Uniform Crime Reporting Data Collection Instrument Pretesting and Burden Estimation General Clearance

MEMORANDUM

MEMORANDUM TO:

Jennifer Park
Official of Statistical and Science Policy
Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

THROUGH:

Lynn Murray
Clearance Officer
Justice Management Division
Christopher A. Nicholas
Chief of Law Enforcement Support Section
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Amy C. Blasher
Unit Chief
Crime Data Modernization
FBI

FROM:

Cynthia Barnett-Ryan
Survey Statistician
Crime Data Modernization Team
FBI

DATE:

November 22, 2016

SUBJECT:

FBI Request for OMB Clearance for developmental activities
including a canvass of state and domain points-of-contact on a new
data collection on law enforcement use of force under the OMB
generic clearance agreement (OMB Number 1110-0057).

Since the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014, law enforcement uses of force have
called public attention to the need for more information on these types of encounters. To provide a
better understanding of the incidents of use of force by law enforcement, the Uniform Crime Reporting
(UCR) Program is proposing a new data collection to include information on incidents where a use of
force by a law enforcement officer as defined by the Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted
(LEOKA) Program has led to the death or serious bodily injury of a person, as well as when a law
enforcement officer discharges a firearm at or in the direction of a person. The definition of serious
bodily injury will be based, in part, on 18 United States Code (USC) Section 2246 (4), to mean “bodily
injury that involves a substantial risk of death, unconsciousness, protracted and obvious disfigurement,
or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty.”

1

Goal of the Proposed Data Collection on Law Enforcement Use of Force
The goal of the FBI’s data collection on law enforcement officer use of force is to produce a national
picture of the trends and characteristics of use of force by a law enforcement officer as defined by the
LEOKA Program to the FBI. The collection and reporting would include use of force that results in the
death or serious bodily injury of a person, as well as when a law enforcement officer discharges a
firearm at or in the direction of a person. The data collected by the UCR Program would include
information on circumstances surrounding the incident itself, the subjects, and the officers. The data
collection would focus on information that is readily known and obtainable by law enforcement with the
initial investigation following an incident rather than any assessment of whether the officer acted
lawfully or within the bounds of department policies. Publications and releases from the data collection
will provide for the enumeration of fatalities, nonfatal encounters that result in serious bodily injury,
and firearm discharges at or in the direction of a person by law enforcement. In addition, targeted
analyses could potentially identify those law enforcement agencies with “best practices” in comparison
with their peers as an option for further study.
This FBI data collection will facilitate important conversations with communities regarding law
enforcement actions in relation to decisions to use force and works in concert with recommendations
from the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Given a growing desire among law
enforcement organizations to increase their own transparency and embrace principles of procedural
justice, this collection will expand the measure to a broader scope of incidents of use of force to include
nonfatal instances as well.

Purpose of the Research
The purpose of the research is to record information that relates to the management of the collection of
use-of-force data by state and domain managers. The information collected in the survey will be used
by the FBI to develop implementation plans that will maximize participation by the law enforcement
community and to select state or domain participants in the pilot study.

Background Research
Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Advisory Policy Board (APB)—
Spring 2015
The FBI’s initial proposal was to pursue the addition of nonfatal officer-involved shootings to the existing
information on justifiable homicide. Beginning in March 2015, the FBI CJIS Division worked with its APB
to consider the question of whether to pursue the collection.
The CJIS APB is a committee comprised of representatives from the law enforcement and criminal
justice communities who advise the FBI Director on matters related to the criminal justice information
systems the CJIS Division manages. The APB meets semiannually and provides recommended actions on
policy and technical issues, to include the UCR Program. While this body does not have the expertise to
provide advice on matters of statistical methodology, the APB does provide two important functions.
2

First, its membership is a geographically diverse group of experts on criminal justice records maintained
by law enforcement agencies at all levels of government: local, state, tribal, and federal. These
representatives can provide important feedback on the potential impact of any change or addition to
UCR data collections on the law enforcement community. Secondly, the APB represents the community
from which UCR data are collected. Through the APB process, the FBI is able to engage in critical
discussions that inform decisions about content and scope of law enforcement statistics.
On June 3, 2015, the APB received the recommendation to approve the data collection and passed the
following amended motion:
“The UCR Program to develop a method to collect information on nonfatal/fatal shootings by
law enforcement in the line-of-duty. The UCR Program will work with local law enforcement
agencies and the five major national law enforcement organizations to develop what
information to collect and the best method to do so and bring the topic back through the APB
Process.”

Meeting of Major Law Enforcement Organizations
Based upon the direction of the CJIS APB, the FBI also began efforts to solicit input from the major law
enforcement organizations. Representatives from the major law enforcement organizations including
the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA), the
National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA), the Major County Sheriffs’ Association (MCSA), the Association of
State Criminal Investigative Agencies (ASCIA), and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) met with
representatives from the CJIS APB, the FBI, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to discuss the next steps
regarding the creation of the new data collection on officer-involved shootings. The result of the
meeting was a unanimous endorsement of a data collection system, to include the following definition
and content.
The participants at the meeting on September 18, 2015, proposed the following definition:
“Law Enforcement Officer’s as defined by the Law Enforcement Officer Killed and Assaulted
(LEOKA) Program Use of Force (LEOUF) that results in the death or serious physical injury to a
person, or when the law enforcement officer discharges a firearm at or in the direction of a
person.”
The effects of this definition were threefold. First, it expanded the collection to include the use of force
that results in serious physical injury, rather than the original focus of officer-involved shootings.
Secondly, the inclusion of the definition of law enforcement as set by the LEOKA Program would allow
for some flexibility to expand the scope of the use of force collection in parallel with the LEOKA data
collection. Finally, the definition does not require a law enforcement agency to determine that the use
of force was justified.
In addition to the proposed definition for the types of incidents eligible for reporting in the UCR use-offorce collection, the representatives from the major law enforcement organizations proposed content to
be collected on every incident that meets the criteria of the definition. The proposed data elements
3

included basic information on any officers involved, the subjects of the use of force, and circumstances
related to the use of force, which served as the basis for the final recommendation approved by the CJIS
APB. These data elements should be collected by the FBI as a part of its UCR Program, but collected
separately from the rest of the criminal incident and offense information the FBI currently maintains.
These proposals were brought to the CJIS APB for consideration.

CJIS APB—Fall 2015
After the meeting with the law enforcement representatives in September 2015, the FBI introduced a
topic to address the question of whether a new data collection on law enforcement officer use of force
would be recommended to the FBI Director. On December 3, 2015, the CJIS APB approved four motions
that effectively established the scope and minimum content of the new data collection.
The scope of the data collection was defined in the following language:
“The APB recommends the collection and reporting of use of force by a law enforcement officer
(as defined by LEOKA) to the FBI. The collection and reporting would include use of force that
results in the death or serious bodily injury of a person, as well as when a law enforcement
officer discharges a firearm at or in the direction of a person. The definition of serious bodily
injury will be based, in part, upon 18 USC Section 2246 (4). The term ‘serious bodily injury’
means bodily injury that involves a substantial risk of death, unconsciousness, protracted and
obvious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member,
organ, or mental faculty.”
The minimum content was identified to include basic information on the characteristics of the incident,
demographics and actions of the subject, and demographics and actions of the officer. In addition to
delineating the minimum content, the APB moved to establish a Use of Force Task Force that would
review this information and provide recommendations for changes or additions to the data elements.

Task Force
As specified in the CJIS APB Recommendations, the FBI moved to establish a Use of Force Task Force to
make the decision on the additional content of the new data collection in January 2016. The Use of
Force Task Force is comprised of representatives from major law enforcement organizations and local,
tribal, and federal law enforcement representatives. Specifically, the following organizations are
represented on the Use of Force Task Force:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

IACP
NSA
MCCA
MCSA
PERF
ASCIA
National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives
Association of State UCR Programs

4

In addition to representatives from these major organizations, the Task Force welcomed observers from
the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Community Oriented Policing Services Office, the DOJ,
and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
The Task Force met on four occasions (January 27, 2016; March 17, 2016; May 4-5, 2016; and August 3,
2016). The final set of data elements recommended by the Use of Force Task Force was based upon
discussions from these four meeting and, importantly, the input of the BJS on their experiences and
research that formed the basis of the Arrest-Related Death (ARD) Collection. Many of the data elements
and concepts in the National Use-of-Force Data Collection were mirrored from the BJS’s ARD Collection.
Because the ARD Collection has been through significant testing, this particular cognitive test focuses
upon areas that are new (such as in the case of interpreting the concept of serious bodily injury) or is
captured in a different fashion than the ARD (e.g., the concept of active aggression).

Data Elements of the National Use-of-Force Data Collection
Incident Information


Date and time of the incident



Total number of officers who applied actual force during time of incident



Number of officers from your agency who applied actual force during time of incident



Location of the incident [physical location acceptable through address or latitude and longitude]



Location type of the incident [location codes from the National Incident-Based Reporting System
(NIBRS)]



Did the officer(s) approach the subject[s]? [Yes/No/Pending/Unknown]



Was this an ambush incident? [Yes/No/Pending/Unknown]



Was a supervisor or a senior officer acting in a supervisory capacity present or consulted at any
point during the incident? [Yes/No/Pending/Unknown]



Reason for initial contact between subject and officer [response to unlawful or suspicious
activity/medical, mental health, or welfare assistance/routine patrol other than traffic
stop/traffic stop/warrant service/service of a court order/mass demonstration/follow up
investigation/ other/unknown]
o

If this was due to “unlawful or criminal activity,” what were the most serious reported
offenses committed by the subject prior to or at the time of the incident? [NIBRS
offense codes drop down, 3 boxes]

o



If applicable, NIBRS (or local) incident number of report detailing criminal incident
information on subject or assault or homicide of law enforcement officer.
If the incident involved multiple law enforcement agencies, case numbers for the local “use of
force reports” at the other agencies.

5

Subject Information
•

Age, sex, race, ethnicity, height, and weight (with range of values) of the subject(s)

•

Injury/Death of subject(s) [gunshot wound/apparent broken bones/possible internal
injury/severe laceration/loss of teeth/other major injury/unconsciousness/death/
pending/unknown]

•

Type(s) of force used connected to serious bodily injury or death [firearm/electronic control
weapon (Taser)/explosive device/pepper or OC (oleoresin capsicum) spray/baton/impact
projectile/blunt instrument/hands-fists-feet/canine/other/pending/unknown]

•

Subject(s) resisted? [Yes/No/Pending/Unknown]

•

Was the threat by the subject(s) directed to the officer or to another party? [Officer/Other
party/Pending/Unknown]

•

Type(s) of subject resistance/weapon involvement [threatened officer/threatened
others/threatened self/active aggression/edged weapon/firearm/vehicle/chemical/
electronic/verbal/passive resistance/resist being handcuffed or arrested/attempt to escape or
flee from custody/none]

•

Apparent or known impairment/physical conditions of subject? [Yes/No/Pending/Unknown]
•

If Yes, indicate which [mental health/alcohol/drugs/unknown]

•

At any time during the incident, was the subject(s) armed or believed to be armed with
a weapon? [Yes/No/Pending/Unknown]

Officer Information
•

Age, sex, race, ethnicity, height, and weight of the officer(s)

•

Officer’s years of service as a law enforcement officer (total tenure) [Number of years]

•

Full-time? [Yes/No]

•

Was the officer readily identifiable? [Yes/No]

•

Was the officer on duty at the time of the incident? (Yes/No)

•

Did the officer discharge a firearm? [Yes/No]

•

Officer(s) injured [Yes/No]

•

Officer injury type [gunshot wound/apparent broken bones/possible internal injury/severe
laceration/loss of teeth/other major injury/unconsciousness/death]

Background Research on Survey Instrument
The survey was constructed with input from various entities both within and outside the FBI which are
involved with various aspects of UCR data management—including the Association of State UCR
Programs and the CJIS APB. Based upon this input, there were six primary areas that were seen to have
a potential to influence on participation in the National Use-of-Force Data Collection. These areas were
6

also identified as most likely to affect levels of participation in the National Use-of-Force Data Collection
and subsequent data completeness and quality based upon past experience of FBI personnel and early
communications with potential data contributors.
The areas covered in the survey include the following:








How management of the National Use-of-Force Data Collection will be organized (2 questions)
Technical capabilities with state or domain systems (9 questions)
State statutes regarding UCR or Use-of-Force data collection (4 questions)
Data quality, training, and auditing capabilities of state or domain systems (7 questions)
Publication of use-of-force data by the state or domain (4 questions)
Use of the Law Enforcement Enterprise Portal by personnel with the state or domain program
(6 questions)

The purpose of the survey is to document the current capabilities and plans of the state and domain
UCR programs in regards to the National Use-of-Force Data Collection.

Methodological Plan and Selection of Participants
The survey will be distributed to state and domain points-of-contact. These individuals are usually
described as program managers or Criminal Justice Information Services Systems Officers (CSOs). The
FBI relies upon these individuals to be the main conduit for the collection of UCR data. This would
include all fifty states and territories, as well as tribal and federal domain managers. This is not a
sample-based survey and could have up to 104 participants based upon two points-of-contact per state
and one per territory. The federal domains will also be given the option of completing the survey to
include the four Department of Justice law enforcement entities, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and other
federal law enforcement agencies.
The distribution will be sent via email to a list of state and domain UCR Program Managers and CSOs
maintained by the FBI CJIS Division on Business Day 1. After the initial distribution, the FBI will monitor
the response rate of the survey to provide follow-up reminders to nonrespondents. The FBI will send at
least two reminder notices to encourage participation in order to maximize the response rate. These
reminders will be sent only to nonrespondents. The first reminder will be sent on Business Day 3 after
the initial solicitation for responses. The second reminder will be sent on Business Day 7. After the two
initial reminders, the FBI will assess the need for additional reminders by either email or phone.

Developmental Activity Procedures Language
The survey will be conducted in English.

7

Burden Hours for Developmental Activities
The FBI is requesting 29.4 burden hours for this activity based upon approximately 104 nonfederal
participants to complete a survey lasting 0.28 hours for each administration. This time was estimated
based upon a timed completion of the survey by six volunteers.

Analysis Plan
The responses from the survey will be analyzed to identify areas that the FBI needs to address to ensure
that the data submissions to the National Use-of-Force Data Collection have a high level of
completeness and quality. In addition, the possible state participants in the pilot study will be identified
based upon the responses to primarily two variables. The pilot states would need to be both managing
their collection of use-of-force data and also using the FBI-constructed collection application on LEEP.
The analysis of the responses will involve descriptive statistics. Since the variables measured on the
survey are mostly categorical in nature, these statistics will involve frequency distributions and crosstabulations. This survey does not rely upon a statistical sample or seek to test any hypotheses, so there
is no need for statistical tests of significance. An internal report will be completed with the results of the
analysis and shared with the participants of the survey and others upon request.

Informed Consent, Data Confidentiality, and Data Security
Participation is voluntary for participants in the survey. Any potential participant who does not wish to
participate would be free to refrain from participating as stated in the introductory paragraph on the
survey instrument. Any identifying information requested from the participants on the instrument will
be kept confidential to the fullest extent that the law allows. Data files will be housed on an internal FBI
computer system and are subject to its data security policies.

8