doj six-month assessment report on ppd
Post on 07-Aug-2018
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
1/96
COLLABORATIVE
REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment
Report on the Philadelphia
Police Department
James “Chip” Coldren, Steven Carter,
James LaRochelle, Ashley Shultz
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
2/96
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
3/96
COLLABORATIVE
REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment
Report on the Philadelphia
Police Department
James “Chip” Coldren, Steven Carter,
James LaRochelle, Ashley Shultz
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
4/96
Thisprojectwassupportedbycooperativeagreementnumber2013CKWXK016,awardedbytheOfficeofCommunity
OrientedPolicingServices,U.S.DepartmentofJustice.Theopinionscontainedhereinarethoseoftheauthor(s)anddonot
necessarilyrepresenttheofficialpositionorpoliciesoftheU.S.DepartmentofJustice.Referencestospecificagencies,com-
panies,products,orservicesshouldnotbeconsideredanendorsementbytheauthor(s)ortheU.S.DepartmentofJustice.
Rather,thereferencesareillustrationstosupplementdiscussionoftheissues.
Thisdocumentcontainspreliminaryanalysisthatissubjecttofurtherreviewandmodification.Itmaynotbequotedorcit-
edandshouldnotbedisseminatedfurtherwithouttheexpresspermissionofCNAortheU.S.DepartmentofJustice.Any
copyrightinthisworkissubjecttotheGovernment’sUnlimitedRightslicenseasdefinedinFAR52227.14.Thereproduction
ofthisworkforcommercialpurposesisstrictlyprohibited.Nongovernmentalusersmaycopyanddistributethisdocument
inanymedium,eithercommercialornoncommercial,providedthatthiscopyrightnoticeisreproducedinallcopies.Non-
governmentalusersmaynotusetechnicalmeasurestoobstructorcontrolthereadingorfurthercopyingofthecopies
theymakeordistribute.Nongovernmentalusersmaynotacceptcompensationofanymannerinexchangeforcopies.All
otherrightsreserved.
TheInternetreferencescitedinthispublicationwerevalidasofthedateofthispublication.GiventhatURLsandwebsites
areinconstantflux,neithertheauthor(s)northeCOPSOfficecanvouchfortheircurrentvalidity.
Recommendedcitation:
Coldren,James,StevenCarter,JamesLaRochelle,andAshleyShultz.SixMonth Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police
Department.CollaborativeReformInitiative.Washington,DC:OfficeofCommunityOrientedPolicingServices.
Copyright©2015CNACorporation.TheU.S.DepartmentofJusticereservesaroyaltyfree,nonexclusive,andirrevocable
licensetoreproduce,publish,orotherwiseuseandauthorizeotherstousethispublicationforFederalGovernmentpurpos-
es.Thispublicationmaybefreelydistributedandusedfornoncommercialandeducationalpurposesonly.
Published2015
http:///reader/full/52-227.14http:///reader/full/52-227.14
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
5/96
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contents
Executive Summary 1
Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Progresstowardreportrecommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Nextsteps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Chapter 1. Introduction 3
Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Organizationofthissixmonthassessmentreport 6
Chapter 2. Use of Force Policies 7
Finding1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Finding2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Finding3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Finding4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Finding5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Finding6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Finding7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Finding8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Finding9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Finding10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Chapter 3. Basic Recruit Training 21
Finding12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Finding13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Finding14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Finding15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Finding16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Finding17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Finding18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Finding19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Finding20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Finding21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Chapter 4. In-Service Training 31
Finding22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Finding23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Finding24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Finding25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Finding26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
–iii–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
6/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Finding27 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Finding28 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Finding29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Finding30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Chapter 5. Investigations 43Finding31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Finding32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Finding33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Finding34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Finding35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Finding36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Finding37 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Finding38 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Finding39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Chapter 6. Use of Deadly Force Review and Officer Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53
Finding40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
53
Finding41 57
Finding42 57
Finding43 58
Finding44 59
Chapter 7. External Oversight and Transparency 61
Finding45 61
Finding46 63 Finding47 63
Finding48 65
Chapter 8. Conclusion and Next Steps 67
Appendix A. Philadelphia Police Department Recommendation Status Summary 69
Appendix B. Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Initialisms 81
About CNA 83
About the COPS Office 85
–iv–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
7/96
Executive Summary
Background
InJune2013,CommissionerCharlesH.RamseyofthePhiladelphiaPoliceDepartment(PPD)requested
technicalassistancefromtheU.S.DepartmentofJustice(DOJ)OfficeofCommunityOrientedPolicingServices(COPSOffice)throughtheCollaborativeReformInitiativeforTechnicalAssistance(CRITA).While
Philadelphiawasexperiencingreductionsinviolentcrimeandassaultsagainstthepolice,thecitywasalso
experiencingincreasesinfatalofficerinvolvedshootings.
CRITAprovideslawenforcementagenciesintheUnitedStateswithanoptiontocloselyassessemerging
issuesofconcernwhich,ifleftunchecked,mightdevelopintoseriousproblemsrequiringextensiveand
expensivereformefforts.ThroughCRITA,independentorganizationsconductassessmentsoftheidenti-
fiedproblemsinapoliceagencyandrecommendreformsaimedateliminatingorsubstantiallyreducing
theproblems;theythenmonitorthepoliceagency’simplementationofthosereformsfor12to18months,
helpingtoinsurethatthereformshavealastingeffect.
ThegoalsofCRITAatthePPDincludeexaminingandreformingdeadlyforcetraining,policies,andpractic-
esinthePPDandimprovingcommunityinvolvementinthesematters.Theobjectivesofthisassessment
includethefollowing:
• Enhancetrainingasitrelatestoofficerandpublicsafetyindeadlyforcesituations.
• Improvethequalityandtransparencyofdeadlyforceinvestigationsfrombothcriminalandadminis-
trativestandpoints.
• Strengthentheuseofforcereviewprocess.
• Institutionalizeorganizationallearningprocessesandpracticesrelatedtodeadlyforceincidents.
AttherequestoftheCOPSOffice,CNA1conductedathoroughassessmentoftrendsandpatterns,training,
andpoliciesandpracticespertainingtouseofforceatthePPD..
TheCOPSOfficepublishedtheinitialassessmentreport,CollaborativeReformInitiative:AnAssessmentof
DeadlyForceinthePhiladelphiaPoliceDepartment,inMarch2015. 2
Thatreportpresentedadetailedanaly-
sisofuseofforceincidentsinthePPDfrom2007to2013.Theanalysisrevealedthatduringthoseyears,the
PPDaveragedabout50officerinvolvedshootings(OIS)peryearandthatthenumberofOISshaddeclined
inrecentyears.However,thepercentageofOISsthatinvolvedPPDofficersshootingatunarmedindividuals
increasedoverthatsametimeperiod,fromapproximatelyeightpercenttomorethan20percent. 3
WhilethereleaseoftheassessmentreportinMarchmarkedthecompletionoftheassessmentphase,the
COPSOffice,CNA,andthePPDhavecontinuedtheircollaborationtosupporttheimplementationofthe
91recommendedreformsincludedinthatreport.
1. CNA is a research and analysis firm specializing in policing reform issues around use of force and police-community relations. CNA worked with the COPS Office to
develop the Collaborative Reform Initiative and has worked on CRI-TA projects in Las Vegas, Nevada; Spokane, Washington; and Fayetteville, North Carolina, in addition
to the Philadelphia project.
2. George Fachner and Steven Carter, An Assessment of Deadly Force in the Philadelphia Police Department , Collaborative Reform Initiative (Washington, DC: Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services, 2015), http://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0753-pub.pdf .
3. Fachner and Carter, An Assessment of Deadly Force in the Philadelphia Police Department , 17–33 (see note 2).
Trackingtheimplementationprogressofthesereforms
beganinApril2015andwillcontinuethroughOctober2016,aperiodofabout18months.
–1–
http://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0753-pub.pdfhttp://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0753-pub.pdf
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
8/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
ThissixmonthassessmentreportisthefirstoftwoprogressreportsthattheCOPSOfficewillpublishon
thePPD’sprogresstowardimplementationoftherecommendedreforms.Itwillinformallstakeholders(i.e.,
thePPD,theDOJ,andthePhiladelphiacommunity)ofthePPD’sprogresstodate.Overthenextyear,CNA
willconductadditionalsitevisitsandinterviewswithPPDpersonnelandcommunitymembers;directly
observePPDactivities;analyzerelateddata;andcontinuetoreviewsupportingdocumentationprovided
bythePPD.Thefinalassessmentreportwilldocumentthestatusoftheimplementationoftherecom-mendedreformsatthecompletionofthemonitoringphase.TheCOPSOfficewillmakethefinalassess-
mentreportpubliclyavailable.
Progress toward report recommendations
Thissixmonthassessmentreportassignsoneoffourstatusestoeachofthe91recommendationscon-
tainedintheassessmentreport:Complete,Partiallycomplete,Inprogress,orNoprogress.Table1shows
thetallyofthestatusofthe91recommendationsasofOctober30,2015.Todate,thePPDhascompleted
21recommendations,hasmadedemonstrableprogressonanadditional61recommendations(thoselist-
edasPartially completeand In progress),andhasmadenoprogressonninerecommendations.The
PPDhasmadepositiveprogresstowardimplementingthereforms.Attheonethirdmarkintheimple-
mentationphase(aftersixof18months),24percentofthe91reformrecommendationsareCompleteor
Partially completewithanother66percentInprogress.Thus,90percentofthe91recommendationsfor
thePPDareComplete,Partially complete,orIn progress.
Table 1. Status of PPD assessment report recommendations
Status Reforms/
Recommendations (N)
Percent (%)
Complete 21 23
Partially complete 1 1
In progress 60 66
No progress 9 10
Total 91 100
Next steps
Overthenextyear,theassessmentteamwillcontinuetomonitorthePPD’sprogresstowardsimplement-
ingthereformrecommendations.AfinalassessmentreportontheimplementationoftheCollaborative
ReformInitiativeinthePPDwillbeprovidedinearly2017.
–2–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
9/96
Chapter 1. Introduction
Background
InJune2013,CommissionerCharlesH.RamseyofthePhiladelphiaPoliceDepartment(PPD)requested
technicalassistancefromtheU.S.DepartmentofJustice(DOJ)OfficeofCommunityOrientedPolicingServices(COPSOffice)throughtheCollaborativeReformInitiativeforTechnicalAssistance(CRITA).While
Philadelphiawasexperiencingreductionsinviolentcrimeandassaultsagainstthepolice,thecitywasalso
experiencingincreasesinfatalofficerinvolvedshootings.
CRITAprovideslawenforcementagenciesintheUnitedStateswithanoptiontocloselyassessemerging
issuesofconcernwhich,ifleftunchecked,mightdevelopintoseriousproblemsrequiringextensiveand
expensivereformefforts—possiblyevenconsentdecreesandappointmentofindependentmonitors.
ThroughCRITA,independentorganizationsconductassessmentsoftheidentifiedproblemsinapolice
agencyandrecommendreformsaimedateliminatingorsubstantiallyreducingtheproblems;theythen
monitorthepoliceagency’simplementationofthosereformsfor12to18months,helpinginsurethatthe
reformshavealastingeffect.
InthecaseofthePPD,thegoalsofCRITA,whichweremutuallyagreeduponbytheCOPSOfficeandthe
PPD,includedexaminingandreformingdeadlyforcetraining,policies,practicesinthePPD,takinginto
accountnationalstandards,bestpractices,currentandemergingresearch,andimprovingcommunityin-
volvementinthesematters.Theagreeduponobjectivesofthisinitiativeincludedthefollowing:
• Enhancetrainingasitrelatestoofficerandpublicsafetyindeadlyforcesituations.
• Improvethequalityandtransparencyofdeadlyforceinvestigationsfrombothcriminalandadminis-
trativestandpoints.
•
Strengthentheuseofforce(UOF)reviewprocess.• Institutionalizeorganizationallearningprocessesandpracticesrelatedtodeadlyforceincidents.
AttherequestoftheCOPSOffice,CNAconductedathoroughassessmentoftrendsandpatterns,training,
andpoliciesandpracticespertainingtouseofforceatthePPD.
InMarch2015,followinga12monthassessment,theCOPSOfficepublishedCNA’sinitialassessmentre-
port, An Assessment of Deadly Force in the Philadelphia Police Department .4 Thatreportpresentedadetailed
analysisofUOFincidentsinthePPDfrom2007to2013.Thisanalysisrevealedthatduringthoseyears,the
PPDaveragedabout50officerinvolvedshootings(OIS)peryear,andthatthenumberofOISsdeclinedin
recentyears.However,thepercentageofOISsthatinvolvedPPDofficersshootingatunarmedindividuals
increasedoverthatsametimeperiod,fromapproximatelyeightpercenttomorethan20percent.5
Whilethereleaseoftheinitialassessmentreportmarkedthecompletionoftheassessmentphase,the
COPSOffice,CNA,andthePPDhavecontinuedtheircollaborationtosupporttheimplementationof91
recommendedreformsincludedinthatreport.Trackingtheimplementationprogressofthesereforms
beganinApril2015andwillcontinuethroughOctober2016,aperiodofabout18months.
4. Fachner and Carter, An Assessment of Deadly Force in the Philadelphia Police Department (see note 2).
5. Fachner and Carter, An Assessment of Deadly Force in the Philadelphia Police Department , 17–33 (see note 2).
–3–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
10/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
SixMonthAssessmentReportonthePhiladelphiaPoliceDepartment
ThissixmonthassessmentreportisthefirstoftworeportsthattheCOPSOfficewillpublishonthePPD’s
progresstowardimplementationoftherecommendedreforms.Itwillinformallstakeholders(i.e.,thePPD,
theDOJ,andthePhiladelphiacommunity)ofthePPD’sprogresstodate.Thefinalassessmentreportwill
documentthestatusoftheimplementationatthecompletionofthemonitoringphase.
Inthissixmonthassessmentreport,eachrecommendationhasbeenassignedoneoffourstatuses(see
table2).
Table 2. Definitions of recommendation statuses
Status Definition
Complete
The recommendation has been sufficiently demonstrated to be complete based
on the assessors’ review of submitted materials, observations, and analysis.
Ongoing review of this recommendation throughout the monitoring period
will determine whether this reform has been fully institutionalized within the
department.
Partially complete
The agency has submitted materials that they believe demonstrate completion
of the recommendation. However, the assessors have deemed that additionaleffort is needed to complete the recommendation. The agency has stated that
no further work will be forthcoming on the recommendation.
In progressImplementation of the recommendation is currently in progress based on the
assessors’ review of submitted materials, observations, and analysis.
No progress The agency has not sufficiently demonstrated progress toward implementation
of the recommendation.
Thereareimportantcaveatstothestatusesreportedhere.Everyrecommendationfromtheinitialassess-
mentreportissubjecttoreviewovertheentirecourseoftheprogram,includingthoserecommendations
thathavereachedthestatusof“Complete.”Thisisnecessarytoensurethatthecompletedrecommenda-tionscontinuetobeinstitutionalizedwithinthedepartmentandtoexaminepotentialmodificationstothe
implementationofthesereforms.Astatusof“Partiallycomplete”isassignedtothoserecommendations
wherethedepartmentdidnotfullyimplementarecommendationasstatedintheinitialassessmentre-
portandhasnofurtherplanstocontinueworkingonorfullyimplementingtherecommendation.Ifthe
assessmentteambelievesthatthePPDwillcontinuetoworkontherecommendation,thestatusislisted
as“Inprogress.”Thisstatusisalsousedtoindicateinstancesinwhichthedepartmenthasmadeconsider-
ableprogressandhassubmittedenoughmaterialsfortheassessorstomakedeterminationthatconstruc-
tivestepshavebeentakentowardcompletion.Recommendationslistedas“Noprogress”arethosefor
whicheither(1)insufficientmaterialswereprovidedfortheassessorstodocumentdemonstrativeprogress
towardscompletion,(2)thedepartmentwasunabletoimplementtherecommendationsbecauseofcir-cumstanceswithinorbeyondtheircontrol(e.g.,theyhavenotyetbegunimplementationofchangesor
theyarerestrictedbystatelegislationorcontractualissues),or(3)thedepartmenthasnotedthatitdoes
nothaveplanstoimplementtherecommendation.
Table3showsatallyofthestatusofreportrecommendations.Todate,thePPDhascompleted21recom-
mendations,haspartiallycompletedormadedemonstrableprogressonanadditional61recommenda-
tions,andhasmadenoprogressonninerecommendations.ThePPDhasmadepositiveprogresstoward
–4–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
11/96
Chapter1.Introduction
implementingthereforms.Attheonethirdmarkinthemonitoringphase(aftersixof18months),24per-
centofthe91reformrecommendationsareCompleteorPartially completewithanother66percentIn
progress.Thus,90percentofthe91recommendationsatthePPDareComplete,Partially complete,or
In progress.
Table 3. Status of PPD initial assessment report recommendations
Status Reforms/Recommendations (N) Percent (%)
Complete 21 23
Partially complete 1 1
In progress 60 66
No progress 9 10
Total 91 100
Approach
ThegoalsoftheCRITAmonitoringphaseareforthemembersoftheassessmentteamtofullyunderstand
thestepsthePPDhastakentowardimplementingtherecommendedreformsandtocollectandreviewas
muchevidenceasnecessarytoconfirmthatthosestepshavebeencompleted.Inordertotracktheimple-
mentationprogress,theassessmentteamprovidedthePPDwithadocumentoutliningprocessesthat
provideevidenceofcompliance.Thatdocumentincludedexamplesofimportantstepsthedepartment
shouldtakeincompletingthereformsaswellasalistofformaldocumentationnecessarytoprovideevi-
denceoftheimplementationprogress.
FromApriltoOctober2015,theassessmentteamconductedtwositevisits,maintainedfrequentcontact
withthePPD,andrevieweddocumentscontainingevidenceofthePPD’sdeliberateactionsandprogress
towardsagencyreformbasedonthe91recommendationsintheinitialassessmentreport.Todate,the
PPDhassubmittedmorethan100documentsandfilesforreviewcoveringmostoftherecommendations,
includingpoliciesanddirectives,internalbulletinsandmemoranda,traininglessonplans,attendancere-
cords,OISinvestigationfiles,emailcommunications,andotherpertinentdocumentation.Theassessment
teamhascriticallyreviewedthesefilesforrelevanceandconsistencywiththerecommendationsaswellas
forclarityandqualityofthedocuments.InadditiontoreviewingthedocumentsandfilesreceivedfromthePPD,theassessmentteamheldbiweeklycallswiththePPDliaisonfortheCRITAassessmentduring
whichtheprogresstowardeachrecommendationwasdiscussedindetail.Tosupplementthebiweekly
phonecalls,theassessmentteamconductedtwositevisitstothePPDonJune3–5andOctober14–16,
duringwhichtheteamobservedseveraldifferenttrainingsessions,attendedcommunitypolicingevents,
interviewedseveralcommandlevelstaffinthetrainingandinternalaffairsdivisions,metwiththePolice
CommunityOversightBoard,andinterviewedCommissionerRamsey.
–5–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
12/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Overthenextyear,CNAwillconductadditionalsitevisitsandinterviewswithPPDpersonnelandcommu-
nitymembers,directlyobservePPDactivities,analyzerelateddata,andcontinuetoreviewsupporting
documentationprovidedbythePPD.
Organization of this six-month assessment report
Theorganizationofthissixmonthassessmentreportresemblestheformatestablishedwiththeinitialas-
sessmentreport.Chapters2to7inthissixmonthassessmentreportcoverthesametopicareasanalyzed
intheinitialassessmentreportandcoveredinchapters4through9ofthatreport.Thissixmonthassess-
mentreportaddressesallrecommendationsinthesameorderinwhichtheyappearedintheinitial
assessmentreport(andwehavemaintainedconsistentnumberingfortherecommendations),though
thechapternumbersthemselvesdonotalignacrossthetworeports.Foreachrecommendation,we
includeinformationexcerptedfromtheinitialassessmentreportthatexplainstherelevanceoftherecom-
mendation.Wherepossible,wedocumentevidencesupportingtheassessments.Weconcludethereport
withasectiononnextsteps.
AppendixAprovidesatablethatoutlinesthestatusofallthereforms,andappendixBprovidesalistoftheacronyms,abbreviations,andinitialismsusedthroughoutthisreport.
–6–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
13/96
Chapter 2. Use of Force Policies
Thistopicappearedinchapter4oftheinitialassessmentreportonthePhiladelphiaPoliceDepartment
(PPD)andincluded20recommendationsbasedonananalysisofdirectives10and22,whicharethede-
partment’suseofforce(UOF)policies.Severalotherdirectivesandpoliciesinfluenceofficerdecisionmak-
ing,publicencounters,andcriticalincidents,suchasdirective111oncrisisresponseandcriticalincident
negotiations;directive136onseverelymentallydisabledpersons;directive146onfootpursuits;anda
draftdirectiveonelectroniccontrolweapons(ECW).Theinitialassessmentreport’srecommendationsin-
cludedthemessuchasconsistencywithtrainingpracticeandotherpolicies;consistencywithpromising
andemergingpractices,researchliterature,andthedepartment’suniqueneeds;courtdecisions;and
theimportanceofofficerandpublicsafety.Ofthe20recommendations,11arecompleteandninearein
progress,asshownintable4.ThefollowingchapterprovidesadetailedassessmentofPPD’sprogressin
implementingthese20recommendations.Wehavemaintainedtheoriginalrecommendationnumbers
(1.1,1.2,etc.)forconsistencyacrossthereports.
Table 4. Status of use of force policies recommendations
Status Reforms/Recommendations (N) Percent (%)
Complete 11 55
Partially complete 0 0
In progress 9 45
No progress 0 0
Total 20 100
Finding 1
PPD officers do not receive regular, consistent training on the department’s deadly force policy.
Recommendation 1.1
The PPD should develop a standard training module on directives 10 and 22 and require all sworn personnel to
complete the training on an annual basis.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundtherewasasignificantlackofinservicetrainingthatthroughoutan
officer’scareerreinforcedthecriticallyimportanttenetsofthedepartment’sdeadlyforcepolicy.
–7–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
14/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDhasdevelopeda10minutevideoofCommissionerCharlesH.Ramseydiscussingspecificchangesin
policiesandpracticesastheyrelatetothesetwodirectives.Inaddition,thePPDhasdevelopedaneighthour
lessonplanonthistopicthathasbeensubmittedforcommandapproval.ThelessonplanincludesappropriatereferencestoGrahamv.Conner andTennesseev.Garner .Itincludesillustrativeteachingpointsonhowofficers
canbetterarticulatemorepreciselywhatoccurredduringanincident.Thereisadiscussionontherequirement
forofficerstointervenewhenexcessiveforceisusedandthedutytoreportthesetypesofincidents.Manyofthe
policychangesrecommendedintheinitialassessmentreportarehighlightedinthelessonplan.Casestudies
areusedasmechanismstoreinforcethelearningobjectives.Theassessmentteamwillcontinuetomonitorthe
progressofthisrecommendationinanalyzingthelessonplanandhowthePPDintendstodeliverit.
Recommendation 1.2
The PPD should engage with officers and supervisors at the patrol level to seek their input on the clarity and com-
prehensibility of the department’s use of force directives.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthePPD’spolicyandplanningdivisionconductedsignificant
outreachtootherdepartmentpersonnelinrevisingdirective10.However,theiroutreachdidnotinclude
patrolofficersorsergeantswhosepositionatthestreetlevelcanhelpshapethepolicyinawaythatisun-
derstandable,practical,andaccessibletosuchofficers,astheyarethemostlikelytoapplythepolicytoev-
erydaypractice.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
TheassessmentteamreviewedaJuly2015revisiontodirective150,DepartmentDirectiveProgram,andconcludedthatthefollowinglanguagedemonstratesthedepartment’sefforttomeetthecriteriaforcom-
pletionofRecommendation1.2:
The Research and Planning Unit will initiate a focus group consisting of officers and supervisors at the patrol level
to seek their input on the clarity and comprehensibility of any recommendation to update or change all or part of
the Use of Force Directives.
TheassessmentteamrequestedinMarch2015thatifthedepartmentmakesanymajorrevisionstothe
UOFpolicyorinstitutesanynewUOFrelatedpolicies,thedepartmentwilldocumentthatithasreceived
feedbackfromofficersandsupervisorsatthepatrollevelasarequirementofdirective150.However,sever-
aldraftswerewrittenbetweenMarchandOctober2015withoutanyofficerlevelengagement.AttheendofSeptember,thePPDissuedanewdirective7.16,DepartmentDirectiveProgram,whichstatesthatafo-
cusgroupofofficersandsupervisorswillbeformedtoensurethatfuturechangestoUOFdirectivesare
clearandcomprehensible.Whilethereviseddirectives7.16and150showprogresstowardimplementing
therequirementsofthisrecommendation,theassessmentteamwillmonitorwhetherfuturerevisions
includedinputfromofficersandsupervisors.
–8–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
15/96
– 9 –
Finding 2
The PPD’s use of force policies are fragmented, as are revisions of these policies. As a result, the
PPD currently has two use of force models, which can be a source of confusion for officers.
Recommendation 2.1
The PPD should revise directives 10 and 22 at the same time to ensure the policies provide clear and consistent
direction and guidance.
The initial assessment report noted that directives should be revised at the same time, and when making
revisions, the PPD should audit to ensure that the language, guidance, and illustrations are consistent and
understandable to officers on the street. The initial assessment report also noted that the directives should
be reviewed at least annually for compliance with changing laws, court precedents, emerging best practic-
es from the field, findings and recommendations from the use of force review board (UFRB), and findings
and recommendations from the police advisory commission.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
Under the new directive 7.16, Department Directive Program, one modification is the following:
The Research and Planning Unit will initiate a focus group consisting of officers and supervisors at the patrol level
to seek their input on the clarity and comprehensibility of any recommendation to update or change all or part of
the Use of Force directives. All changes/updates that are made to the Use of Force Directives will be made and dis-
seminated at the same time.
The assessment team will follow up to determine whether directive 10 has been audited within one year of
its revision.
Recommendation 2.2
For each district unit, the PPD should designate or assign an individual who is responsible for policy and training
bulletin dissemination and auditing.
The initial assessment report noted that officers interviewed suggested the position of training coordinator
be created in each district and that training coordinators be responsible for timely policy dissemination
and verification that training was received and audited. The initial assessment report observed that officers
noted the lengthy time it takes to receive updates and disseminate them constitutes a large workload.
Therefore, making this the primary responsibility of a district training coordinator will result in a more time-
ly dissemination.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
The PPD has developed a different structure for training coordination. PPD directive 150 established the
position of Training Coordinator, which is responsible for the distribution of policy updates and training
bulletins. This is an extremely limited role, and in a functional sense this person has no real involvement in
training; they are merely performing the administrative duties of document distribution and tracking.
Chapter 2. Use of Force Policies
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
16/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Thechiefinspector(CI)oftheTrainingBureauhasproposedthecreationofaFieldTrainingCoordinator
program.Thispositionwouldbeacorporalorsergeantwho,whileworkinginadistrictordivision,would
beresponsivetotheCIoftheTrainingBureau(andcouldalsoconducttrainingattherequestofthedistrict
captain).Theywouldmonitoradistrict’scompliancewiththedistributionoftrainingmaterials,policies,
andtheMunicipalPoliceOfficerEducationandTrainingCommission(MPOETC)requirements.Theywould
monitorUOFreportstodetermineiftherearetrainingneedsthatshouldbeaddressed.Theywoulddelivershorttermtrainingatrollcallsorinhourlongblocksatthedistricts,includingtherotatingfirearmstraining
simulator(FATS)machine.TheywouldbeMPOETCcertifiedinstructors.Theassessmentteamhasclosely
reviewedtheproposalandfeelsitwouldbeamajorimprovementtothecurrentoperationalenvironment.
Itwouldfacilitateinservicetrainingattheunitlevelwhileensuringconsistencywithtrainingconductedat
theAcademy.Theassessmentteamwillcloselyfollowtheprogressofthisproposal.
Recommendation 2.3
The PPD should incorporate officers’ acknowledgement of receipt of training bulletins and policy updates into the
PPD’s training recordkeeping system.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthePPDcouldnotdeterminehowwellofficersarekeeping
abreastofpolicyupdatesatthedepartmentlevel,norcouldittrackcomplianceattheunitlevel,because
officers’acknowledgementofreceiptofpolicyupdateswerenotrecordedinanytypeofelectronicrecords
system.TheinitialassessmentreportnotedthatthePPDshouldcollectandstorereceiptinformationelec-
tronicallyandintegratethoserecordswithotherinformationmaintainedonofficertraining.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
TheCIoftheTrainingBureaurequestedthattheexistingtrainingrecordsdatabasebereplacedwithasys-
temthat
• supportsawebbasedplatformthatpermitsonlinetrainingandeaseofaccessacrossthedepartment;
• transmitsnotificationsandalertsacrossdifferentusersviaemail;
• allowssystementriesatthedistrictorunitcommanderlevelwiththeabilitytouploadcompletion
trainingcertificateswithTrainingBureauvettingofcoursestakenoutsidethedepartment;
• tracksinventoriesofequipment,alertingequipmentholderstoexpirations,etc.(e.g.,ballisticvests,
oleoresincapsicum[OC]spray[pepperspray]canisters,Narcanvials),withspecificfirearm/electronic
controlweapons(ECW)assignmentandlocationtracking;
• allowsbulkentriesoftrainingdata,suchaswiththeQISTdatabase;
• tracksstudentcertificationexpirationsforallpersonneltosatisfythedepartment’strainingmatrix
needs.
PPDmembersreviewedtheproposedQualtrax6systemandnotedthatitislackinginotherareas
neededtotracktrainingandequipment.Theassessmentteamwillcontinuetomonitortheprogress
ofthisrequest.
6. Qualtrax is an automated training records system that the PPD thought could replace its current system.
–10–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
17/96
Chapter2.UseofForcePolicies
Finding 3
Directive 10 is too vague in its description of use of force decision making, relying too heavily
on the use of force decision chart.
Recommendation 3
The PPD should update directive 10 to include additional narrative context describing the appropriate level of
force to be applied under various circumstances.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatbasedsolelyontheuseofforcedecisionchart,anofficerappears
tobeabletouseanyforceoptionrangingfromphysicalcontroltobatonstoECWsonasubjectwhoisei-
therpassivelyresistantornoncompliant,whichwouldbeaninappropriateUOF.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDchangeddirective10toincludeadditionalnarrativetoexplaineachlevelontheUOFdecision
chart.TheadditionalnarrativecomplementstheconceptsdepictedonthenewUOFdecisionchart.Itin-
cludesexamplesofhowtointerpretthedecisionchart.AnearlyrevisionincludedASP/batonstrikes(not
allpermittedusesofthebaton—strikesonly)inthemoderateUOFlevel.However,afterworkingwiththe
assessmentteam,thedirectivewasrevisedtoreflectthefollowing:
TheuseoftheElectronicControlWeapon(ECW)and/orASP/Batonisauthorizedwhentheoffender
isphysicallyaggressiveorassaultiveandthereisanimmediatelikelihoodthattheymayinjure
themselvesorothers.Suchbehaviorsmayincludepunching,kicking,grabbing,orapproachingwith
aclenchedfist.
Finding 4Directive 10 uses the term “probable cause” in the context of deadly force, which is an unneces-
sary and confusing departure from the traditional legal definition of the term.
Recommendation 4
The PPD should remove the term “probable cause” from directive 10 and expound upon the principles of Graham
v. Connorto guide officers in deadly force decision making.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatdirective10usestheterm“probablecause”inthecontextofdead-
lyforce,whichisanunnecessaryandconfusingdeparturefromthetraditionallegaldefinitionoftheterm.
Likealllawenforcementofficersinthiscountry,PPDofficersapplyprobablecausetoarrestsandsearchesinthevastmajorityoftheirwork.However,becauseofthePPD’spolicylanguage,officersmustshifttheir
thinkingonprobablecausewhenconfrontedwithadeadlyforcesituation,resultinginconfusionwhen
appliedinthefield.
–11–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
18/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDchangedtheterm“probablecause”indirective10to“objectivelyreasonable”andprovidedthe
definitionthatexpoundeduponthelegalpreceptsinGrahamv.Connor.
Finding 5
The definition of “objectively reasonable” in PPD directive 10 includes the terms “imminent” and
“immediate,” which can be a source of confusion for officers in the field. Notably, the term “im-
minent” does not appear in the Graham
v.Connor
decision.
Recommendation 5
The PPD should remove the term “imminent” from directive 10.
Theinitialassessmentreportalsofoundthatdirective10definesimminent as“threatening,likely,andun-
avoidable,”whichisvagueandinsufficientlanguage.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDchangedtheterm“imminent”indirective10to“immediate”.
Finding 6
The PPD’s “duty to intervene” clause in directive 22 creates a limited requirement—specifically,
that officers are required to stop another officer from using force when it is no longer required.
The policy is silent on whether officers are required to stop the initial use of force when it is in-
appropriate and on whether any such abuses should be reported.
Recommendation 6.1
The PPD’s “duty to intervene” should be revised to account for any officers witnessing the inappropriate initiation
of force.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthepolicyneglectsthedutyofofficerstointervenewhenthelevel
offorcebeingappliedisinappropriateinthefirstplace.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDchangeddirective22policytoreflectofficers’“dutytointervene”uponwitnessingexcessiveforce
beingused.Theassessmentteamsuggestedthefollowingadditionallanguagetothedirectivethathad
notalreadybeenadded:
Nopersonshouldeverbesubjecttoexcessiveforceatthehandsofthepolice.Yourinterventionwill
upholdthemoralandethicalstandardsofthePhiladelphiaPoliceDepartment.Officerswhoengage
orarecomplicitintheuseofexcessiveforcearesubjecttocivilandcriminalliability,inadditionto
disciplinaryaction.
–12–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
19/96
Chapter2.UseofForcePolicies
TherevisedDirective22nowstates,
Theprimarydutyofallpoliceofficersistopreservehumanlife.Onlytheamountofforcenecessary
toprotectlifeortoeffectanarrestshouldbeusedbyanofficer.Excessive force will not be
tolerated.Officersshouldexerciseallsafeandreasonablemeansofcontrolandcontainment,using
onlytheminimalamountofforcenecessarytoovercomeresistance.
Recommendation 6.2
The PPD’s “duty to intervene” should be expanded to include a “duty to report”.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatdirective22issilentonwhetherofficersarerequiredtostopthe
initialuseofforcewhenitisinappropriateandonwhetheranysuchabusesshouldbereported.Theinitial
assessmentreportalsofoundthatwhiledirective114onemployees’responsibilitytoreportcorruption,
misconduct,andotherimproperactsnegativelyaffectingthedepartmentrequiresthereportingofsuch
incidents,itisnotstatedclearly,norisitreferencedinthedepartment’sUOFdirectives.
Current assessment of compliance |Complete.
ThePPDchangeddirectives10and22toinclude“dutytoreport”andthestatement“Officerswhowitness
inappropriateorexcessiveforcehaveadutytoreportsuchviolationstoasupervisorandInternalAffairs.”
Finding 7
Directive 22 does not require officers to carry oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray.
Recommendation 7
Directive 22 should state that officers are required to carry OC spray on their duty belt at all times while on duty.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatmanyofficersdonotcarrytheirOCspraybecausetheydonot
believeittobeeffective,basedlargelyonanecdotalstoriessharedthroughouttheranks.Bynotcarrying
OCspray,PPDofficersarenotavailingthemselvesofavaluabletoolthatcouldenablethemtogaincom-
pliancewithoutinjuryortheenhanceddangerofgoing“handson”withasuspect.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDchangeddirectives78and22toreflectthisrecommendation.Theassessmentteamaskedthat
languagebeaddedtoreflectthatsubsequentviolationswillsubjecttheofficertoincreasinglevelsofdisci-
pline.ThePPDexplainedthatthedisciplinarycodeisacontractualmatterbetweenPPDandthepoliceunion(theFraternalOrderofPolice)andthatthematterofchangestothedisciplinarycodecannotbead-
dresseduntilthenextcontractnegotiationsscheduledfor2017.
Whilepolicyhasbeenchanged,whichmeetstheminimumrequirementofthisrecommendation,itis
notlikelythatthedisciplinarycodematterwillbeaddressedduringthe18monthimplementationphase.
Inaddition,duringitstwomonitoringvisits,theassessmentteamobserveduniformedofficersworking
invariouscapacitieswhowerenotcarryingOCspray.Theassessmentteamwillcontinuetomonitorfor
evidencethatofficersareheldtothisstandard.
–13–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
20/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Finding 8
The PPD requires officers to complete CIT in order to obtain an ECW. This requirement conflates
the two tactical approaches and limits the distribution of lesslethal tools throughout the de-
partment.
Recommendation 8.1
The PPD should decouple ECWs and CIT both conceptually and operationally.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatcrisisinterventionteam(CIT)trainingismeanttotrainofficerson
therecognitionofindividualswhoareincrisis(becauseofmentalhealthorothertemporaryimpairments)
andthentoemploydeescalationstrategies,includingverbaldeescalation,sothatwhenpossible,en-
counterswithpersonsinastateofmentalcrisiscanberesolvedwithoutviolence.ThePPD’sstronglinkage
ofthisconceptwithECWssendsmixedmessages.Infact,manyinterviewedofficersreferredtoCITtraining
as“Tasertraining”becausetheyviewedobtainingthetoolastheprimaryoutcomeofthetraining.7
7. CNA interviews.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
CommissionerRamseyindicatedthatthePPDisworkingonacompromiseversionofdecouplingECWand
CITthatwouldincludesomedeescalationtrainingtogoalongwiththeECWclass.
Recommendation 8.2
ECWs should be standard issue weapons for all PPD officers assigned to uniformed enforcement units.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthedistributionofECWshascoincidedwithadecreasingpropor-
tionofarmedencountersbeingresolvedwithdeadlyforce.Theinitialassessmentreportnotedthatthe
PPDshouldmakeECWsastandardissuetoolforalluniformedpersonnelassignedtouniformedenforce-
mentunits.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDindicatedthatthisisacostlyrecommendation.Theassessmentteamacknowledgedthisissue
andsuggestedthatunlikethecurrentsystemofindividuallyissuinganECWtoeachofficer,thePPDcould
maintainasupplyineachdistrictandissuethematthebeginningoftheshifttocutdownoncosts.
OnMay18,2015,theAcademybegantrainingrecruitsontheECW.Inaddition,overhalfofthePPDisECW
certified.Theassessmentteamrequestedevidenceofprogressregardingthisrecommendationforincum-bentofficers.
–14–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
21/96
Chapter2.UseofForcePolicies
Recommendation 8.3
All PPD officers in uniformed enforcement units should be required to carry ECWs on their duty belt at all times.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthePPDdoesnotrequireCITofficerstocarrytheirECWontheirduty
beltatalltimes.SomedepartmentpersonnelnotedthatofficerswhohavehadCITdonotcarryECWsbe-
causetheyprefertousetheirverbalskills.OthersnotedthatevenwhenrequiredtocarryECWs,officerswouldoccasionallyleavethemintheirvehiclesratherthancarrythemontheirdutybeltbecauseoftheirbulkiness.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDchangeddirectives78and22toreflectthisrecommendation.Theassessmentteamaskedthat
languagebeaddedtoreflectthatsubsequentviolationswillsubjecttheofficertoincreasinglevelsof
discipline.Asnotedearlier(seerecommendation7),changestothedisciplinarycodearesubjecttounion
contractnegotiations,whichwillnottakeplaceuntil2017.Thusitisunlikelythatthisrecommendation
willbecompletedduringtheimplementationphase.
Theassessmentteamrequestedtoseeevidencethatthisispartofrollcallinspection.ThePPDindicated
thatwhenthedirectivechangesareapprovedbyCommissionerRamsey,ageneralmessagewillbesent
byResearchandPlanningDivisionstatingthatsupervisorswillinspectpersonneltoensurecompliance
andthatthisinspectionwillbedocumentedintheofficer’spersonnelrecords.
Whilethepolicyhasbeenchangedtomeettherecommendation,theassessmentteamsuggestsa
mechanismthatallowsthedepartmenttoensurethoseofficerswhoareECWcertifiedarecarryingtheir
ECWsasthiscannotbesimplyobserved.Theassessmentteamwillcontinuetomonitorthisaspectof
therecommendation.
Recommendation 8.4The PPD should continue to dispatch CIT officers to calls for service involving persons in a probable state of men-
tal crisis.
TheinitialassessmentreportnotedthatbeingarmedwithanECWdoesnotbetterprepareanofficerto
manageanencounterwithsomeoneinmentalcrisis.ItshouldremainthepolicyofthePPDthatCIToffi-
cersbedispatchedtocallsforserviceinvolvingpersonsinastateofexciteddeliriumormentalcrisis.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDdraftedamemoin2011entitled“DispatchingCrisisInterventionTeams”mandatingthatwhenthereisanincidentinvolvinga“SeverelyMentallyDisabledPerson(SMDP)whoisviolent,suicidaloracting
out,”thedispatcherwillattempttodispatchCITofficers.Ifnoneareavailable,dispatchwillnotifyaradio
andstreetsupervisor.TheradiosupervisorwillattempttofindaCITofficerfromanearbydistrictordivi-
sion.ThememoalsodocumentshowCITtrainedofficersaredocumentedintheircomputeraideddis-
patch(CAD).Theassessmentteamisconcernedthatthisisfocusedonlyonmentalhealthclientsanddoes
notrecognizethattheremaybeotherswhoaresufferingatemporaryemotionalcrisisforwhomthese
proceduresshouldalsobeimplemented.
–15–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
22/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
ThePPDupdatedtheCommunicationsDivision’sstandardoperatingprocedure(SOP)421,entitled“Severely
MentallyDisabledPerson‘302.’”(Thedesignation302isaradiocodeforaSMDP.)ThisSOPdefinesaSMDPas
Apersonisseverelymentallydisabledwhen,asaresultofmentalillness,his/hercapacitytoexercise
selfcontrol,judgment,anddiscretioninconductofhis/heraffairsandsocialrelationsortocarefor
his/herownpersonalneedsissolessenedthathe/sheposesaclearandpresentdangerofharmto
othersortohim/herself.
ThisagainreinforcesthatCITisonlyrequiredforthementallyillandnotthosewhomaybeinatemporary
emotionalcrisis.Inaddition,thispolicyonlyaddresseswhattodowhenacallcomesintodispatchre-
questingtransportofaSMDPtoacrisiscenter.Theassessmentteamisconcernedthatthispertainsonlyto
requestsforSMDPtransportstoacrisiscenterandnottosituationswhenacalltakeridentifiesapotential
CITclientwhileassessingothercallsforservicefromthepublic.
Theassessmentteamrequesteddatafromdispatchfromthebeginningoftheyearthatshowsallofthe
callsforservicethatinvolvedamentalhealthissueandthecorrespondingnumberofCITofficersdis-
patched,buttheCADsystemwasnotcapableofproducingsuchreports.
ThePPDrequestedtechnicalassistanceinobtainingdispatchprotocolsforCITcalls;theassessmentteam
sentrelevantpoliciesfromtheDenver(Colorado)andLasVegas(Nevada)Metropolitanpolicedepart-
mentsandwillcontinuetomonitorthisrecommendation.
Finding 9
The PPD’s ECW policy drafted in 2014 is not detailed enough regarding the circumstances in
which use of the tool should be limited.
Recommendation 9.1
The PPD’s ECW policy should limit the number of cycles used per subject to three.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthepolicydoesnotexplicitlylimitthenumberofcyclesusedona
singlesubject.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDreviseddirective22toreadasfollows:
WhenactivatinganECW,personnelshoulduseitforone(1)standardcycle(astandardcycleisfive
(5)seconds)andshouldevaluatethesituationtodetermineifsubsequentcyclesarenecessary.
Personnelshouldconsiderthatexposuretomultipleactivations,continuouscyclingandexposuretotheECWlongerthanfifteen(15)secondsmayincreasetheriskofdeathorseriousinjury.Any
subsequentactivationshouldbeindependentlyjustifiableandshouldbeweighedagainstother
forceoptions.UndernocircumstancesareofficersauthorizedtoadministermorethanTHREE (3)
CYCLES againstaperson.
–16–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
23/96
Chapter2.UseofForcePolicies
Recommendation 9.2
The PPD’s use of force decision chart policy should clearly illustrate where using ECWs is appropriate and where it
is inappropriate.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatECWsarepositionedintheUOFdecisionchartsuchthatusingthe
toolonanoncompliantorpassivelyresistingsubjectcanbeinterpretedasanappropriateuseoftheweapon.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDchangeddirective22tocontainlanguageunderthedecisionchartthatoutlineswhenitisappro-
priatetousetheECW.TheUOFdecisionchartandaccompanyingnarrativenowprovidecleardirectionon
theECW;itnowstates:
TheuseoftheElectronicControlWeapon(ECW)and/orASP/Batonisauthorizedwhentheoffender
isphysicallyaggressiveorassaultiveandthereisanimmediatelikelihoodthattheymayinjure
themselvesorothers.Suchbehaviorsmayincludepunching,kicking,grabbing,orapproachingwith
aclenchedfist.
EXCEPTION: Protestors/DemonstratorsthatareexercisingtheirConstitutionalRightsofFree
SpeechorAssemblyandarenoncompliantandpassivelyresistingofficer’scommands,ECWSHALL
NOT BE USED toovercometheresistance.Rather,officerswilldisengageandcontactasupervisor.
Ifnecessary,additionalofficerswillbeusedtoovercometheresistance.
Recommendation 9.3
ECW discharges used against handcuffed persons should be permissible only in cases where the officer or another
is in danger of serious bodily injury.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthePPD’scurrentpolicycontainednoprohibitionagainstusing
ECWdischargesonhandcuffedprisoners.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDchangeddirective160.Itnowstates,“TheECWSHALLNOTbeusedinthefollowingmanner:I.On
handcuffedpersonsunlessnecessarytopreventtheindividualfrominflictingseriousbodilyinjuryto
themselvesorothers.”
Recommendation 9.4
Officers who accidentally discharge an ECW and strike a suspect or nonsuspect should be required to complete a
use of force report.
TheinitialassessmentreportnotedthatUOFreportswerenotrequiredifsomeonewasaccidentallystruck
byanECW.Reportsshould,outsideofthetrainingenvironment,alwaysberequiredwhenforceisused
againstaparty,whetherintentionaloraccidental.
–17–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
24/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDchangeddirective22toreflectthatUOFreportswillnowberequiredwheneverapersonisstruck
byanECW,regardlessofintent.
Finding 10
Between 2007 and 2013, PPD officers were involved in 30 OISs involving vehicles. The depart-
ment’s policy does not provide enough limitations on this practice.
Recommendation 10
The PPD should amend its policy and include a stronger prohibition on shooting at moving vehicles.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthedepartment’spolicydoesnotprovideenoughlimitationson
thispractice,andexpoundinguponthepolicystatementwouldmakeitstronger.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
PPDchangeddirective10toemphasizethisprohibition.Thenewlanguagecontainsthefollowing:
G.PoliceofficersshallnotdischargetheirfirearmsFROMamovingvehicleunlesstheofficersare
beingfiredupon.Shootingaccuratelyfromamovingvehicleisextremelydifficultandtherefore,
unlikelytosuccessfullystopathreatofanotherperson.
H.PoliceofficersshallnotdischargetheirfirearmsATavehicleunlessofficersorciviliansarebeing
fireduponbytheoccupantsofthevehicle.
1. OfficersshallnotdischargetheirfirearmsATavehiclewhencircumstancesdonotprovidea
reasonableprobabilityofstrikingtheintendedtargetorwhenthereissubstantialrisktothe
safetyofinnocentbystandersorofficers.
2. Amovingvehiclealoneshallnotpresumptivelyconstituteathreatthatjustifiesanofficer’suse
ofdeadlyforce.
3. Officersshallnotmoveintoorremaininthepathofamovingvehicle.Movingintoor
remaininginthepathofamovingvehicle,whetherdeliberateorinadvertent,SHALLNOTbe
justificationfordischargingafirearmatthevehicleoranyofitsoccupants.Anofficerinthe
pathofanapproachingvehicleshallattempttomovetoapositionofsafetyratherthan
dischargingafirearmatthevehicleoranyoftheoccupantsofthevehicle.
NOTE:Anofficershouldneverplacethemselvesoranotherpersoninjeopardyinanattempt
tostopavehicle.
–18–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
25/96
Chapter2.UseofForcePolicies
4. Theprohibitionsregardingthedischargeofafirearmatorfromamovingvehicleexistforthe
followingreasons:
a. Bulletsfiredatamovingvehicleareextremelyunlikelytodisableorstopthevehicle.
b. Disablingthedriverofamovingvehiclecreatesunpredictablecircumstancesthatmay
causethevehicletocrashandinjureotherofficersorinnocentbystanders.
c. Movingtocoverinordertogainandmaintainasuperiortacticaladvantagemaximizes
officerandpublicsafetywhileminimizingtheneedfordeadlyorpotentiallydeadlyforce.
NOTE:Barringexigentcircumstances,(e.g.,thedriverisunconsciousandthemotorisstill
running),anofficershallneverreachintoanoccupiedvehicleinanattempttoshutoffthe
engineortorecoverevidence,sincethishasbeenknowntoresultinseriousinjuryto
officers.
Althoughthisrecommendationisconsideredcomplete,theassessmentteamwillcontinuetomonitor
thestatusofthisrecommendationtodeterminewhetheranytrainingisprovidedtosupportthispolicychange.Theassessmentteamfeelsthisisanopportunitytouserealitybasedtraining(RBT)toreinforce
thispolicyinthefuture.
–19–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
26/96
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
27/96
Chapter 3. Basic Recruit Training
Thistopicappearedinchapter5oftheinitialassessmentreportofthePhiladelphiaPoliceDepartment
(PPD)andincluded16recommendations,whichwerebasedonacomprehensiveassessmentofthePPD’s
recruitacademytrainingasitrelatestodeadlyforce.Theserecommendationsincludeddefensivetactics,
deescalation,useofforce,andfirearms.Ofthe16recommendations,twoarecompleteand14arein
progress,asshownintable5.ThischapterprovidesadetailedassessmentofthePPD’sprogressinimple-
mentingthese16recommendations.Wehavemaintainedtheoriginalrecommendationnumbers(11.1,
11.2,etc.)forconsistencyacrossthereports.
Table 5. Status of basic recruit training recommendations
Status Reforms/Recommendations (N) Percent (%)
Complete 2 12
Partially complete 0 0
In progress 14 88
No progress 0 0
Total 16 100
Finding 11PPD recruit training is not conducted in a systematic and modular fashion. As a result, some re-cruit classes receive firearms training close to the end of the academy while others receive it ear-
ly on.
Recommendation 11.1
The PPD should revise the sequencing of its academy curriculum so that recruits are continually building on previ-
ously learned skills.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthesequenceofcoursesthroughouttheacademydoesnotgen-
erallyflowfromtheinstructionoffoundationalskillstomorecomplexskills,becausemuchoftheschedule
isdeterminedbytheavailabilityofinstructorsandspaceduetooverlappingacademyclasses.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDindicatedthattheRecruitTrainingUnit(RTU)revieweditscurriculumtosequentiallyprovidere-
cruittraining.Thechiefinspector(CI)oftheTrainingBureaumetwiththeLosAngelesPoliceDepartment
(LAPD)togaininsightintohowtoimprovethesequencingofthetrainingcurriculum.ThePPDindicated
–21–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
28/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
thatthereareseveralfactorsthatdeterminetheplacementofacourseorblockofinstruction(e.g.,Shoot-
ingRange,EmergencyVehicleOperatorsCourse[EVOC])withintherecruitschedule.Somefactorsover
whichtheyhavenocontrolincludethefollowing:
• Thesizeoftheclass.Thisdeterminesthenumberofplatoons;forexamplea90recruit,3platoonclasswill
inevitablyhaveanineweekdifferenceinstartingtimeattherangebetweenAplatoonandCplatoon.
• Theamountofoverlapbetweenclassesbasedonwhenclassesbeginandpossibleconflictsinthe
timingofthecurriculum.
• Limitationsplacedbythetrainingvenue—onerange,onegym,oneEVOCcourse.Recruittraining
doesnotalwaystakeprioritycomparedtootherunitsusingthetrainingfacility(forexample,in
servicebiketraining,crisisinterventionteam[CIT]training,andotherinservicecourses).
Theassessmentteamperformedadetailedanalysisofoneofthemostrecentrecruitschedules.Therehas
beensignificantefforttostructurethesequencingofthecoursessuchthatadvancedinstructiononlyoc-
cursafterfoundationalideasandconceptshavebeenpresented.TheAcademystaffiscontinuingtostudy
thestructureofthecurriculuminlightofrecommendationsmadebytheassessmentteamandtheaddi-
tionofnewcoursesofstudythatexpandontheconceptsofcommunitypolicing,fairandimpartialpolic-
ing,andproceduraljustice.Inaddition,theyarereengineeringtheirdefensivetacticsprogram,whichwill
haveanimpactonscheduling.Thestaffhasindicatedanevenbetterschedulewillbeforthcoming,and
thisschedulewillalsobeanalyzedindetailbytheassessmentteam.
Recommendation 11.2
Skills that require continual training and refinement, such as firearms, defensive tactics, communications, and
driving, should be staggered throughout the length of the academy.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatfirearmstrainingisconductedinitsentiretyinone80hourblock
ofinstruction.Theproblemwasthatthisblockofinstructionwould,attimes,occurearlyintheeightmonthrecruitacademy.Thisearlyscheduling,coupledwiththerequirementthatofficersareonlyrequired
tofiretheirserviceweaponsonceperyear,couldresultinanofficerwhowasnewtohandgunsnotprac-
ticingwiththeirfirearmforalmosttwoyears.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPDexaminedthefeasibilityofstaggeredfirearmstraining.Physicaltraininganddefensivetacticsare
alreadystaggered,andcommunicationshasseveralcomponents(statemandatedandcitycourses)that
canbescheduledatdifferentpointsinthecurriculum.
ThePPDindicatedthatdrivingandfiringaremusclememoryskills,whichtheirexperiencedinstructorsfeel
shouldcontinuetobescheduledastheycurrentlyare.Theyfeltrecruitslearnmorewithrepetition,prac-
ticingeachmaneuveroverandoveragainforbetterskilldevelopment.Beginningwithaclassthatstarted
inmid2015,theacademyinitiatedaprogramtosendallrecruitstoafulldaytothefirearmsrangeand
drivertrainingshortlybeforeleavingthepoliceacademytoreacquainttherecruitswiththemechanicsof
bothskillsets.Thistrainingregimenwillcontinueforfuturerecruitclasses,andtheassessmentteamwill
continuetomonitorthispractice.
–22–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
29/96
CChapter3.BasicRecruitTraining
Finding 12
PPD training staff members are required to complete instructor training just one time during
their careers, in accordance with minimum MPOETC standards.
Recommendation 12
The PPD should establish a minimum continuing education requirement for all training staff to remain certified
by the PPD.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatmostPPDtrainingstaffmembersmaintaintheirinstructorcertifi-
cationbycontinuingtoteach,whichistheminimumrequiredbyMunicipalPoliceOfficerEducationand
TrainingCommission(MPOETC)standards.However,thereportrecommendedamoreformalizedprocess
tokeepuptheinstructor’sproficiency.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
MPOETCcurrentlyrequiresaninstructornottoexceedaperiodoffouryearswithoutteachinginorderto
maintaincertification.ATrainingBureauCertifiedInstructorlistisreviewedonanannualbasistoensure
instructorsareintheteachingrotation.TheAdvancedTrainingUnit(ATU)staffcreatedaneighthourin-
structordevelopmentrefreshercoursethatwillberequiredtrainingforallcertifiedinstructorseverytwo
yearsaftersuccessfulcompletionofthetwoweekMPOETCinstructordevelopmentcourse.Whilethereis
nocurrentminimumeducationalrequirementtobeassignedtotheTrainingBureau,MPOETCisinthepro-
cessofamendingthisstandardtorequireaminimumofanAssociatedegreewhilepursuingaBachelor’s
degree.ApplicantsfortransfertotheTrainingBureauarerequiredtohaveexceptionalwriting,research,
andanalyticalskillsinordertosuccessfullycommunicateinformationtostudentsandpreparecomprehen-
sivelessonplans.Collegeleveleducationprovidesapplicantswiththetoolsnecessarytocompletethese
tasksrequiredofallTrainingBureaupersonnel.
Theinstructordevelopmentcourseispendingcommandapproval.
Finding 13
On occasion, PPD training staff provides inconsistent or contradictory instruction to recruits.
Recommendation 13
The PPD should create formal, ongoing collaboration between the FTU [Firearms Training Unit] and the academy.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatPPDtrainingstaffmembersoccasionallyprovideinconsistentorcontradictoryinstructiontorecruits.Thisinconsistentinstructionisoneofthemostfrequentlycitedissues
byrecruitsontheirexitevaluationsoftheAcademy.8 Theinconsistenciesweredescribedasoccurring
betweenfirearmsinstructionandtheacademyclassroominstructiononuseofforce(UOF)(twodifferent
staffsareresponsiblefortheseinstructionalareas).
8. CNA interviews.
–23–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
30/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
AtthedirectionoftheCIoftheTrainingBureau,theRTUUOFinstructorshavebeencrosstrainedasfire-
armsinstructorsandFirearmsTrainingUnit(FTU)instructorsaretobecrosstrainedasUOFinstructors.To
date,RTUandFTUpersonnelhavemetseveraltimesonamonthlybasistodiscussabestpracticesstrate-gytoensureongoingcollaborationbetweenthetwounits.Themeetingsfocusonbestpracticesandlo-
gisticalissuesofcrosstrainingadditionalpersonnelinbothUOFandfirearmsdisciplines.ThePPDindicated
thatRTUandFTUwillcontinuetomeetonamonthlybasis.
Theassessmentteamwillmonitortheminutesfromthesemeetingstodetermineiftheworkinggroup
establishesanygoalsoroutcomesarerealized.Theassessmentteamrequestedevidenceofformalmeet-
ingprotocolandprocessesinplacethatwillkeeptheworkgroupgoaldrivenandmakesthemreview
theirpolicyeveryyear.
Finding 14
PPD officers are dissatisfied with academy defensive tactics training.
Recommendation 14.1
The PPD should review and update its defensive tactics manual at least once every two years, taking into account
PPD officer experiences and emerging best practices from the field.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatPPDofficers(recruitsandincumbents)aredissatisfiedwithacade-
mydefensivetactics(DT)trainingbythelackofroutinerefreshertraininginDT,toomuchfocusonlegallia-
bility,andnotenoughfocusonteachingpracticalandrealisticmethodsforsurvivingaphysicalencounter.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
TheDTmanualhasbeenupdatedandsubmittedtoCommissionerRamseyforapproval.ThePPDhasin-
vestigatedagroundfightingprogramfromtheLAPDaswellasKravMagaforlawenforcementofficers
andwillincorporatebothbeginninginJanuary2016.WhileMPOETCdoesexercisesomecontroloverDT
instruction,theydonotmandatespecifictacticsandmaneuvers.ThePPDisfreetoteachsuchstylesas
KogaandKravMaga.9
Theassessmentteamfeelsitisrelevanttonotethatinresponsetocurrenteventsandtherecommenda-
tionsofthePresident’sTaskForceon21stCenturyPolicing,MPOETChasmandatedachangeofreferences
intheDTmanualsandtrainingfrom“warrior”to“guardian”and“survival”to“prevailing”.
TheassessmentteamrequestedandreceivedthecolorcopyoftheDTmanual,whichhasbeensimplified
greatlywithhundredsofphotographstoexplainallofthemovestonewrecruits.Themanualiscurrently
underreviewbytheassessmentteam.
9. Koga and Krav Maga are widely accepted styles of arrest control and defensive tactics instruction taught to law enforcement officers around the country. Koga was
developed by Bob Koga, an LAPD officer, in the mid-1960s. Krav Maga is a form a self defense taught in Israel that has been adapted for law enforcement.
–24–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
31/96
Chapter3.BasicRecruitTraining
Recommendation 14.2
Ground fighting should be part of the PPD’s defensive tactics training.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthePPDdoesnotincludegroundfightingaspartoftheirDTtrain-
ing,unlikethevastmajorityofotherlargemunicipalagencies.10Manyphysicalaltercationswillnecessitate
thisskill.Includinggroundfightinginthedepartment’scurriculumwillhelpaddressrecruits’concernsabouttherelevanceofdefensivetacticstrainingandbetterpreparethemforphysicalaltercationsinthefield.
10. Brian A. Reaves, “State and Local Law Enforcement Training Academies, 2006,”Special Report, revised April 14, 2009 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics,
2009), http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/slleta06.pdf .
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
TheDTmanualhasbeenupdatedandsubmittedtoCommissionerRamseyforapproval.ThePPDwill
receiveaKravMagatrainthetrainerclassinNovember2015.Thisinstructionwillbecombinedwithinfor-
mationprovidedbytheLAPDtodevelop“grounddefensivetactics”thatmaybeincorporatedintotheDT
manual.
TheassessmentteamwillcontinuetomonitortheprogressofthisrecommendationtoassessthePPD’s
movetoincorporategroundfightingorgrounddefensivetacticsintotheirtraining.
Recommendation 14.3
The PPD should discontinue training on the use of neck restraints and eliminate its use from the field except in exi-
gent circumstances when life or grave bodily harm are at risk.
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundtherewasaconcernaboutthelackofclarityontrainingasitrelatesto
theuseofneckrestraints.
Current assessment of compliance | Complete.
ThePPD’sdirective22explicitlyforbidstheuseofneckrestraints.Inaddition,thedepartmentissuedthe
followingteletyperegardingadherencetodirective22UseofForce:
Theintentionaluseofneckrestraints(chokeholds,‘sleeperholds’orotherholdstorenderasubject
unconscious)[is]prohibited.Thiswillincludeanyincidentwhereanindividualattemptstoingest
narcoticsorotherevidence;theywillbetakenimmediatelytothenearesthospital.
Finding 15
For some PPD recruits, deescalation training has amounted to little more than lectures and ob-
servations.
Recommendation 15.1
The PPD should revamp its academy deescalation training, ensuring recruits receive more hours of scenario
training, which allows each recruit to exercise and be evaluated on verbal deescalation skills.
–25–
http:///reader/full/agencies.10http:///reader/full/agencies.10http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/slleta06.pdfhttp:///reader/full/agencies.10http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/slleta06.pdf
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
32/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundthatalthoughmanyofthescenariosinvolvestudentparticipation,not
allstudentsparticipatedbecauseoftimerestrictions,classsize,orunwillingnessofsomerecruitstovolun-
teer.Theinitialassessmentreportalsofoundthatscenarioswerefrequentlycitedasthemostbeneficial
training,andacademyandFTUevaluationsindicatedthatrecruitswantedmoreofthem.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDindicatedtheyarerevampingtheirAcademydeescalationtrainingthroughthecreationofthe
RealityBasedTrainingUnit(RBTU).RBTUisidentifyingscenariobasedcoursessoacomprehensiveevalua-
tiontoolthatassessesverbalandphysicaldeescalationskillscanbedeveloped.Thescenariosarebeing
reworkedsothattheroleplayersareresponsivetotheactionsofthetrainee.Inotherwords,dependingon
howtherecruitperforms,theroleplayerwilleitherescalateordeescalatethescenario.
ThePPDindicatedthatatacticaldeescalationlessonplanwassubmittedtotheCIoftheTrainingBureau
forapproval.Theyarerevisingtheirdeescalationlessonplantoincludetacticaldeescalationgoalsand
learningobjectives.ArecruitRBTUmoduleisalsoindevelopment.Theassessmentteamwillcontinueto
monitortheprogressofthisrecommendationtoobservethesedevelopmentsandrevisions.
Recommendation 15.2
The PPD deescalation training should be expanded to include a discussion of tactical deescalation.
Theinitialassessmentreportnotedthatdeescalationinvolvesnotonlyverbalskillsbutalsotactics.In
manywaystacticaldeescalationmaybejustasimportantastheuseofverbalskillsinthatofficerswilluse
tacticstoslowdownthesituation,requestadditionalresources,andcreatedistancebetweenthemand
thethreat.Theseactionswillreducethelikelihoodthatofficerswillplacethemselvesinapositionofperil
andunnecessarilyprecipitatetheusedeadlyforce.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDdevelopeda40hourrealitybasedtraining(RBT)programthatincorporateseighthoursof
classroomdiscussionduringwhichtacticaldeescalationisdiscussedinconjunctionwithactualscenarios,
includingadebriefwithtrainingrecruitsfollowingeachscenario.PPDisreviewingforadoptionanin
servicetacticaldeescalationlessonplanfromtheSeattlePolice.Inaddition,theRBTUcurriculumwillin-
cludetacticaldeescalationcomponentsthatconformtotheLasVegasMetropolitanPoliceDepartment
(LVMPD)modelcurriculum.PartofthedutiesoftheRBTUwillbetocreateclassroominstructionthataug-
mentsthescenarios.Thiswillalsohaveafocusonthetacticalelementsofdeescalation.
Theassessmentteamwillcontinuetomonitortheprogressofthisrecommendationtoobservehowthe
departmentwillincludetacticaldeescalationtrainingunitswhileworkingontheoverallRBTUplan.
–26–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
33/96
Chapter3.BasicRecruitTraining
Finding 16
Academy recruits are not trained to use ECWs.
Recommendation 16
ECW certification should be incorporated into the PPD’s basic recruit academy.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthePPDhasnotimplementedthepracticetotraintheiracademy
recruitsintheuseofECWs,unlikeroughlyhalfofpoliceagencieswith1,000ormoreswornofficersasof
2006.11Manygraduatesandofficersinterviewedsaidtheywantedmorelesslethalforceoptions.Infact,
recruitgraduatesnearlyunanimouslyexpressedtheirdesiretocompleteCITinordertoobtainanECW.
11. Ibid.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDamendedtheRecruitFirearmsTraininglessonplantoincludeECWtraining.Instructioncom-
mencedwiththerecruitclassthatbeganitsfirearmstrainingonMay18,2015.Theassessmentteamwill
continuetomonitortheprogressofthisrecommendationtodeterminewhenthefinancialstructureisin
placetosupportrecruitsgraduatingtheAcademywithECWsindividuallyassignedtothem.
Finding 17
Incidents involving discourtesy, use of force, and allegations of bias by PPD officers leave seg-
ments of the community feeling disenfranchised and distrustful of the police department.
Recommendation 17.1
The PPD’s academy should significantly increase the scope and duration of its training on core and advanced
community oriented policing concepts.
TheinitialassessmentreportfoundthatthePPD’sacademydoesnotincludeastrongcommunityoriented
policingcomponent,committingjusteighthoursoftrainingonthetopicperrecruitclass.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
TheassessmentteamcontinuestomonitorPPDprogressonthisrecommendationandplanstoreviewthe
contentandlessonplansforseveralothercoursesthatcouldbeclassifiedascommunitypolicingrelated.
Inaddition,theintroductionoffairandimpartialpolicingandproceduraljusticeclasseswillcounttoward
progressonthisrecommendation.
Recommendation 17.2
The PPD should develop and implement an action plan in response to the organizational assessment on com-
munity oriented policing policies and practices throughout the department.
–27–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
34/96
COLLABORATIVE REFORM INITIATIVE
Six-Month Assessment Report on the Philadelphia Police Department
Theinitialassessmentreportfoundanumberofweaknessesinthedepartment’spoliciesandtrainingre-
latedtotheprinciplesofcommunityorientedpolicing.Theinitialassessmentreportalsofoundthatcom-
munitymembershadpolarizedviewsonthestateofthecommunityrelationswiththePPD.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDcompletedacommunitypolicingselfassessmenttodeterminewherethedepartmentfallsalong
thecommunitypolicingcontinuum.Thisisthefirststeptowardthedevelopmentofanactionplan.The
assessmentteamwillreviewthecontentofthatcommunitypolicingassessmentreportandprovidetech-
nicalassistancetothePPDinthedevelopmentofacommunitypolicingactionplan.
Finding 18
Academy instruction materials on the use of force policy and use of force continuum are incon-
sistent.
Recommendation 18The PPD should conduct a complete audit of its use of force policy and legal instruction conducted throughout
the academy and ensure that messaging is clear, consistent, and understandable.
Forexample,thecontinuumconceptandvisualaidpresentedinthedepartment’sUOFlawenforcement
academyclassismarkedlydifferentfromtheforcedecisionmodelthatappearsinthePPD’spolicies.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDconductedaninternalauditoftheUOFcurriculumdatedApril24,2015.Itnotedthattherewasa
“glaringdiscrepancy”inthereviewedtrainingmaterials—theyalluseddifferentUOFcontinuummodels—
andrecommendedtheybeaddressedwithMPOETCandtheResearchandPlanningDivision.Theassess-
mentteamrequestedevidencethatallofthematerialshavebeenupdatedandarenowconsistent.Upon
approvalofdirectives10and22,thePPDwillperformanauditoftheselessonplansandsubmitchanges
notedbyredlinestotheassessmentteamforreview.
Finding 19
The majority of academy instruction and scenariobased training sessions related to use of force
end with the officer having to use force.
Recommendation 19The PPD should review all of its use of force course materials, including lesson plans, case studies, and scenarios,
and ensure that they demonstrate the opportunity for a peaceful resolution.
–28–
-
8/20/2019 DOJ six-month assessment report on PPD
35/96
Chapter3.BasicRecruitTraining
Recruitsoftenstatethatthescenariospresentedtothemwereinvariably“nowin”situations.Trainers,on
theotherhand,indicatetheyfeltaneedtopreparerecruitsfortheworstpossiblesituations.Whileitisim-
portanttodevelopanappreciationforhowasituationcanturnfortheworse,thevastmajorityofpolice-
citizen12encountersdonotendinaphysicalconfrontation,muchlessrequiringtheuseofdeadlyforce.
12. This report uses “citizen”to refer to all individuals in a city or town who are not sworn law enforcement officers or government officials. It should not be understood
to refer only to U.S. citizens.
Current assessment of compliance | In progress.
ThePPDcontinuestoworkonmakingthechangesnecessarytocompletethisrecommendation.ThePPD
createdtheMPOETCScenarioBasedTrainingCurriculumthatnotonlyoutlineshowtoaccomplishRBTbut
alsoincludesthefollowingstatement:
Everyscenariowillbebasedonthetheorythatscenariotrainingsituationsshouldbe“winable”,
buildingthecadet’sconfidenceintrainingreceived.Whenthecadetdisplaysconfidence,empathy,
properunderstandingofthelessonstaughtandsoundcommunicationskills,thentheinstructors/
Roleplayerswillcooperatewiththerespondingcadet(s)andallowthecadetto“win”thesituation,
therebybuildingconfidenceandreinforcingobjectives.Since97%ofpolicecitizencontactsare
nonphysical,thepoliceofficerwhopossessesbettercommunicationskillswillhaveahigher
chanceofsuccessfullydealingwithconfrontationalsituations.
Finding 20
There is a strong desire for more realitybased training throughout the department.
Recommendation 20
The PPD should increase the amount of realitybased training offered to academy recruit
top related