact the police? 64. How did you contact the police?	Month ______ Year ______ 1  Called the police (this includes calls made to 911, 311, a sheriff’s office or any other type of law enforcement) 2  Went to police station 3  Security alarm contacted police 4  Someone else contacted the police for me 5  Approached an officer in a public place 6  Other  Specify _____________ 7  Don’t remember
65. Did the police respond promptly to your request?	1  Yes 2  No
66. Did the situation improve after you contacted the police?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
67. Were you satisfied with the police response during your most recent contact?	1  Yes 2  No
68. Would you be more likely, less likely, or just as likely to contact the police in the future?	1  More likely to call 2  Less likely to call 3  Just as likely to call 4  Don’t know
INTRO FOR ALL EXCEPT BLOCK WATCH: Now, just a few questions about the characteristics of your (most recent) contact with the police and how you felt about the officer(s) during that contact. 69. About what time of day did this contact occur?	During Day 1  After 6am – 12 noon 2  After 12 noon – 6pm 3  Don’t know what time of day At night 4  After 6pm – 12 midnight 5  After 12 midnight – 6am 6  Don’t know what time of night OR 7  Don’t know whether day or night
70. How many minutes would you say this contact lasted?	____________________________________ number of minutes
71. Do you believe the police spent an appropriate amount of time with you?	1  Yes 2  No, too much time 3  No, too little time 4  Don’t know
72. Looking back on this contact, do you feel the police behaved properly?	1  Yes  Skip to CHECK ITEM P (page 17) 2  No  Go to Q73 3  Don’t know  Skip to CHECK ITEM P (page 17)
73. Did you file a complaint against the police?	1  Yes  Go to Q74 2  No  Skip to CHECK ITEM P (page 17)
74. With whom did you file the complaint?	1  the police 2  citizen review board 3  Don’t know
75. Has your complaint been resolved?	1  Yes  Go to Q76 2  No  Q77 3  Don’t know  Q77
76. What was the outcome of your complaint?	1  Withdrawn 2  Dismissed, the claim was said to be unsupported or there was insufficient evidence to make a determination 3  The officer(s) were cleared of any wrongdoing 4  The officer(s)’s actions were found to be improper
77. How satisfied are you with how the complaint was handled?	1  Very satisfied 2  Somewhat satisfied 3  Somewhat dissatisfied 4  Very dissatisfied
CHECK ITEM P: Was the respondent’s only or most recent contact with police in the prior 12 months to report a crime, disturbance, suspicious person, non-crime emergency to the police, or seek help from the police for something not mentioned [((CHECK ITEM B = one and (Q2a = Yes, OR Q2b = Yes, OR Q2d = Yes)) OR (Q3=1, 2, or 4)]? Yes  Ask Q78 No  Skip to CHECK ITEM Q
78. During <this contact/your most recent contact> with police, did the police USE or THREATEN TO USE force against you?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM Q: Did the respondent have more than one contact with police during the prior 12 months (CHECK ITEM B= 2+ OR A2a>1)? Yes  Ask Q79 No  Skip to CHECK ITEM R
79. During any of your EARLIER contacts with police in the last 12 months, did the police USE or THREATEN TO USE force against you?	1  Yes 2  No 3  Don’t know
CHECK ITEM R: Was the respondent arrested during the prior 12 months (Q2i=1 or Check item A2b=yes)? Yes  Ask Q80 No  End Interview
80. How many total times were you arrested during the prior 12 months? __________________________

1 RE: BJS Response to 2011 PPCS Nonresponse Bias Plan – ‘Split Sample Design’.