What We’ve Done
The CPE is proud to have worked with many of the largest and most committed police departments in the United States and abroad. As a research and action think tank, we aim to provide leadership in equity through excellence in research. As a result of our collaborations, we have received the endorsement of the Major Cities Chiefs Association and crafted a blueprint for research and action in policing equity.
The CPE is also proud to have provided services for the below police departments. Services have included research into department culture, department and community interactions, and training for police departments on issues related to equity.
Denver Police Department
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department
Toronto Police Service
Houston Police Department
Salt Lake City Police Department
Virginia Beach Police Department
Denton Police Department
San Jose Police Department
Portland Police Bureau
Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
Baltimore County Police Department
St. Louis Metro Police Department
Oakland Police Department
Bay Area Rapid Transit Police Department
Berkeley Police Department
University of California Police Department, Berkeley
University of California Police Department, Los Angeles
Chicago Police Department
Baltimore City Police Department
Saint Louis County Police Department
The problem, it seemed, was that many women in the DPD Academy reported that they simply could not “see themselves” on the force. So, the solution was to implement a mentoring program where veteran officers provided those in training with a window into the future, helping new officers see how they would fit in. The DPD now boasts a 0% dropout rate of women in their police academy since the implementation of the mentorship program—and male officers report a benefit as well (the program has expanded to include everyone in an academy class). Though neither the CPE nor the DPD would claim that no women will ever drop out again, this is the kind of data-driven intervention that the CPE believes can work in other departments.
It was. And in a bad direction.
Though most officers and a slight minority of residents favored the policy itself, a large majority of officers revealed that having to enforce immigration policy was likely to make their jobs more dangerous. More importantly, regardless of resident’s race, immigration status, or political leanings, a significant number (nearly 50% of those surveyed) of those who said they would normally report a minor crime said they would likely decline to report that same crime were SLCPD officers required to check for immigration status. This research provides some of the first empirical evidence that the marriage of policing and immigration poses significant risks to public safety, and provided the SLCPD with scientific support for their position against policing immigration.
It is important to note that this research could have gone the other way and that social science, done right, does not privilege a political perspective. However, either way the results came out, the SLCPD was better prepared to deal with their obligations to the community they serve.
For research on the topic of immigration, please click here.
Armed with these research insights, we developed a series of trainings on some of the psychological factors that seem to produce community concerns about policing. Most importantly, PD’s that use our trainings provide us with before and after-training data. This allows CPE researchers to determine whether or not the trainings are having the desire effect, the opposite effect, or no effect at all. Given how contentious trainings often can be with unions, residents, and command staff, CPE feels that the least a training should offer is the ability to measure whether what it has done.